the UCI is the antichrist and is killing our sport - Save it Here:

[TubularBills]

So let's get real... if UCI is the antichrist... how do we transition to clean racing, transition promotion and oversight and maintain corporate sponsorship?

Clearly we have failure in the governing bodies + most team management is as corrupt as day old tuna at 110 degrees + the riders either dope to perform or retire.

Let's formulate a realistic Forum driven alternative that saves the sport!

I like the toe dip from Australia with the Bike Clean program...

But it comes down to $ers and the established and entrenched corruption and greed - bottom up, riders and top down, management and oh yeah, the promoters... and the complicit sponsors. Phew...

Anyone know the total revenue generated worldwide in the cycling industry?

It's all about Money and Greed - institutional and personal.

Forum Members - Let's rally and save the sport!

Solutions anyone?

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

The only viable structure I can see working is something atune to a grass-roots movement that has an impartial arbiter overseeing the show.

Get some people together, put on some races (garnering enough capital to cover insurance and road-closure costs - possibly defered through municipal complicity due to increased revenue from the spectators coming to watch), and see if it grows.

The impartial arbiter is the key. Once things get off the ground, people - being human, and all - will start sucking the corporate d*ck. Money, in cycling anyways, truly is the root of all evil.

Start your own race series, get some ghetto crit going, how about an east-bumble TT, we can truly do anything!

Just make sure you cover your *** (especially to the yanks...), and do it on your own. We all love cycling, and to think that the UCI is the only available game in town is bull.

Afterall, THEY started somewhere. They just happened to turn into a bunch of corrupt rotten *****s.

 

[Epicycle]

The first problem is that the UCI in it's current form has only been led by one corrupt faction, the Verbruggen/McQuaid mafia. In 2005 Vebruggen stepped aside after 14 years at the helm and made sure that his boy McQuaid won the presidency. There were real alternative candidates in 2005 but nobody wanted to waste the time seriously campaigning against McQuaid when he was up for re-election last year because it was pointless. It's time for the individual national federations to take a stand, because the UCI is the union of those federations, but we know how ethical national federations can be.

It's in the teams' best interests to side with the UCI because the other side is the race organizers, who don't represent the teams' interests. The teams and thus the riders get a very small slice of the biggest non-sponsorship revenue in the sport...television money, most notably TDF television rights.

To me the answer starts at the top of the UCI...realistic management that treats doping as an issue which should be dealt with seriously using strict protocol, without any favoritism. The UCI should also have a long term plan to heal the wounds of the poorly executed Pro Tour and align the organizers, teams and federations in a direction that improves the overall health of the sport. The sport needs stability at the top and that stability has to come from good governance, not longevity of a certain management group.

 

[flicker]

I vote Phil Liggett prez., Paul Sherwin V.P. and Bob Roll secretary UCI.

Problemas?

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

The first problem is that the UCI in it's current form has only been led by one corrupt faction, the Verbruggen/McQuaid mafia. In 2005 Vebruggen stepped aside after 14 years at the helm and made sure that his boy McQuaid won the presidency. There were real alternative candidates in 2005 but nobody wanted to waste the time seriously campaigning against McQuaid when he was up for re-election last year because it was pointless. It's time for the individual national federations to take a stand, because the UCI is the union of those federations, but we know how ethical national federations can be.

It's in the teams' best interests to side with the UCI because the other side is the race organizers, who don't represent the teams' interests. The teams and thus the riders get a very small slice of the biggest non-sponsorship revenue in the sport...television money, most notably TDF television rights.

To me the answer starts at the top of the UCI...realistic management that treats doping as an issue which should be dealt with seriously using strict protocol, without any favoritism. The UCI should also have a long term plan to heal the wounds of the poorly executed Pro Tour and align the organizers, teams and federations in a direction that improves the overall health of the sport. The sport needs stability at the top and that stability has to come from good governance, not longevity of a certain management group.

Wow! That was totally awesome post! Written with verve and penache, to say nothing of how purile it was...

To think that the answer starts AT THE TOP of the UCI is insulting. The top of the UCI has helped create this problem. They have institutionally let down the greater hopes of a global population that loves the sport. They have done nothing to increase transparency in regards to their doping protocols, may have been complicit in treating certain riders with impunity while castigating others, been implicated in possible bribery, and have (with what has been disclosed these last couple of days) not even been close to following their own charter in terms of battling the scourge of the sport.

THE UCI IS THE LARGEST THREAT TO CLEAN CYCLING.

If you disagree, and would prefer to revert to a new megalomaniac running the UCI, let 'er rip. I would love to hear an explicated reasoning based on the UCI's 'stellar' track record of not being run by mobsters and thugs.

Honestly, please...

 

[Epicycle]

Wow! That was totally awesome post! Written with verve and penache, to say nothing of how purile it was...

To think that the answer starts AT THE TOP of the UCI is insulting. The top of the UCI has helped create this problem. They have institutionally let down the greater hopes of a global population that loves the sport. They have done nothing to increase transparency in regards to their doping protocols, may have been complicit in treating certain riders with impunity while castigating others, been implicated in possible bribery, and have (with what has been disclosed these last couple of days) not even been close to following their own charter in terms of battling the scourge of the sport.

THE UCI IS THE LARGEST THREAT TO CLEAN CYCLING.

If you disagree, and would prefer to revert to a new megalomaniac running the UCI, let 'er rip. I would love to hear an explicated reasoning based on the UCI's 'stellar' track record of not being run by mobsters and thugs.

Honestly, please...

My post was certainly much less idealistic than thinking a grass roots movement can change elite level pro cycling.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I thought the OP was looking for ideas...

I realize that my post may have seemed idealistic - sh*t, it was totally idealistic! That was the point. Especially in regards to your post. You propposed a change AT THE TOP of the UCI to actively effect some change.

Is that not idealistic?

I would say that the UCI, being such an entrenched bureaucratic entity, is not capable of the type of change we would like to see. Certainly not in how it has it's head nuts being forced upon us, which you so eloquently explained.

I'm not saying that the UCI could be up-ended in a weekend, I'm saying that they're obviously in possesion of questionable ethics at an institutional level. That is something you and I can work around.

I was proposing an impetus of change that doesn't need to rest upon the fees we pay a corrupt governing body that many people are losing faith in.

I'm not looking for a quick-fix for elite cycling (that's a body I know too well to think that it can change overnight), I'm looking for a way to empower riders and lovers of the sport to get out from under the 'iron umbrella' of the UCI and do some racing on their own.

That's all I want - people who love to race their bikes, having a venue to beat on each other on the road. Without having to fund the goat-show that seems to continue unabated.

And maybe picking on you a little bit...

 

[Cloxxki]

At first glance, there are 2 main ways to get the UCI out of the way.
First, via "wild" unions such as exist in The Netherlands and Belgium. They have their own races, not governed by national unions or UCI. They're allowed to co-exist. Much like the Bahá'í faith has its residency right at the heart of Jeruzalem, and is tolerated by especially Isreali agressors, as long as they don't actively spread their superior word over the world. Wiki that.
So, place grassroots unions everywhere, with new ideology, and unite those globally in an alternative to the UCI. Ultimately, IOC would be approached to substitute it for the UCI's services.

Second, it's to go to the highest level of government in sports. Ministers of Sport of major countries. The IOC, etc. Make a compact, solid case that the UCI in its present form is beyond help. Every single workers, every single pro rider, needs to be replaced to have a faint chance at offering the public a sporting "service" that is void of fraud. Polical pressure, to da max.
Break the UCI, but at the same time promote cycling as the ultimate people's sport. Sponsors will stay away from UCI events, as the public anti-PR will be vigorous. These is the e-era, all the public needs to do is quit being silent about things. "We" can break the UCI, without lawyers, without spending a dime.
My second route might well be accompanied by a solution 1, immediately offering a platform to serve as UCI's successor.

UCI workers who jump on the opportunity to join the new world union of cycling, WUC (triple you see), can sign a declaration to apply for a similar role there, while writing an essay on what was wrong within there scope, to be corrected and looked after in the WUC org.

 

[whittnj]

Winds of change

In response to creating a new governing body, take a look at what happened within cycling in South Africa.
Initially led by an old rear guard which made its own rules and forced every exissting cycling club to join and abide by it's policies. Along comes a group of highly educated and motivated ex racing and touring cyclists who had had enough of having events staged out in no mans land, having little to no say in the running of events, forking over large sums of cash for events in which their sponsors got no returns.
Enter a new era where a new association started up, creating amazing events with area's in which sponsors could get their returns, cycle events were made safe, fun and increased the awareness of cycling within a country which is vast and lacked a highly structured public transportation system.

These few increadible people created events like the Argus cycle Tour, the Giro Del Capo amonst others, events in which both beginners and top end racing cyclists could partake. It increased cycling in South Africa by almost 25% year on year.

This breakaway organisation created many issues for SA's then Governing body, the old rear guard, least of which were financial as sponsor sought to get onboard with the breakaway association. This eventually forced the South African Cycling Federation, by way of the South African Government to accept and enter into a unified governing body, now called cycling South Africa.
Perhaps a plan could be sought in which the UCI would have to accept a new unified and Global governing body, one which would look out for our sport.

 

[icefire]

WADA sues PcQuaid & Co. for breach of duty trying to cover a positive doping test. CAS bans them for life. Next one.

 

[Cloxxki]

WADA might also just say they've had it with professional cycling. They will not govern it anymore as long as the UCI runs it. Sponsors will need to consider the sport "dirty" and "criminal" by lack of a respected anti-doping organisation comfortable dealing with them.

 

[mastersracer]

we've seen national anti-doping agencies ban riders from their country - could AFLD ban Contador from racing in France the way CONI banned Valverde from Italy? One way to circumvent McQuaid.

 

[meandmygitane]

Give WADA full authority to investigate, test and BAN all cyclists participating in UCI-events. And let them charge UCI for every ban, test and investigation.

Keep UCI out of the process. Why should one consider UCI more capable of judging doping infrigements than WADA? UCI has possible motives for hushing things up, WADA would have the exact opposite of motives.

 

[elapid]

For the UCI to be effective, it needs to stop its attempt to control everything from grass roots to professional cycling. Getting rid McQuaid would be a good start considering how he has been such an embarrassment to the sport and such a poor leader and manager. Furthermore, and probably more importantly, it needs to stop fuelling their conflict of interest. In their efforts to become all controlling, they now are responsible for protecting the rights of cyclists (and the reputation of cycling in general) but also for detecting doping and cheating by professional cyclists. They have to be transparent and stop this conflict of interest. The UCI should be responsible for protecting the rights of cyclists and WADA should be responsible for all doping controls and management of positive tests.

 

[AnythingButKestrel]

The only thing that will remove most of the cheating, doping in particular, from professional sports is to de-professionalize sport: i.e. remove the money. If spending $50K on a doctor and drugs is the difference between being a thousand-aire and a multi-millionaire, somebody's going to dope.

Maybe 98% of the riders will shape up and ride clean ... eventually, but there's going to be that couple percent that see doping as a mere cost of doing business, jail time included.

 

[Oldman]

The only thing that will remove most of the cheating, doping in particular, from professional sports is to de-professionalize sport: i.e. remove the money. If spending $50K on a doctor and drugs is the difference between being a thousand-aire and a multi-millionaire, somebody's going to dope.

Maybe 98% of the riders will shape up and ride clean ... eventually, but there's going to be that couple percent that see doping as a mere cost of doing business, jail time included.

We call that amateur racing and it has it's share of dopers that are entirely self-motivated by lust for the pro version.

As for the IOC; their corruption completely humbles the UCI's attempts at being gangsters of sophistication so they are not a helpful atlernative. Like the UCI, the IOC extracts alot of complementary travel and benefits from race organizers to sanction events.
I think the answer may be with the riders. Can they create and govern an organization that deals with race organizers and effectively monitor their peers? If mutual expectations over race lengths, dates and compensation could be met between those two bodies their mutual interest/benefit as a unified "clean" and predictable brand could be policed. Riders wouldn't be expected to race ridiculous quantities of miles (necessitating constant medical intervention) and promoters wouldn't suffer the embarrassment of the event "winner" being an interim individual until the test results come in. Sponsors and broadcasters would presumably be happy over the predictability.
As for a control organization they would need a WADA or someone apparently detached and not for sale to operate as an independent 3rd party. Really strict and consistent rules over testing would need to be maintained and the information handled in a similar manner. Most pro riders express a concern for lack of respect and humanity in their treatment, but the current state of their behavior merits little sympathy. They know what's going on and need to police the behavior or there will be little left for them to do.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Back to an independent arbiter, especially after Pat McQuack's blaming of Spain for the problems in cycling.

Funny, I thought HE was supposed to be heading up the international governing body...

 

[DAOTEC]

 

[Polish]

We call that amateur racing and it has it's share of dopers that are entirely self-motivated by lust for the pro version.

As for the IOC; their corruption completely humbles the UCI's attempts at being gangsters of sophistication so they are not a helpful atlernative. Like the UCI, the IOC extracts alot of complementary travel and benefits from race organizers to sanction events.
I think the answer may be with the riders. Can they create and govern an organization that deals with race organizers and effectively monitor their peers? If mutual expectations over race lengths, dates and compensation could be met between those two bodies their mutual interest/benefit as a unified "clean" and predictable brand could be policed. Riders wouldn't be expected to race ridiculous quantities of miles (necessitating constant medical intervention) and promoters wouldn't suffer the embarrassment of the event "winner" being an interim individual until the test results come in. Sponsors and broadcasters would presumably be happy over the predictability.
As for a control organization they would need a WADA or someone apparently detached and not for sale to operate as an independent 3rd party. Really strict and consistent rules over testing would need to be maintained and the information handled in a similar manner. Most pro riders express a concern for lack of respect and humanity in their treatment, but the current state of their behavior merits little sympathy. They know what's going on and need to police the behavior or there will be little left for them to do.

+1.....insightful/thoughtful post. Many great ideas!

I especially like your statement "the answer may be with the riders".

I would only add that the riders should be "rank and file".
Not the prima donnas who only ride 5 months a year while earning 10's of millions of dollars while throwing dope in the soup all riders need to survive.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

The pros should never have been allowed into the Olys and the other larger games.

It took the impetus (and doping control) from National bodies that had a lot of investment to protect. They're funding the Nat Teams afterall...

I agree that a revert to 'amatuer' sport may help the doping situation a bit, but more importantly it may help the funding of high-end amature sport. Once the big guns were allowed into the games, the interest of amature sports' funding started to tank.

Unfortunately, it's still money talking.

 

[offbyone]

We need better, stronger standards that are adhered to.

We need stricter rules of what a positive and negative is.

Uniformity from lab to lab, race to race. All testing must use the same standards, same test techniques, etc.

Standards of how athletes are interacted with.

We need to detach the party who makes the standards and enforces them and the penalties from the party who implements the standards.

Frankly, all attempts for reform will fail unless we can figure out how to remove the human factor.

 

[Oldman]

We need better, stronger standards that are adhered to.

We need stricter rules of what a positive and negative is.

Uniformity from lab to lab, race to race. All testing must use the same standards, same test techniques, etc.

Standards of how athletes are interacted with.

We need to detach the party who makes the standards and enforces them and the penalties from the party who implements the standards.

Frankly, all attempts for reform will fail unless we can figure out how to remove the human factor.[/QUOTE]

That's why I feel the answer lies with the riders as a group as they are the only human factor that matters.

McQuaid must have mixed feelings about Contador. He tried to keep it quiet ala' Armstrong's prior positives and his motives for doing so are questionable: a)Contador's positive is bad for the Tour and another black eye for the UCI
b)it represented another profitable circumstance for McQuaid to extort a rider and possibly two separate teams to maintain the status quo-a gift that would keep paying off.

 

[Aguirre]

The first problem is that the UCI in it's current form has only been led by one corrupt faction, the Verbruggen/McQuaid mafia. In 2005 Vebruggen stepped aside after 14 years at the helm and made sure that his boy McQuaid won the presidency. There were real alternative candidates in 2005 but nobody wanted to waste the time seriously campaigning against McQuaid when he was up for re-election last year because it was pointless. It's time for the individual national federations to take a stand, because the UCI is the union of those federations, but we know how ethical national federations can be.

It's in the teams' best interests to side with the UCI because the other side is the race organizers, who don't represent the teams' interests. The teams and thus the riders get a very small slice of the biggest non-sponsorship revenue in the sport...television money, most notably TDF television rights.

To me the answer starts at the top of the UCI...realistic management that treats doping as an issue which should be dealt with seriously using strict protocol, without any favoritism. The UCI should also have a long term plan to heal the wounds of the poorly executed Pro Tour and align the organizers, teams and federations in a direction that improves the overall health of the sport. The sport needs stability at the top and that stability has to come from good governance, not longevity of a certain management group.

for all your information I let you know, or just remind, that Pat McQuaid won the UCI elections againts his main adversary... a spanish... Think twice, we could have a spanish in the body goverment. The rivalry in between Pat and the spanish (whose name can't recall now) was tough, very tough, they represented different views on cycling.

Well, we know what we got, or what cycling deserved

the same incompetent goverment that presecuted Valverde untill the end, will clear up Contador.

Pat must go home, and his son too!