Ferminal said:Which is why change can only be driven by external stakeholders. There has been more or less nothing from anyone with a seat at the UCI calling for change. In the current state, whether Pat stays or goes is irrelevant as the next man will be to him what he was to Hein.
Only if those who can pressure the UCI get together and demand reform is it possible for a shift to occur. Sadly there isn't much will there either.
I like the idea of some external watchdog type entity - small, agile and powerful. Help craft the mechanisms to run the sport, and then ensure they are adhered to and / or modified to suit as new / better mechanisms become available.
The 4.5 month delay for XZTT and Rasmussen incidents - whether the rider is guilty or not - should have resulted in severe recrimination for the responsible party, and did not, nor will they.
This external org could be in charge of results management too, and leave the UCI to administer and "grow" the sport.
External org sets up checks and balances, and more than anything, provides a safe and respectful whistleblower function for anyone in the sport.
Thinking as I'm posting here, but this is akin to what I have been imagining.
WADA do not enforce their edicts - the passport is a good example of that - and even if they did, what's the mechanism for "punishing" a wayward body? When Deck Pound has a go at cycling, UCI sued him ffs.