UCI Management Committee Meeting Friday - ACT NOW

Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Some of these Emails are rather generic and surely won't reach the intended recipient. I don't think that any of those chair farters would give out a valid Email address.:rolleyes:
 
Jul 2, 2010
30
0
0
So what's Option B?

What if your national rep is as bad as McQuaid? Mike Turtur kept hush on a stage winner testing positive at the TDU and also announced to the world that LA would make his comeback at the '09 edition despite LA being ineligible due to not being part of the OOC testing regime for the full 6 months required. Anne Gripper has already expressed her personal disappointment that they (WADA) caved on that one.
Don't kid yourself that the national feds will move on McQuaid - they're all in it together to save their collective arses. You only risk repeating the horror of the post-Festina shuffle that saw Verbruggen replaced with McQuaid. Why pick through a crate full of rotten apples to find the least rotten one? Tip the whole thing into the pig trough and start over.
Personally, I would like to see the UCI cease to exist and have it replaced with a new organisation that will serve the interests of its fee-paying members above all else.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
Can't hurt to send a few emails. I will send Turtur a brief one, along the lines of "don't think the same old tough talk and weak action will cut it this time". Fun to try and annoy these ****ers anyway.

Ultimately, club riders own the UCI. It's your fees which support the Clubs, which support the feds, which fund the UCI.

Roughly speaking, you will need to use your vote within your club in some way. Figure out who the bad apples are in your region (Ashenden helpfully listed 4 in Aus), then request that your club brings a motion of no confidence in (list bad apples) to the national fed. Talk to your club president about how to add items to the agenda for the next club meeting. It's the guys at the top of the feds and confederations that voted for McQuaid and the management committee, they have to go before the 2013 UCI election.

You could also request your club brings a motion requiring the national fed to explain how it holds the UCI accountable to club members. The National Fed Reps attend UCI annual congress; their job is to hold the UCI accountable to YOU. What have they done to make sure the UCI is doing it's job properly?

The club can bring a motion of no confidence in the UCI leadership too (but it won't bind the UCI unless enough feds bring it to the UCI congress). There may be a few intermediaries between your club and the fed; talk to your club president about your club fits in to the national federation and what you can do.

Irish cycling will be voting on a motion of no confidence in the UCI leadership later this week. That will have come about by a similar process. Club meetings are usually very poorly attended. Your club committee might support your motion, but even if they don't, it will probably only take you and a few mates to stack the meeting and get your vote through.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
Broken Spoke said:
Don't kid yourself that the national feds will move on McQuaid - they're all in it together to save their collective arses.
Brian Cookson of British Cycling has already made his position clear over on the UK Veloriders forum. In response to the question "Can the National Federations get rid of McQuaid+Verbruggen?" Cookson simply posted a link to the UCI's justification for not acting on Armstrong's positive test for corticosteroids in the 1999 Tour.

Self-serving corporate whores, the lot of them.
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
Michael Turtur, you'd be wasting your time, there'll be no change coming from that lot they'll be circling the wagons. Change is going to have to be imposed.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
This is what I'm sending Mike Turtur (Oceania confederation rep, which includes NZ).

Mr Turtur,

This letter is to inform the decision making of the UCI Management Committee this Friday.

The Committee needs to know that cycling fans have seen through the UCI's tough talk. We have heard Pat McQuaid repeatedly talk about four year sanctions, but know 4 year sanction are only possible in limited circumstances and seldom happen. We have heard the UCI's claims of doing everything possible to prevent doping, but know your organisation failed to implement WADA's recommendations to investigate non-analytical evidence.

Words cannot restore the fan's confidence this time, we have been mislead by senior UCI officials too many times before. Action is required:
1) Do everything to minimize doping that is recommended by WADA;
2) Remove McQuaid and Verbruggen from the organisation immediately.

Anything less will cause many fans to turn away, protracting the dark period where cycling's growth is strangled by scandal and mismanagement.

Sincerely,
....
 
Robert21 said:
Brian Cookson of British Cycling has already made his position clear over on the UK Veloriders forum. In response to the question "Can the National Federations get rid of McQuaid+Verbruggen?" Cookson simply posted a link to the UCI's justification for not acting on Armstrong's positive test for corticosteroids in the 1999 Tour.

Self-serving corporate whores, the lot of them.

Just saw that, glad I spent an hour writing an email to British Cycling then.
Still, will be interesting to see if there's any reply, might be a chance if he posts on web forums.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
Robert21 said:
Self-serving corporate whores, the lot of them.
They are indeed, they will be circling the wagons too. The best to be hoped for is that they feel enough heat that they think getting rid of phatso and verdrugthem will increase their own chances of survival. But really, I just like sending people cranky letters.
 
Jul 16, 2012
201
0
0
I Watch Cycling In July said:
Can't hurt to send a few emails. I will send Turtur a brief one, along the lines of "don't think the same old tough talk and weak action will cut it this time". Fun to try and annoy these ****ers anyway.

Ultimately, club riders own the UCI. It's your fees which support the Clubs, which support the feds, which fund the UCI.

Roughly speaking, you will need to use your vote within your club in some way. Figure out who the bad apples are in your region (Ashenden helpfully listed 4 in Aus), then request that your club brings a motion of no confidence in (list bad apples) to the national fed. Talk to your club president about how to add items to the agenda for the next club meeting. It's the guys at the top of the feds and confederations that voted for McQuaid and the management committee, they have to go before the 2013 UCI election.

You could also request your club brings a motion requiring the national fed to explain how it holds the UCI accountable to club members. The National Fed Reps attend UCI annual congress; their job is to hold the UCI accountable to YOU. What have they done to make sure the UCI is doing it's job properly?

The club can bring a motion of no confidence in the UCI leadership too (but it won't bind the UCI unless enough feds bring it to the UCI congress). There may be a few intermediaries between your club and the fed; talk to your club president about your club fits in to the national federation and what you can do.

Irish cycling will be voting on a motion of no confidence in the UCI leadership later this week. That will have come about by a similar process. Club meetings are usually very poorly attended. Your club committee might support your motion, but even if they don't, it will probably only take you and a few mates to stack the meeting and get your vote through.
Just sent my email to Turtur.

Who were the Ashenden four again? Turtur - Oceania representative UCI, Phil Bates (the guy that referred to Tygart as a ego maniac - on the UCI disciplinary committee), Mueller - who was the other one?
 
I Watch Cycling In July said:
They are indeed, they will be circling the wagons too. The best to be hoped for is that they feel enough heat that they think getting rid of phatso and verdrugthem will increase their own chances of survival. But really, I just like sending people cranky letters.
Not sure I'd trust any of them to do what's best for the sport. Brian Cookson, good guy, done lots for the sport in the UK but is on the board of Team Sky. Definitely conflicted, weather he can see it or not.

Nothing will change, we need a new governance. Hopefully the IOC will kick cycling out until its less screwed up.
 
Here is my email. Piece about it in my signature too.


Dear Mr Cookson,

I have little faith that this email will be taken notice of, or even read, but I will feel better for having written it, for having attempted to be a part of a movement to make the situation in this sport better than it is.

Ahead of the UCI Management Committee Meeting this Friday, I have several issues that, as a fan, I would like to bring to your attention. I know that you are part of the aforementioned Committee and so would hope that you bear some of these things in mind in the lead-up to the meeting, and also during it. The comments below are related to UCI President Pat McQuaid, and his predecessor and current Honorary President of the UCI Hein Verbruggen – both of whom have, and are continuing to discredit the sport of cycling.

As one of our countrymen, longtime professional rider and British Cycling member David Millar said today (reiterating what he has said already this month) “I will be absolutely disgusted if he has a future (at the UCI).”1 Cycling superstar Tom Boonen has also made statements to this effect in recent days.2 With Mr Verbruggen having ‘overseen’ cycling during the time of rampant doping during the peloton, his continued friendship and defence of disgraced ex-cyclist Lance Armstrong should make his position, and any association with the federation that governs the sport and today’s young riders, untenable. It is ridiculous that someone like him can have any role or any say in the sport today, he should never, never, never be in the position he is in after having played a part in keeping cycling in the state is in.

The former President of WADA Richard Pound, has said in recent days that “it is not credible that they did not know this was going on”,3 referring to the particularly abysmal way testing was run during Mr Verbruggen’s presidency, during which time Mr McQuaid served as President of the UCI Road Commission. I am sure you do not need to be reminded of the importance of Mr Pound and the weight his words carry. Add that statement to the numerous allegations of UCI complicity from people who have nothing to gain by making such allegations, and the level of trust one feels for the people running the sport is not very high. In fact, with the revelations that have come with USADA’s report and the long overdue erasion of Lance Armstrong from the record books, I would say that the general level of confidence in the leaders of cycling is at a low. I have seen riders express their lack of confidence in Mr McQuaid and Mr Verbruggen, with one openly calling for Mr McQuaid to resign. It probably doesn’t need to be said that a large amount of fans also feel this way.

As for Mr McQuaid, how can somebody who allows, even encourages, donations from the riders he is employed to govern be fit to lead this sport? Surely you agree that such a blatant (and given today’s statements, public) conflict of interest at the highest level of governance is not the way things should be run. The donations from Lance Armstrong happened while he was in charge of road cycling at the UCI, so he does not escape responsibility despite his best efforts yesterday afternoon. In addition to the fact that donations from riders are extremely unethical, how can donations from riders who we now know had suspicious blood values at the time be condoned?

With every scandal, we hear the same soundbites from Mr McQuaid - “the culture of doping is changing”, “cycling has come a long way” and some spiel about looking to the future. We have heard these numerous times during his Presidency and will no doubt hear the same recycled statements when future cases such as those currently ongoing in Padova and Mantova draw to an end. I am sure that, looking further into the future than even the Italian legal system can take us, there will be more scandals, more rehashing of the same message from McQuaid if he is still around.

The startling lack of new ideas to battle doping that have come from the UCI has also been a major worry. I have seen news of a possible doping amnesty being mooted in the past weeks, something which was shot down by the UCI in late September. I say, why try running when you can’t yet walk? Who would think that the UCI would consider listening to riders coming forward to talk about doping when they have repeatedly ignored riders who have done the same after being caught doping?

Jörg Jaksche has said that the UCI pushed for a longer ban after he gave them details of his doping. Jesus Manzano was also dismissed in a similar way. Mr McQuaid today labelled Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis “scumbags” and said that ”all they have done is damage the sport.”4 Yet without their testimony, without their willingness to be castigated, even hated by some, they have told the truth and aided the slow process that has seen the downfall of the largest doping programme and the biggest cheat in cycling history, probably in the history of sport. And yet to Pat McQuaid, they are “scumbags”.

We have recently seen a large and well-loved sponsor pull out of the sport citing their lack of confidence in the leadership of the sport to be able to change things for the better, and that “Doping is supported even within the highest institutions of the cycling world.”5 Is this really what the sport wants? Do you want sponsors withdrawing because the people that lead this sport are unable to instigate change or at least convince sponsors that they are capable of doing so? Can you imagine what kind of blow to cycling in this country it would be if Sky were to do the same?

Mr McQuaid today said of this loss, ”We lost a very important sponsor, Rabobank, last week. That’s true. But I am quite confident that sponsor will be replaced”6 When considering that, in the same press conference, Mr McQuaid also complained that his federation compares unfavourably financially to FIFA, to the extent where he is happy to accept donations from the sport’s participants, I would think that the loss of an important and long-running title sponsor would have been mentioned with a less throw-away attitude. The statement he made was remarkably cavalier for a man whose sport has increasingly relied on the backing of billionaires or political patronage in place of actual sponsors in recent years. This lack of sponsorship and frequency of desperate sponsor-searching has become the norm under Mr McQuaid’s reign, and is presumably not in line with the UCI’s vision of how the sport should be run.

I don’t doubt that cycling is cleaner now than it has been for years, but how can any fans be sure about this when the sport we love is led in this manner? Even if new anti-doping measures are brought in, how can any of us know for sure that the people in charge aren’t assisting riders in getting around them? The truth is, we can’t and nothing Pat McQuaid or Hein Verbruggen do or say can change that. Credit to them, it doesn’t look like they’re even trying.

With the election coming up next year, now is surely as good a time as any to talk to other delegates about where the UCI is heading under its current leadership, and whether another four years of this is good for the sport.

Thank you,

Daniel
 
Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Why should we stop at that? Why don't we go the full mile? Since hearing that craptastic Phat interview in the morning, my blood has been boiling as UCI is trying to sweep evrything under the rag and McQuaid continues to be the Iraqi Information Minister of Cycling :mad:

1. I'm sure some in here have contacts to serious and competent journalists. Why not compell them to dig a bit deeper and uncover the cesspool that calls itself UCI.

2. What about cyclingnews themselves. When are we going to see a seriously researched article about the state of things instead of just following the herd, hoping to not draw too much attention for fear of not being invited to the next junket in Aigle?

3. Couldn't we try to drum up enough of us Europeans to actually protest - in person - in front of or near the UCI headquarters.

4. We could write letters or emails to our national cycling unions to apply pressure on UCI

5. Send back Merchandise of riders, who refuse to speak up against Doping and UCI complicity. Boycott idiots like Samuel Sanchez, who still go around yapping that 'never caught', 'moving on' claptrap

6. Find articles and Blogs, which call bull**** on Hein and Phat and make sure they get properly advertised. Spread the word.

7. Support Kimmage in his fight with UCI

Just a few ideas...
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
People should put a 'ps' that if McQuaid is not gone and testing given to an independent agency that fans will push for cycling to removed from the Olympics.

That might make them think!
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Don Quixote said:
Good idea.

Done.
I agree. And done. Thanks for the list.

Other things to do: email or contact your local bike shops, and your local bike clubs. Ask them to spread the word too. Ask them to contact the UCI.

McQuaid and Verbruggen must go. We MUST have an independent, transparently functional, and effective drug testing program. We have seen what happens when the tests don't detect anything.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Here is what I just sent. Feel free to copy the text - but I would suggest you reword something if you use it. Identical letters would get discounted a bit, I think.

membership@usacycling.org;spetty@usacycling.org;support@usacycling.org

To: Bill PETERSON, Steve JOHNSON, Mike Plant
USA CYCLING
210 USA Cycling Point, Suite 100
COLORADO SPRINGS CO-80919


McQuaid has today demonstrated that he is incapable of leading the UCI in a constructive fashion. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-landis-and-hamilton-are-far-from-heroes?ns_campaign=news&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=cyclingnews&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0)

We are at a watershed moment - and cycling must change, or we will be held in the same light as professional "wrestling". McQuaid is incapable of taking us there. I respectfully request that you work to remove McQuaid and Verbruggen from positions of influence in the UCI, and that you work to establish an INDEPENDENT, transparent, and reputable anti-doping and testing organization for cycling. We have seen, vividly, what happens when the tests do not detect anything. We can not, for the future of our sport, allow the failed policies of McQuaid and Verbruggen to continue.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
bobbins said:
Not sure I'd trust any of them to do what's best for the sport. Brian Cookson, good guy, done lots for the sport in the UK but is on the board of Team Sky. Definitely conflicted, weather he can see it or not.

Nothing will change, we need a new governance. Hopefully the IOC will kick cycling out until its less screwed up.
Cookson has put out a response.

A message to British Cycling members from Brian Cookson, OBE, President of British Cycling:

"Many of you have been in touch to communicate your concerns about the Lance Armstrong affair and the troubles besetting our sport.

After a wonderful summer, the USADA report on Armstrong has seen cycling attract the wrong kind of headlines.

However, while this is painful for those of us who love cycling, I believe this is a necessary process and one from which the sport will emerge stronger.

I welcome the UCI decision to accept the findings of the United States Anti-Doping Agency’s investigation into Lance Armstrong and I promise to use my role on the UCI Management Committee to reflect the concerns many of you have expressed via email and social media.

Cycling must act on the lessons from USADA’s thorough investigation, which has brought light into a dark era in our sport. I believe we have already made progress but the actions of the past continue to affect the present and we have to maintain our vigilance.

British Cycling remains as committed as ever to the fight against doping and we are proud of our record of providing a clean environment for our riders to compete in.

Our work across the sport – providing opportunities to compete or just enjoy riding bikes – goes on."

Brian Cookson OBE
British Cycling President
Typical vacuous 'management speak'. A simple "As your President I will do all in my power to follow your wishes and see that both Pat McQuaid and Hein Verbruggen are removed from the UCI as soon as is possible" would have done.

As if Cookson would have the balls and integrity to do that!
 
Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Robert21 said:
Typical vacuous 'management speak'. A simple "As your President I will do all in my power to follow your wishes and see that both Pat McQuaid and Hein Verbruggen are removed from the UCI as soon as is possible" would have done.

As if Cookson would have the balls and integrity to do that!
He would find that he's been excluded from the Friday meeting if he'd done that.

Coupe d'Etat 101: Lesson 1 - Don't announce it beforehand.

But then again, you could just as well be right. Sadly :(
 
Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Decided to write a letter to German magazine "Der Spiegel". Everything in []'s are annotation for better understanding and the German Original is posted below.


Dear Sir or Madam,

Up to this point I found your reporting about the causa Armstrong quite blanced, but I wonder why Der Spiegel retracted into the same self-administered form of Omertá as most other media outlets.
Yes, details of the USADA's resoned decision were outlined and discussed, but the complicity of UCI in the Armstrong scheme as been vaguely hinted at in a half-sentence at best.
Nowhere was it mentioned that the UCI is both main promoter and regulating body of cycling, which means that every success in the fight against doping is automatically a bad hit for UCI as the promoter. Why is such a monumental conflict of interest being kept quite about instead of uncovered?
Why is their no light shed on the connections an insider deals of Armstrong outside cycling? Things like his attempted blackmail of Barrack Obama before his first term election [link to Selena Roberts' doc] not even mentioned?
How come that names like Paul Kimmage or Travis Tygart do never come up. It's not like EVERYBODY tucked tail and ran from Armstrong. The methods of Mr. A, would paint, not the picture of a ruthless fraud, but of a psychopath, who built and ran a Mafia organization in plain sight and with help of the sports gouverning body. An organization in which fraud, blackmail and bribery were common workplace practice.
And the media were all mute on this. If it was blatantly obvious to the layman cycling enthusiast that something was badly rotten in the state of Denmark [that's a German phrase, has nothing to do with denmark itself.] How come journalists close to cycling didn't notice anything?
Notorious frauds like Team Telekom, idols like Jan Ullrich, Erik Zabel and others ruined German cycling years ago. We've reached a point where the majority in German speaking internet forums are Swiss and Austrian. If one, as a German, dares to admit to cycling enthusiasm, one is looked upon as if one's favourite hobbies include engaging in indecent acts with sheep and children (even if one isn't a catholic priest).
Cycling is at a crossroads, where it might either slip and slide to the level of the World Wrestling Federation or the sport might pry cycling back out of the hand of the fraudsters.
But of all times, the media chose now to remain silent. Now that we could use a mercilessly asking and relentlessly researching media, there's nothing but silence. The unbelieveable farce of a UCI press conference yesterday proved the point. A whole ensemble of streamlined journalists sat silently and watched Pat McQuaid perform a formidable impression of the Iraqi Information Minister. The sport just sat there and listened to him telling fairy tailes of the ponies. ['nother German phrase. Equates to 'utter claptrap']

In this sense I would like to respectfully request that Der Spiegel takes a more agressive stance in this situation and digs deeper than others, because we have myriads of questions, but no answers.
Where are all our 'repentant dopists'? Did someone even try to get a statement from Jörg Jaksche on the matter? And who takes a really close and hard look at the last remaining German mohicans [German phrase, meaning only a few people of a once big group left] in the peloton?
And who sounds the alarm clock at the BDR [German cycling union] so that Scharping [former German minister, now chairman of BDR] will finally fall out of bed? The good man as always been taking valium as a stimulant, but considering the catastrophic state the sport is in, one cannot possibly be that quite.
I remain hopeful that Der Spiegel might agree to pursue the matter more aggressively and therefore will distinguish itself from the otherwise woefully idle German media, because if bloggers and powerless forum members are the only people left, willing to fight, Cycling will soon enjoy the same acceptance in society like outdoor onanism or synchrnized exhibitionism.

Best regards
[name]


&quot said:
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,

Bisher fand ich Ihre Berichterstattung zum Fall Armstrong durchaus ausgeglichen, muss mich aber wundern, warum der Spiegel größtenteils in die gleiche selbst auferlegte Form der Omertá verfällt, wie fast alle Medien.
Zwar wurden die Details der "reasoned decision" der USADA durchaus beleuchtet, aber noch immer wird die Komplizenschaft der UCI im System Armstrong bestenfalls vage in einem Nebensatz angedeutet.
Nirgendwo wird analysiert, daß die UCI sowohl Promoter, als auch regulierende Instanz im Radsport ist, d.h. jeder Erfolg der UCI im Kampf gegen Doping ist automatisch ein herber Rückschlag für die UCI als Promoter. Warum wird ein solcher fundamentaler Interessenkonflikt verschwiegen oder nicht zumindestens ausreichend beleuchtet.
Warum werden Armstrongs Verflechtungen, Verbindungen und Seilschaften ausserhalb des Radsports nicht untersucht. Dinge, wie sein Erpressungsversuch gegen Barack Obama im Wahlkampf vor dessen erster Amtsperiode (nachzulesen in Selina Roberts "The Influence Peddler", http://reader.roopstigo.com/view/roopster/story/595#/chapter/1/) gar nicht erst erwähnt.
Wieso tauchen Namen, wie Paul Kimmage oder Travis Tygart in der Berichterstattung des Spiegel nicht auf. Es ist ja nicht so, daß bisher ALLE vor Armstrong den Schwanz eingekniffen haben. Die Methoden des Herrn A., vor allem im Umgang mit seinen Gegnern, zeichnet mitnichten das Bild eines skrupellosen Betrügers, sondern offenbart einen Psychopathen, der vor den Augen aller Welt und unter Komplizenschaft des Weltverbandes eine Mafiaorganisation aufgebaut und betrieben hat, in der Betrug, Erpressung, Bestechung zum Tagesgeschäft gehörten.
Und die Medien haben zu all dem geschwiegen. Wenn der unbedarfte Radsportfanatiker seit Jahren wußte, das da was faul ist im Staate Dänemark, wie offensichtlich musste es für Journalisten sein, die dem Radsport nahestehen?

Notorische Betrüger, wie das Team Telekom, Sportidole, wie Jan Ullrich, Erik Zabel und andere haben den Radsport in Deutschland schon vor Jahren in den Ruin getrieben. Mittlerweile ist es so, daß die meisten Teilnehmer in deutschsprachigen Radsport-Foren Schweizer und Österreicher sind und wenn man sich als Deutscher zu seiner Radsportbegeisterung bekennt, dann wird man angesehen als würde man sich als liebstes Hobby and Schafen und Kindern vergehen (selbst wenn man kein katholischer Priester ist).
Jetzt ist der Punkt erreicht, wo der Radsport entweder auf die Stufe der World Wrestling Federation abgleitet oder die Sportwelt sich den Radsport aus den Händen der notorischen Betrüger zurückerobert.
Ausgerechnet also, wenn man eine gnadenlos nachfragende und unnachgiebige Presse braucht, herrscht betretenes Schweigen im Blätterwald, wie die unglaubliche Farce der gestrigen UCI Pressekonferenz beweist, in der ein gleichgeschaltetes Medien-Ensemble stillschweigend zuhört, wie Pat McQuaid eine ziemlich überzeugende Imitation des legendären Irakischen Informationsministers aufführt und der Sportwelt Märchen vom Pferd zum besten gibt.

In diesem Sinne möchte ich den Spiegel respektvoll darum bitten, in dieser Sache etwas tiefer zu graben und einen offensiveren Standpunkt einzunehmen, denn der Fragen gibt esviele und Antworten hat es keine. Wo sind denn all unsere "geläuterten" Doping-Stars. Hat mal jemand versucht ein Statement von Jörg Jaksche zu bekommen? Wer schaut eigentlich den letzten verbliebenen deutschen Mohikanern im Starterfeld auf die Finger und warum stellt keiner im BDR mal den Wecker, damit Scharping mal aus dem Bett fällt. Der Gutste hat ja schon immer Valium als Aufputschmittel verwendet, aber so verschwiegen kann man angesichts der katastrophalen Lage des Radsports ja nun nicht sein.
Ich verbleibe in der Hoffnung, daß der Spiegel sich in dieser Sache vielleicht etwas offensiver von den eher tatenlosen deutschen Medien abheben kann, denn wenn der Kampf gegen Korruption in der UCI Bloggern und machtlosen Forums-Teilnehmer überlassen bleibt, wird Radsport wohl bald den gleichen Status geniessen, wie Freiluft-Onanieren oder Synchron-Exhibitionismus.

mit freundlichen Grüßen,
[name]
 
Jun 26, 2012
253
0
0
Why stop there

If you are going to email, why not include Sports ministers and your countries branches of the IOC & WADA puttin pressure on UCI & the guys listed on page 1

Can't hurt
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts