If they lose their license, will another team be elevated to Pro Team status? If nothing else, this may be the backdoor that Geox needs to get into the Tour.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 29,413
- 3,482
- 28,180
Would be a big bunch of BS if they lose their license...
Will Radioshack lose their license when Armstrong is found guilty?
Will Saxo Bank lose their license when Contador is banned after all after appeal?
etc..
Typical UCI madness. Not that I defend Vacansoleil here, Hilare vd Schueren made a mess of the team like he does with all his teams (Unibet anyone?)
But in this case, the UCI is the worst of 2 evils
Will Radioshack lose their license when Armstrong is found guilty?
Will Saxo Bank lose their license when Contador is banned after all after appeal?
etc..
Typical UCI madness. Not that I defend Vacansoleil here, Hilare vd Schueren made a mess of the team like he does with all his teams (Unibet anyone?)
But in this case, the UCI is the worst of 2 evils
This is ridiculous! Is UCI trying to see how big hole they can dig themselves before their customers start to vote with their feet? You can't make this stuff up!
Vacansoleil will play a role in classics and would for sure do something in GT's as well. Maybe not top-10 GC material, but when do you see some top-10 GC team anyway? When their domestiques are getting bottles from the team car? Some GC top-10 teams are always visible in classics though...when they are at the bottom of a massive pile-up.
Vacansoleil will play a role in classics and would for sure do something in GT's as well. Maybe not top-10 GC material, but when do you see some top-10 GC team anyway? When their domestiques are getting bottles from the team car? Some GC top-10 teams are always visible in classics though...when they are at the bottom of a massive pile-up.
Dumb. They can't change the rules in the middle of the season. The sponsors are on board.
Team management has suspended the riders, they've done what they could do with all available information.
Team management has suspended the riders, they've done what they could do with all available information.
- Jun 28, 2009
- 218
- 1
- 0
If the UCI pulls the license mid season I think it shows how stupid the entire UCI setup is. Looking from the UCI's point of view it don't look good for Vancansoleil based on UCI "principles". But not sure about the legal ramifications since the team has fronted the money, has sponsorship, and "supposedly" it is not the team's fault that the riders did what they did. I love cycling but fans of other sports have got to be laughing their asses off at this sport at the moment.
Hmmmmm said:
Trust me, fans of other sports laugh at us for thinking cycling is a sport already. Even the WWF has rules they stick with.
The Hitch said:
True, true, true. At least WWF guys don't look like such pus*sies throwing punches at each other. Their fake assaults look more real than the real cyclist altercations but now I'm just feeling bad for bringing it up.
- Jun 14, 2010
- 34,930
- 60
- 22,580
Oldman said:
WWF guys are anything but pussies. They fight for a just cause. The enviroment and animals
But if you are talking about wwe they arent bad either. People say its fake but its actually one of if not the hardest sports out there. Probably more injuries per year than any other athletes. Its not fake as much as preplanned. The punches etc are usually real just expected and exagerated. But often there is no need for exageration.
When a nut does a front summersault off a 20 foot ladder, onto another guy for example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBZmcTJZtjA
Now thats how you break an enemy. In style. A cyclist would have just punched his opponent when he was down. Barredo would have tried to hit him with a wheel.
- May 28, 2010
- 639
- 0
- 0
It's setting a very dangerous precedent if they do take the license away... any time a team has a rider who turns out to have doped in the middle of the season, they can have their license revoked? I'd also be curious to to see how Vacansoleil would have been in the rankings without Ricco, but again the UCI's rules keep that a secret too. The UCI needs to learn what transparency is, and fast, if they want to save the image of cycling.
- Oct 29, 2009
- 2,578
- 0
- 0
I was gonna post here, but ended up posting something in the thread in the clinic that is disussing the same stuff.
Don't wanna do it twice so here it is: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=440653&postcount=27
Here is the thread: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=12357
Don't wanna do it twice so here it is: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=440653&postcount=27
Here is the thread: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=12357
- May 28, 2010
- 639
- 0
- 0
Hmmm here http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-says-saxo-bank-will-not-lose-contadors-ranking-points
McQuaid says licenses cannot be revisited, but he later said that the UCI would review Saxo's license in the event of Contador's suspension, and now this bit about Vacansoleil... I'm sick of the UCI and its hypocrisy!
McQuaid says licenses cannot be revisited, but he later said that the UCI would review Saxo's license in the event of Contador's suspension, and now this bit about Vacansoleil... I'm sick of the UCI and its hypocrisy!
Why don't the teams, riders, ASO and RSC get together and form a cycling program outside of the UCI? They would control all the riders, the top teams and the overwhelming majority of the top races. Set up their own deal and tell the UCI to pound sand.
- May 28, 2010
- 639
- 0
- 0
hector5950 said:
Sounds good to me. Only issues would be getting every major race to agree (and some only exist because the UCI decided cycling should globalize), and also races like the World Championships and the Olympics (?) that the UCI has fairly direct control over. Seems like the national federations would need to be mostly in on it too.
- Sep 8, 2009
- 15,306
- 3
- 22,485
this uci thing must disappear as soon as possible.it's destroying the whole thing.
vacansoleil deserves the license and nothing should change that.
vacansoleil deserves the license and nothing should change that.
Apologies for jumping in late. I would say to some extent you reap what you sow so Vacansoleil would rather get what they deserved for signing people with the background of Ricco and Mosquera.
On the UCI debate, how is McQuaid elected and for how long? Surely it's not the dumping of the UCI that's required, but internal change to modify how the UCI behaves.
On the UCI debate, how is McQuaid elected and for how long? Surely it's not the dumping of the UCI that's required, but internal change to modify how the UCI behaves.
royalpig180 said:
Not all major races need to agree, but I don't think they will have any choice. Every team will want to be in the league the Tour is after all. So all other races have the choice to either join or only get second rank riders at the start.
The World Championship isn't a problem either, the new league can just organize their own. There are enough examples of sports with 2 world champions at the same time because of rivaling organizations.
I think this Vacansoleil-story is kind of strange. I've been following it for quite some time with a growing sense of surprise. Of course, they shouldn't have signed Riccò. I'm actually surprised to find out the UCI and the "cycling world" didn't have a lot of trouble with Riccò coming back to cycling, when you compare it with cases like Rasmussen and Vinokourov. There hasn't been a lot of talk about it being wrong to sign Riccò. This does not mean that Vacansoleil doesn't have a choice. They could pick me instead and leave Riccò.
But the problem is that Riccò is damn talented, no matter what you think of it and he's had his punishment. Of course there is always that discussion whether riders deserve a second chance. I don't actually think so when doping is concerned (And then I don't talk about a picogram of this that might have come from meat and a nanogram of that that might have come from a spoiled food supplement), but the system allows riders to return. And honestly, I enjoy David Millar's time trials, Petacchi's sprints. I even cheered for the hated Vinokourov when he crushed Kolobnev at the Ans hill last year. And I cheered for Riccò when he won the Coppa Sabattini, at the end of 2010.
My point is that when riders have a second chance, half chances are kind of weird. Vacansoleil might not have been smart to sign Riccò, but it's not a crime. Now, if the story about Riccò is true (which I think it is), I think Riccò is a nutcase and should be banned from the sport, for everybody's sake. i don't think anyone disagrees with that. But Vacansoleil signed a rider that was not suspended. They could have signed him and we all know if Vacansoleil didn't, someone else would. Riccò was expected to ride the Vuelta for Quickstep and sign for a couple of years. The fact that Riccò picked Vacansoleil ("because of the zero tolerance thingy" he said in the Dutch press) does not mean that Vacansoleil is to blame for his return. Are we kicking Quick step and Ceramica out too? Don't think so. And rightly so. The guy to blame is Riccardo Riccò.
Then, the Mosquera thing. As far as I know, he signed for Vacansoleil before he got the positive test. I don't think Vacansoleil could have known about it beforehand. Besides, for some reason, Mosquera is still not suspended. I'm not into that specific case, but he is allowed to ride. Contador was suspended, for instance. What makes Vacansoleil worse off than Saxo Bank in this matter?
Besides, it's widely known that Vacansoleil asked the UCI not to take Mosqueras points into account when the UCI decided on the ranking. That was because after Mosquera signed for Vacansoleil (but during his Xacobeo contract) he had this test and the procedure was not yet finished (and still isn't (?) ). I think this is either a smart move by a bunch of cheaters who figured out exactly how the points system works and that they were still al right if they left the detected one of their guys out, or (and I think this is the more likely option) they were being ethical about it. In the end, Vacansoleil managed to get more points than many other teams. That also has to do with Stijn Devolder, Johnny Hoogerland, Romain Feillu, Matteo Carrara and the other guys.
In very short, ban Riccò, ban Mosquera (if he's judged guilty) and leave the rest of the team alone to check the points next year and see if they're still among the best.
But the problem is that Riccò is damn talented, no matter what you think of it and he's had his punishment. Of course there is always that discussion whether riders deserve a second chance. I don't actually think so when doping is concerned (And then I don't talk about a picogram of this that might have come from meat and a nanogram of that that might have come from a spoiled food supplement), but the system allows riders to return. And honestly, I enjoy David Millar's time trials, Petacchi's sprints. I even cheered for the hated Vinokourov when he crushed Kolobnev at the Ans hill last year. And I cheered for Riccò when he won the Coppa Sabattini, at the end of 2010.
My point is that when riders have a second chance, half chances are kind of weird. Vacansoleil might not have been smart to sign Riccò, but it's not a crime. Now, if the story about Riccò is true (which I think it is), I think Riccò is a nutcase and should be banned from the sport, for everybody's sake. i don't think anyone disagrees with that. But Vacansoleil signed a rider that was not suspended. They could have signed him and we all know if Vacansoleil didn't, someone else would. Riccò was expected to ride the Vuelta for Quickstep and sign for a couple of years. The fact that Riccò picked Vacansoleil ("because of the zero tolerance thingy" he said in the Dutch press) does not mean that Vacansoleil is to blame for his return. Are we kicking Quick step and Ceramica out too? Don't think so. And rightly so. The guy to blame is Riccardo Riccò.
Then, the Mosquera thing. As far as I know, he signed for Vacansoleil before he got the positive test. I don't think Vacansoleil could have known about it beforehand. Besides, for some reason, Mosquera is still not suspended. I'm not into that specific case, but he is allowed to ride. Contador was suspended, for instance. What makes Vacansoleil worse off than Saxo Bank in this matter?
Besides, it's widely known that Vacansoleil asked the UCI not to take Mosqueras points into account when the UCI decided on the ranking. That was because after Mosquera signed for Vacansoleil (but during his Xacobeo contract) he had this test and the procedure was not yet finished (and still isn't (?) ). I think this is either a smart move by a bunch of cheaters who figured out exactly how the points system works and that they were still al right if they left the detected one of their guys out, or (and I think this is the more likely option) they were being ethical about it. In the end, Vacansoleil managed to get more points than many other teams. That also has to do with Stijn Devolder, Johnny Hoogerland, Romain Feillu, Matteo Carrara and the other guys.
In very short, ban Riccò, ban Mosquera (if he's judged guilty) and leave the rest of the team alone to check the points next year and see if they're still among the best.
Nearly all the major races are controlled by ASO or RSC. The biggies that aren't will have a choice to make. They can join the new series and get the big teams, are they can stay with UCI. For the WC and Olympics, the riders need to choose. Do they want to put up with the UCI's BS or not? If not, they might have to forgo the WC and Olympics.royalpig180 said:
Ryaguas said:Are you Tommy Dekker?
besides that... UCI is a bunch of hypocrites... Rat McQuack is such a %/&%(/& and a &%/&% and his **** *** *** ** ******** ***** ***** *** *** ****... arrrg... bah...
Haha, no, I'm the other Tommy
And I agree with you on the UCI, especially on the asterisk thing
Three points on this:
1. First of all, no-one's been stripped of their licence. The UCI have just said they'll consider it, as they should. I doubt anyone will be stripped of anything. This seems like a warning shot to me -'hire returning dopers at your own peril'.
2. There's a fundamental difference between the Ricco and Contador cases. Namely that Contador wasn't a Saxo rider when he tested positive. Nor did Saxo know about it when they signed him. Saxo can't be blamed.
On the other hand Ricco was a Vacansoleil rider when he had his recent troubles, plus had a previous sanction against him.
3. Why do people think that the ASO/RCS would be any better than the UCI? They are profit making companies and as such are unelected and unaccountable to the sport. Their only obligation is to the shareholders. This isn't a recipe for a corruption free sport.
1. First of all, no-one's been stripped of their licence. The UCI have just said they'll consider it, as they should. I doubt anyone will be stripped of anything. This seems like a warning shot to me -'hire returning dopers at your own peril'.
2. There's a fundamental difference between the Ricco and Contador cases. Namely that Contador wasn't a Saxo rider when he tested positive. Nor did Saxo know about it when they signed him. Saxo can't be blamed.
On the other hand Ricco was a Vacansoleil rider when he had his recent troubles, plus had a previous sanction against him.
3. Why do people think that the ASO/RCS would be any better than the UCI? They are profit making companies and as such are unelected and unaccountable to the sport. Their only obligation is to the shareholders. This isn't a recipe for a corruption free sport.
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 36K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram