Wake up people, keep your focus on the UCI

[LauraLyn]

"Emma Pooley: International Cycling Union have turned women's cycling into a Mickey Mouse sport," Emma Pooley

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...womens-cycling-into-a-Mickey-Mouse-sport.html

A woman's perspective on UCI, sponsorship, and what is bringing our sport down.

Go Emma!

 

[mtb Dad]

great great post and article. How to facilitate the changes required at the top. Some highlights:

... it would take simply one member of the management committee, be it Mike Plant of the USA, or Igor Makarov of Russia, or even Mike Turtur of Australia to muster the support of 1/5 of the Federations in the UCI membership to call an extraordinary Congress for a vote on the removal of president Pat McQuaid. The UCI must convene the Congress within two months of said request. An approval of the ultimate removal of the president requires a 2/3 majority vote.

...

Or they could simply file a motion to add the dismissal of the UCI president for cause based on the mounting evidence (which requires immediate action) at the Congress meeting at the UCI Championships, provided they have 15 of the federations supporting the inclusion of the item on the agenda. Again, the 2/3 majority vote would come into play. The question is, are current members willing to make this gesture and do the footwork, or are they also merely puppets to a corrupt agenda, similar to other sports?

...

There are mechanisms to trigger the investigation and removal of the entire management committee, or the president solely. In our current circumstances, it is imperative that this happens now from multiple sources. From inside the UCI. From the AIGCP. From WADA. From the IOC. Enough is enough.

I think this is oversimplified or it would have happened by now. I suspect the national federation presidents are reluctant to come out against the leader of such an oligarchical organization. They have objectives at the UCI that being seen as a rebel won't help. Races to argue for (eg hosting world cups), Olympic qualifying places to lobby for, invitations to wangle for their national teams, and perhaps less altruistically, commissions (with travel) to lobby their way onto. Once you get seen talking to rebels, Pat/Hein will cut you off. If you don't win the rebellion, you lose big time.

I think UCI need a structural re-organization so more of the decisions on things that are important to national federation presidents, are out of the UCI president's hands. Still a tough sell for a national president who just wants a race or another continental ranking points race. Take away Pat's goodies to hand out? He won't do it willingly.

Or, we could all threaten to remove our respective national federation presidents at our next AGMs, unless they join the rebellion. I think this is simpler. We'd have to expect the collateral damage to our federations interests if we lose. It would be nice to see some elite athletes say they can accept some short term pain for long term gain. Presidents are also fans, and they won't like seeing their national team harmed unless they have permission or pressure.

 

[MarkvW]

Indeed lamb is pretty tasty, especially off the grill.

The problem is, of course, cycling is very much a mafia type structure within the peloton, for which you have a rather ruthless pecking order, which seems to be in the nature of the game. How else are you going to find strong guys willing to thrash their bodies for kilometers and kilometers, while only getting a pat on the back in the end and told that tomorrow's stage will be even harder?

Inherent to such a self-effacing, masochistic psychology is a predisposition toward obedience and restraint, while next comes the pressure to maintain omertà and to not "spit on the plate" from which you are fed. Humiliation and sacrifice run hand in hand, all in the name of reaching the team goal. One almost has to be sheepish to survived and have a career. Then there are the roosters, but you can’t have too many roosters in the hen house.

It’s no wonder this sport has gotten the governmental body it has.

There has never been a better time for the sheep to become men, though, because there seems to be a crack in the code of silence which has corrupted the sport from within, has been its very culture (so we can't blame the sheep really), for decades now if not since the very beginning.

Your point highlights the paradox, as I see it. The riders are extremely rule compliant and subject to the de facto rules of the peloton. They totally buy off on omertá, for example. Why can't that kind of solidarity translate to union solidarity? I don't get it.

Why can't the riders, through a union, cut their own sponsorship deals or promote races? Why do they need corrupt middlemen like the UCI, or race organizers who won't share TV revenue, like ASO? There really isn't a good reason.

The UCI is supposed to be a rider's union, but when you have top men at the UCI attempting to personally profit from the riders' labor, then you have a grotesque conflict of interest. That's just one example. The "sysmex" donation is another. And the "favored rider" allegations should be sending riders through the roof!! But no ... the riders accept their lot, as sheep.

I'm not apportioning blame. But the system will only change if the riders organize and demand change.

 

[ThisFrenchGuy]

I think it is overly optimistic to believe that a riders's union would have the power to top the UCI.

It is true that in US sports, we have seen lock-outs, but it's far removed from changing the institutions (which are also a bit different on the other side of the Atlantic).

I would surmise teams, owners and sponsors have way more leverage. The only thing that those "neutral" bodies fears are a breakaway league that would drain money and the whole illusion of their universality.

In truth cycling is in a poor position there, as noted riders may be somewhat obedient and teams have a hard time being powerful on their own, since they are not like what we see in collective sports.
Even ASO, a fairly powerful actor failed to translate some of its goodwill.

It would take a scandal of epic proportions (bigger than Festina, bigger than the decade of sham we went through) to convince a concerted effort.

The Armstrong case may be a way, however, to implicate some people doing a terrible job at the UCI. That would already be a big progress.

 

[summerhill]

Lionel Birnie‏@lioneljbirnie
Interesting thing is how fast Verbruggen moved to ensure McQuaid would be "voted" UCI president when others stood against him in 2005.
Darach McQuaid‏@darachmcquaid
@lioneljbirnie f+ck's sake. That Madrid 2005 election was scrutinised by all and sundry. Media harking back to that now, look like w+nkers
Lionel Birnie‏@lioneljbirnie
@darachmcquaid Rather a defensive response. And I respectfully disagree. The circumstances prior to election remain of importance
and the Ma gets birthday greeting from the LA Madge McQuaid‏@madgemcquaid
@lancearmstrong Thank you for the birthday wishes Lance - much appreciated

 

[summerhill]

Lately Darach McQuaid's tweets have been mainly reposting Lance casuistry. A Shady Tree indeed.

 

[PosterBill]

The whole McQuaid bunch running things makes me so nauseous...only in cycling could this happen.

 

[Franklin]

You did emphasize "structure" in your post whereas myself and others tend to believe that corrupt individuals are more to blame.

No, I'm with him on this one... Pat and Hein did get elected one way or the other. Pat and Hein didn't put epo in the veins of riders. Pat and Hein didn't make national unions completely useless when it has to deal with their own riders. Pat and Hein didn't choose the politicians that protect riders.

It's not just them. Yes, they are filthy scum who need to be exposed, but the real question is why it's so widespread and visible at every level and in every countries union.

 

[the big ring]

No, I'm with him on this one... Pat and Hein did get elected one way or the other. .

Have a close look at that election. Sorry I don't have links, but it's an election done by countries that are on the very edge of the cycling world, by countries you never even heard of or realised had bike racers.

If the elections are corruptible, the elected are the culprits, long before the electors.

 

[Tinman]

I think this is oversimplified or it would have happened by now.

Or, we could all threaten to remove our respective national federation presidents at our next AGMs, unless they join the rebellion. I think this is simpler.

I am sure you are right on all your points.

I think it's great to see more media coverage, forum discussion/contribution and suggestions for change on UCI. Often it takes one person to get the ball rolling, others can add suggestions, etc, the "model" improves. I suspect that the collective wisdom in the clinic poster community could easily be used to greater benefit by national organizations and UCI.

 

[Franklin]

Have a close look at that election. Sorry I don't have links, but it's an election done by countries that are on the very edge of the cycling world, by countries you never even heard of or realised had bike racers.

If the elections are corruptible, the elected are the culprits, long before the electors.

And the rest just was naive like babies and sat on the sideline? This is not a crime movie, this is the real world.

You think it's a complete coincidence this corruption is the same with the Fifa, Uci, Us cycling, Spanish Cycling, Luxembourg Cycling etc?

Can't you see this problem is much bigger than Pat and Hein? It's a feel good action to slam Pat... but it won't help at all.

 

[ThisFrenchGuy]

It always help to root out corrupt individuals.

But yeah... FIFA, IOC and much of the others are exactly the same, except on the doping issue: They are not overtly covering dopers, because they simply refuse to acknowledge the fact that they may exist.

 

[Tinman]

You think it's a complete coincidence this corruption is the same with the Fifa, Uci, Us cycling, Spanish Cycling, Luxembourg Cycling etc?

Can't you see this problem is much bigger than Pat and Hein? It's a feel good action to slam Pat... but it won't help at all.

this sounds like the "everyone is doing it" argument we all know too well.

Doping is more useful in its many guises and visible in cycling than any other large popular sport. UCI should be at the forefront of all sports administrations dealing with this. At best they have been asleep on the job for decades, at worst they have been seriously complicit.

 

[rhubroma]

Your point highlights the paradox, as I see it. The riders are extremely rule compliant and subject to the de facto rules of the peloton. They totally buy off on omertá, for example. Why can't that kind of solidarity translate to union solidarity? I don't get it.

Why can't the riders, through a union, cut their own sponsorship deals or promote races? Why do they need corrupt middlemen like the UCI, or race organizers who won't share TV revenue, like ASO? There really isn't a good reason.

The UCI is supposed to be a rider's union, but when you have top men at the UCI attempting to personally profit from the riders' labor, then you have a grotesque conflict of interest. That's just one example. The "sysmex" donation is another. And the "favored rider" allegations should be sending riders through the roof!! But no ... the riders accept their lot, as sheep.

I'm not apportioning blame. But the system will only change if the riders organize and demand change.

To answer your question, I think because human nature demonstrates that solidarity is simply too hard to come by. It's much easier to "go with the flow" as they say, whereas once a mafia set-up is in place, it becomes hard to find the charismatic types capable of being leaders in an effort to break it, or to overrule those who enforce its code of silence.

Usually the leadership is made up by those whose ambitions and unscrupulousness establish an agenda that is antithetical to what you suggest, however repulsive, and this is what becomes "law." LA became the symbol of this typology in its most despicable form. Under his reign any sheep that rebelled were distanced from the flock. So it comes down to a question of leadership.

Now some of them have told what the flock was like to the public in ways that, for the first time really, have threatend the bosses who ruled over it.

 

[Tinman]

What's flawed at UCI and needs changing

Didnt want to start a new thread but thought it worthwile to summarize some of these, and maybe people can add/prioritize. Trying to add value rather than merely be critical...

My layman's start:
- hand over all doping control responsibility to Wada and national bodies, fund this at a level which re-establishes trust that cheaters will be caught (need higher testing frequency and separate R&D budget to establish new tests)
- report full financial transparency into where funding comes from and goes to
- establish code of conduct including dealings between riders and UCI, riders and medical profession/doping agencies/drug companies
- hand over rider interest representation to a riders union

 

[ThisFrenchGuy]

I don't think it's "everyone doing it" really. Just the assessment that "the neutral institution responding to no one & accepted as the international ruler, based in Switzerland" model is seriously flawed. As far as I can tell, this is true for the FIFA and the IOC. National federations can be pretty bad too, but ultimately they can still be held accountable, which helps, sometimes.

There's no easy answer to that, because I guess the system also has some merits -it wouldn't have come to be otherwise-.

Individual corruption should be treated as it deserves, that's a given. Corruption and doping should be pursued with very much zeal at a national level: obviously as long as we'll see things like the Puerto case being swept under the rug, it will not help.
Anti-doping responsabilities should be handled completely by an independent body, if only because separation of duties makes collusion a little bit harder.
I also think the audience (in short: "us") should start questioning its own expectations and responsibilities in all this, but that's another very big can of worms.

Would be a good start, I reckon.

 

[Oldman]

It always help to root out corrupt individuals.

But yeah... FIFA, IOC and much of the others are exactly the same, except on the doping issue: They are not overtly covering dopers, because they simply refuse to acknowledge the fact that they may exist.

They haven't found a way to shake down the sport's participants for patronage like the UCI has. From local UCI officials possibly taking bribes to warn of impending drug testing to the senior UCI actually investigating riders because Lance suggests they may have doped is a profitable but minor league business model. It's vulnerable to the kind of expose' thats occurring before our eyes.
The good part is the scrutiny will spread to other sports if it is actually allowed to fully play out. That would include a complete colonoscophy of USA Cycling and the UCI. If rumored evidence exists in the hands of Interpol and other Euro investigators the exposure won't just end with an Irish mobster and a Texas fraud (is that an oxymoron) meeting justice. It might actually get NBC to suggest that they want an end to bad publicity or we'll make the X Games the new Olympics.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

I don't think it's "everyone doing it" really. Just the assessment that "the neutral institution responding to no one & accepted as the international ruler, based in Switzerland" model is seriously flawed. As far as I can tell, this is true for the FIFA and the IOC. National federations can be pretty bad too, but ultimately they can still be held accountable, which helps, sometimes.

This. The most fundamental problem is the lack of accountability.

The UCI election structure distorts accountability to the national federations. The size and of the governance structure cripples it's capacity to hold management accountable. The UCI has strayed so far from its central responsibilities that it behaves like the union of CYCLING instead of the union of CYCLISTS. That's an important distinction....(have I understood the translation correctly?).

There's no easy answer to that, because I guess the system also has some merits -it wouldn't have come to be otherwise-.

But organisations can outlive their historical merit, especially if the organisation continues to serve the vested interests of a few at the top.

Individual corruption should be treated as it deserves, that's a given. Corruption and doping should be pursued with very much zeal at a national level: obviously as long as we'll see things like the Puerto case being swept under the rug, it will not help. Anti-doping responsabilities should be handled completely by an independent body, if only because separation of duties makes collusion a little bit harder. I also think the audience (in short: "us") should start questioning its own expectations and responsibilities in all this, but that's another very big can of worms. Would be a good start, I reckon.

Separation of duties does make collusion more difficult, and certainly needs to happen between UCI governance and management. I think when it comes to anti-doping, a focus on ensuring athlete anonymity within the anti doping system would have the most effect, whether or not all anti doping was separated from the UCI.

 

[the big ring]

And the rest just was naive like babies and sat on the sideline? This is not a crime movie, this is the real world.

You think it's a complete coincidence this corruption is the same with the Fifa, Uci, Us cycling, Spanish Cycling, Luxembourg Cycling etc?

Can't you see this problem is much bigger than Pat and Hein? It's a feel good action to slam Pat... but it won't help at all.

The other federations are irrelevant. There's corruption everywhere, doesn't mean there's a bigger picture at UCI.

You haven't actually said what the bigger problem is - other than Pat and Hein are elected.

OP said UCI need to "raise the bar" (and then repeated this completely useless idea on Steve Tilford's blog comments). It's like he's a UCI sockpuppet but as equally ineffective as the UCI.

Asking questions does not create an argument. Feel free to tell use what's wrong, but "why is it so wide spead" does not change the fact that Hein and Pat are corrupt, and need to be removed.

Who were the people meeting in Lausanne after the ToS positive? They need to be removed.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Nothing changes the fact that hein and pat are corrupt and need to go. It won't fix the problem though, might improve it but won't fix it. I wish it was as easy as getting rid of a few bad apples, but the UCI couldn't have got this bad without a corrupt organizational culture.

There is a bigger picture at the UCI, which is that the structure of the organisation has none of the key ingredients of good governance. No accountability, conflicts of interest all over the show, no separation of governance and management, little transparency.....these aren't abstract concepts. Without these key ingredients, incompetence or/and corruption are inevitable.

 

[Tinman]

Wada needs to claim the anti-doping space publically before UCI gains the public momentum on "anti-doping":
- we are the experts
- we are independent and at arms length
- this is the testing protocol we need to have to root out doping
- this is the plan we have for cycling
- this is the funding we need to do the job

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

@tinman, I used to agree with you.

WADA is very close to the IOC though. WADA's impartiality might depend on it lacking the power to act partially. (Note that is NOT a reflection on current individuals within WADA). I would be pretty hesitant to give any organisation answerable to the IOC direct control of results management.

I think the answer is to separate the athletes identification number from the sample number through a third party. The third party could be WADA. Everyone involved, from the laborotary analyst to the ADA has no idea whose sample it is till the third party makes the connection and reports it to both WADA and the ADA. Not as easy as it sounds though.

 

[the big ring]

@tinman, I used to agree with you.

WADA is very close to the IOC though. WADA's impartiality might depend on it lacking the power to act partially. (Note that is NOT a reflection on current individuals within WADA). I would be pretty hesitant to give any organisation answerable to the IOC direct control of results management.

I think the answer is to separate the athletes identification number from the sample number through a third party. The third party could be WADA. Everyone involved, from the laborotary analyst to the ADA has no idea whose sample it is till the third party makes the connection and reports it to both WADA and the ADA. Not as easy as it sounds though.

They will have to rewrite the ADR then. There's some very specific rules in there.

Analysis of Samples
196. For purposes of article 21.1 Samples shall be sent for analysis only to ADA-accredited laboratories or as otherwise approved by WADA. The choice of the WADA-accredited laboratory (or other laboratory or method approved by WADA) used for the Sample analysis shall be determined exclusively by the UCI.

So the labs are WADA accredited, but the UCI has exclusive choice of which lab analyses ths sample. How ... convenient. Yo Saugy my man, got another sample for you.

199. The laboratory shall report any analysis results to the UCI and WADA or, if the Testing concerns World Championships, to the UCI official doctor and WADA.

Does this mean WADA knew of Contador's positive all along? Interesting considering the timeline it had and the fact that nothing was known until the result was leaked? Am I remembering that right?

 

[the big ring]

WADA is very close to the IOC though. WADA's impartiality might depend on it lacking the power to act partially. (Note that is NOT a reflection on current individuals within WADA). I would be pretty hesitant to give any organisation answerable to the IOC direct control of results management.

Now that I think of it - there is a website somewhere that talks about WADA and I could not work out quickly whether they were anti- or pro- (or nutjobs).

USADA came about because USOC was entirely corrupt.

Did WADA come about for the same reason? IOC was corrupt and someone with a large enough stick forced a change? Makes me realise I know nothing of the history of WADA... except John Fahey - an ex Aussie poli is now head.

Which doesn't half sound like a ticket to junket land.

 

[the big ring]

WADA have an executive commitee: http://www.wada-ama.org/About-WADA/Governance/Executive-Committee/

The 12-member Executive Committee is WADA's ultimate policy-making body. It is composed equally of representatives from the Olympic Movement and governments.

Olympic movement

Mr Patrick McQuaid
IOC Member, President UCI
Ireland

So if a test result is given to McQuaid, does that satisfy the requirement that both the UCI and WADA are notified of a test result?