Wake up people, keep your focus on the UCI

[LauraLyn]

. . . Verbruggen (and 3 ex vice presidents) attending meetings without voting is not acceptable. Even being able to speak to the meeting and be privy to the agenda/discussion is undue influence. Such attendance is precluded by the constitution. It's inexcusable.

Being pragmatic, what can be done now is to scream blue murder about Pat and Hein, . . . . The only question remaining is how to stoke the fire.

Edit: I think the WADA exec makeup dilutes the IOC interests by allocating equal numbers to various government representatives. It seems to be working, at least with the current leadership and current limited powers. Partly for reasons explained by the French guy, I wouldn't hurry to place far greater responsibilities on WADA though. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

I am not sure about the "unconstitutional." Normally a committee can invite anyone they like to their meetings and discuss with whomever they please. There is not inherent conflict here. The real conflict, and unconstitutional aspect would be if Verbruggen was a member of a UCI committee without having the qualifications or following due process. That seems to be the case from what Velodude suggested and that would be a huge problem.

Screaming in The Clinic will do little to fix it. Who can fix it? (That was my question above.) UCI seems to answer to no one. And who would bring a case like this against UCI in the Swiss courts?

Part of the problem with WADA is that it ain't broke and it don't work. I still see a huge conflict of interest to have WADA peopled with people from IOC. Government sports ministers are also heavily engaged with IOC, with money in sports, and primarily being popular. I don't see them providing a check and balance to the overwhelming IOC presence in the WADA leadership.

WADA does need fixing.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

No. There is a big difference between asking someone to present specific information to a meeting and treating them as a committee member. Go have a look at velodudes link. Verbruggen and three ex vice-presidents are on the managment committee list. UCI constitution says a maximum of 2 non-voting co-opted members. Unconstitutional, end of story.

The UCI is not some small town church knitting committee and it needs to stop acting like one. There are endless national federations, cycling codes, continetal confederations, pro tour interests etc, all clamoring to get onto the management committee and shape the direction of the sport. The right to be there is only conferred by a complex multi stage nomination and election process. The committee has the right to chose ONLY two co-opted members (they might want a lawyer or haematoligist there for example). The committee DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to bring their BFFs along to enter the discussion. Think of the selection process as a tough competition for the right to be heard. Verbruggen does not have that right.

Sorry to be terse here, but it frustrates me that so few people understand the extent to which uncontsitutionally "stacking the deck" can derail a not-for-profit. Particularly when that not for profit covers a wide geographical area.

Who can fix it? No one. There is not one singe silver bullet or person or organisation or lobby group that has the authority or capacity to solve the problem, because the organization's acountability structure is dysfunctional. The problem gets solved incrementally, by cyclists or federations or pro teams or media comentators taking whatever opportunities come up to cause a bit of change. Screaming in the clinic won't help, but I think it might be worth figuring out how and where to lobby to try and get rid of Pat and Hein.

 

[skippy]

Item#24 dated 28/8/12 , such a long time ago now , offered a few ideas which people chose to ignore . More ideas were expressed in Parrabuddy over a longer time span .

Months ago you people started an " item re " LA " " addressed to Pres. Obama that failed to gain support . BUT with the weight of numbers in the forum , a similar approach could be used to get Pres. Obama to exercise his ability to control an approach to WADA & IOC which would force them to act Worldwide and in every Sporting Federation , regardless of the legalities currently existing in their Countries .

So many countries now treat " Doping " as a criminal matter that only the IOC through the country NOC 's can get established a " ONE TIME ONLY Window of Opportunity " . With Pres. OBAMA establishing this in the USA , most if not all other countries would follow suit .

This " Amnesty must be for ALL SPORT " since it will be the " ONCE and ONLY " op. for athletes( past & present) and their legitimate staff ! Suppliers of " Supplements " can look to their future with dread . Of course there will be some who have engaged in " Criminal Activity " that will have to risk their chances .

Most Athletes ( past & present ) in Sport will have crossed the line , or so JV seems to suggest , at some time , and thus meeting the imposed deadline with no penalty on ANY DISCLOSURE will be fairly simple . The problem will be that the " Amnesty " will only work IF it is conducted by WADA & IOC , not by the various Sports Federations .

Disclosure will be to the " Central Clearing House " , which will assign an investigator from an outside Sport Federation drawn by lot / random selection . Thus there will be Aussie Cycling Athletes meeting with eg : Equestrian Delegates from Israrl & GB Cycle Athletes being investigated by Weighlifting Delegates from Thailand .

ONLY when the " Legal Jeapardy " is lifted can Team Owners , Team DS , Team Doctors and UCI Personnel be able to make FULL DISCLOSURE ! Does it really matter if a few escape their " just Deserts " , when the future can be made so much safer for the majority ?

Failing to meet the deadline will result in Lifetime Bans from any Sporting Related Activity . As mentioned in " item #24 " a second deadline will be needed to review the " Published List of Athletes complying with the Amnesty " ! Those not on this WebSite will bring down ALL who worked with them in any way unless they apply to the " Central Clearing House " to determine why the " Athlete's name has not been published . Should they find that the Athlete has not applied for " Amnesty " then to avoid " Lifetime Bans " themselves and their Co workers , they will ALL have to make full disclosure of the activities in which they were joined with that Athlete .

Certainly a cumbersome process to set up BUT who wants to revisit another " Festina " moment further down the road ?

Can Cycling News Management set up the approach to Pres. Obama so that ALL CNF visitors can subscribe and with their friends find the 125000 needed to move the matter onto the White House Agenda ?

 

[LauraLyn]

No. There is a big difference between asking someone to present specific information to a meeting and treating them as a committee member. Go have a look at velodudes link. Verbruggen and three ex vice-presidents are on the managment committee list. UCI constitution says a maximum of 2 non-voting co-opted members. Unconstitutional, end of story.

The UCI is not some small town church knitting committee and it needs to stop acting like one. There are endless national federations, cycling codes, continetal confederations, pro tour interests etc, all clamoring to get onto the management committee and shape the direction of the sport. The right to be there is only conferred by a complex multi stage nomination and election process. The committee has the right to chose ONLY two co-opted members (they might want a lawyer or haematoligist there for example). The committee DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to bring their BFFs along to enter the discussion. Think of the selection process as a tough competition for the right to be heard. Verbruggen does not have that right.

Sorry to be terse here, but it frustrates me that so few people understand the extent to which uncontsitutionally "stacking the deck" can derail a not-for-profit. Particularly when that not for profit covers a wide geographical area.

Who can fix it? No one. There is not one singe silver bullet or person or organisation or lobby group that has the authority or capacity to solve the problem, because the organization's acountability structure is dysfunctional. The problem gets solved incrementally, by cyclists or federations or pro teams or media comentators taking whatever opportunities come up to cause a bit of change. Screaming in the clinic won't help, but I think it might be worth figuring out how and where to lobby to try and get rid of Pat and Hein.

Thanks. Agree fully. (I especially like your point on NGOs.)

I do believe the conversation in The Clinic helps. So still wondering, with you, what to do?

 

[the big ring]

tl;dr:

LauraLyn: this is not unconsitutional, there is no conflict.
IWCIJ: it is unconstitutional
LauraLyn: I completely agree.

I am not sure about the "unconstitutional." Normally a committee can invite anyone they like to their meetings and discuss with whomever they please. There is not inherent conflict here. The real conflict, and unconstitutional aspect would be if Verbruggen was a member of a UCI committee without having the qualifications or following due process. That seems to be the case from what Velodude suggested and that would be a huge problem.

No. There is a big difference between asking someone to present specific information to a meeting and treating them as a committee member. Go have a look at velodudes link. Verbruggen and three ex vice-presidents are on the managment committee list. UCI constitution says a maximum of 2 non-voting co-opted members. Unconstitutional, end of story.

Thanks. Agree fully.

How is this conversation not a complete logic meltdown?

 

[Tinman]

Item#24 dated 28/8/12 , such a long time ago now , offered a few ideas which people chose to ignore . More ideas were expressed in Parrabuddy over a longer time span .

Months ago you people started an " item re " LA " " addressed to Pres. Obama that failed to gain support . BUT with the weight of numbers in the forum , a similar approach could be used to get Pres. Obama to exercise his ability to control an approach to WADA & IOC which would force them to act Worldwide and in every Sporting Federation , regardless of the legalities currently existing in their Countries .

Skippy could you post link? Tried to find it to no avail.

How about similar grassroots approach through local clubs, ie start signature collection campaign there also?

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Skippy could you post link? Tried to find it to no avail.

How about similar grassroots approach through local clubs, ie start signature collection campaign there also?

So, these signatures you speak of would need to be sent to someone. The national federation representatives to UCI congress or the continental confederation voting delegates seem like the best options. Here's how it "works" in Oceania http://cyclingiq.com/2012/06/25/oceania-death-of-a-uci-cycling-confederation/

Mike Turtur is the president of the oceania continental confederation and sits on the UCI management committee. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/no-regrets-from-tour-down-under-boss-over-armstrong. Nice job keeping the confederation going Mike

I remember the bike nz guy at the national road race a few years ago in his crisp shirt and yella bracelet....Hmm oh, and they have a recreational arm called ridestrong too, vomit emoticon anyone?

 

[the big ring]

So, these signatures you speak of would need to be sent to someone. The national federation representatives to UCI congress or the continental confederation voting delegates seem like the best options. Here's how it "works" in Oceania http://cyclingiq.com/2012/06/25/oceania-death-of-a-uci-cycling-confederation/

Mike Turtur is the president of the oceania continental confederation and sits on the UCI management committee. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/no-regrets-from-tour-down-under-boss-over-armstrong. Nice job keeping the confederation going Mike

I remember the bike nz guy at the national road race a few years ago in his crisp shirt and yella bracelet....Hmm oh, and they have a recreational arm called ridestrong too, vomit emoticon anyone?

So I guess a vote of no confidence has no legs?

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

The first few pages from these minutes contain most of the relevent names. Need to check who is still there now though. A vote of no confidence is unrealistic IMO.

Edit: 2012 congress will be at the worlds so there isn't time to notify agenda items, even if someone with the balls to ask hard questions could be found. The more I look the more I realize how well these guys have it all stitched up....but they do have an ethics committee....

 

[DirtyWorks]

...
Most Athletes ( past & present ) in Sport will have crossed the line , or so JV seems to suggest

One must be careful with this excuse. It is used to forgive the dirty cheaters. The half-truth is very damaging. There were clean riders in the Pro peloton at any given time in the EPO era through to today.

Disclosure will be to the " Central Clearing House " , which will assign an investigator from an outside Sport Federation drawn by lot / random selection .

Except we can't be confident the other sports federations are fair dealers. If they are from the IOC, then the chances are slim they would deal impartially. Equestrian sports have a drug problem (horses for sure) and we know Weightlifting has a MAJOR drug problem. This is where we begin to see the consequences of the IOC's dope-friendly strategy.

No one wants another Festina, but it's probably coming because Hein isn't going to stop now and Pat clearly can't see past the next 3 hours. He's probably quite rich for it, but with the UCI's PR hat on, he looks the fool.

I appreciate your enthusiasm though. Don't get discouraged. This is a tough problem that transcends the UCI. The doping and corruption problem starts in the IOC. Hein and Pat have done a bad job of keeping it covered-up.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Well I'm feeling like a bit of a thicko. Having spent considerable time thinking about what can be done, getting distracted by what can't be done and just reading up on the subject, I've finally figured it out. The answer is (drumroll), what UCI overlord said a month ago.

Lean on national federations to take complaints to the ethics committee. The usual representation/accountability mechanisms are so utterly fvcked up within the UCI, that they aren't worth pursuing.

A number of their longer term strategies have real merit too.

 

[the big ring]

Well I'm feeling like a bit of a thicko. Having spent considerable time thinking about what can be done, getting distracted by what can't be done and just reading up on the subject, I've finally figured it out. The answer is (drumroll), what UCI overlord said a month ago.

Lean on national federations to take complaints to the ethics committee. The usual representation/accountability mechanisms are so utterly fvcked up within the UCI, that they aren't worth pursuing.

A number of their longer term strategies have real merit too.

He lost me at Conconi - but only due to the blood transfusing.

I just read it again and there's definitely space there for some recourse on recent actions. If my brain was working I'd make some suggestions but all I can come up with now are either
1. a letter to our local fed requesting a formal question to the ethics committee or
2. a petition for same

ETA: We were recently asked to do a survey for our state fed. The cycle racing federation who have started running recreational rides. Methinks they have no issue with UCI creating new races. Not sure how far a request is going to get there...

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

He lost me at Conconi - but only due to the blood transfusing.

I just read it again and there's definitely space there for some recourse on recent actions. If my brain was working I'd make some suggestions but all I can come up with now are either
1. a letter to our local fed requesting a formal question to the ethics committee or
2. a petition for same

ETA: We were recently asked to do a survey for our state fed. The cycle racing federation who have started running recreational rides. Methinks they have no issue with UCI creating new races. Not sure how far a request is going to get there...

Yep letter/petition requesting formal complaint to ethics committee from national federation is all I can see at the moment too. There are other issues that Overlord didn't mention which might also be grounds. Improper makeup of management committee is one, waiving of 6 months pre competition testing for LA might be another.

I guess it's primarily a matter of tailoring the complaint to suit the interests of the federation big wigs that would have to put it to the UCI. I'm thinking how to approach it in NZ. I mostly know MTB types but that could be a way to get around roadies who might value their UCI stranglehold more than they value good leadership.

Wonder if bike pure would be interested in calling on some national feds to bring ethical complaints? Anyone know those guys?