What changes are needed in the UCI?

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Tyler's book has put the spotlight on the bigger picture in cycling. Is fixing the UCI the answer? What most needs to change?

 

[benzwire]

Burn it down and start over completely. Seriously.

 

[the big ring]

burn it down and start over completely. Seriously.

+ 1

 

[sittingbison]

yup. it cannot be a simple case of Hein and Fat Pat being corrupt. They had to corrupt their employees for it to work.

The whole organisation has to fold, and a new one built from ground up, with a clear delineation of responsibilities.

 

[MarkvW]

The UCI needs some sort of antagonist or competitor to keep it honest.

Otherwise the UCI will remain a self-serving and incestuous oligarchy.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

The UCI have such a chokehold, it will be almost impossible for something new to start up and take over. It is a self serving oligarchy without proper delineation of authorities, but it's not going away any time soon. UCI has the nod from the IOC, which is kinda difficult for a new organisation to compete with.

It's a mistake to assume that everyone involved at every level is part of the problem. No organisation that big is so simple. What is needed is drastic change, so fair and competent people rise to the top and the others get booted out.

 

[Bratam]

Yep agree with the others. Complete overhaul is required. All of the above. My question is who will initiate these wholesale changes. ?

 

[noddy69]

The problem is certainly at the top end of the UCI ,but that in itself causes major problems. New people who have not lost sight of the fact it is a sport that they govern is what is needed. The doping issue is at the heart of it. Growing cycling at any expense has been the ideal at the heart of what the UCI has been trying to do. In doing that they have lost sight of what cycling should be about. They have lost all perspective in the fight on cheats in their drive to promote cycling to the masses at the expense of fair play. In doing so they have lost the right to govern cycling in my mind.

The way ahead will be difficult but there are steps that can be taken. First and foremost the biological passport and drug testing must be given to an impartial body set up with no commercial interest in the growth of cycling but an interest in fair play and sport.
The UCI has lost sight of what it should be doing and needs a major overhaul, it just remains to be seen if they have the drive to do this or if the rot has spread all the way through the ranks.

 

[the big ring]

Random thoughts:

As we saw in the Congress meeting minutes, Nat Fed members have been accepted / appointed by the current UCI mgt team.

The fish rots from the head, but I believe now a replacement of that head would struggle with the inertia inherent in the "system" due to the way it has evolved / come about.

This is further exacerbated by UCI's relationship with ASO and other race owners.

ASO, Zomegan, UCI, pro teams and most riders are anti-doping scandal.

WADA, which is anti-doping, have been lambasted more than once by UCI for not being anti-doping scandal but outright anti-doping.

How do we get UCI to a point where they are anti-doping, rather than anti-doping scandal? It directly affects the livelihood of everyone involved. Is it even possible?

 

[sairyder]

Not sure about burn it all down but a complete overhaul definitely. I particularly think if you have a cycling business or cycling business interests you should not be eligible for positions on any governing body.

There are enough keen cyclists who are upstanding citizens who do not have cycling business interests.

I fear that it is a pretty small and tight knit world, and people will want to hang on to their sphere of influence with all its benefits.

 

[ebandit]

joke

has the forum ever before seen a poll with 100% agreement in voting?

that kinda sums things up

we need reasoned argument but truth is the uci is a complete joke..............
described succinctly by fat pats ' double speak

how many times have i heard him say 'it's not my place to comment' then he carries on with his observations?

then pat's famous turn around re usada v armstrong

remember those charging letters found in a uci employees desk that were not sent in time?

 

[Ninety5rpm]

The problem is not just the UCI, but is inherent in anyone whose livelihood depends on the popularity of the sport. Anyone working in a position that is tied to one particular sport is going to be naturally disinclined to bring attention to matters and issues that are bad for that sport's image. This is true for all sports, by the way, not just cycling.

By tearing down and rebuilding the UCI you won't even be addressing, much less resolving, this core problem.

There needs to be a UCI - an organization representing the interests of the cyclists - but it should not also be the governing body of the sport. So, then, what should the governing body be and how should it be formed?

It's a tough problem. But we can only begin to solve it by recognizing the crucial role that motivation plays in human behavior, and in particular the role it plays in governing cycling.

 

[the big ring]

remember those charging letters found in a uci employees desk that were not sent in time?

no. wtf are you on about?

 

[the big ring]

There needs to be a UCI - an organization representing the interests of the cyclists - but it should not also be the governing body of the sport. So, then, what should the governing body be and how should it be formed?

AIGCP? or a different organisation again?

 

[Oldman]

AIGCP? or a different organisation again?

After a major colonoscophy of the UCI, AIGCP should be jointly involved. They would need some teeth to discipline their members but you also have to consider an amnesty period for full disclosure by riders, staff and directors. Any associated representative of that group not willingly clearing the air would be subject to a career death penalty.
Then you could move on.

 

[MarkvW]

Assuming that we're stuck with the UCI...

The UCI needs a disinterested, transparent, and benevolent dictator.

As if that will ever happen.

 

[BroDeal]

The only way there will be any change is if the pro teams form a new league with its own sports authority. Unfortunately, JV's and the other team owners views of what the sport should be like do not seem to be any more sporting than the UCI's. Gaining an advantage by spending more on dope gets replaced with gaining an advantage by spending more on technology. The personal greed of corrupt UCI officials gets replaced by corporate greed of corrupt sponsors.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

AIGCP? or a different organisation again?

AIGCP represents the pro tour teams/team owners interests, not the individual riders interests. Those should be represented by a Union Cycliste Internationale, rather than an International Cycling Union. Oh wait...

@Ninety5rpm, what you say about motivation is true. The answer IMO is to make the UCI more accountable to the interests of the majority, because fairness and transparency serve the majority. At the moment UCI is accountable to nobody and serves the interests of "cycling", favoring the minority in a position of influence (primarily themselves).

 

[ebandit]

!

no. wtf are you on about?

i remember that crazy tale from a cn news report................it was some time ago can't remember exactly when

 

[thirteen]

i remember that crazy tale from a cn news report................it was some time ago can't remember exactly when

probably here? http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=695129

 

[Ninety5rpm]

@Ninety5rpm, what you say about motivation is true. The answer IMO is to make the UCI more accountable to the interests of the majority, because fairness and transparency serve the majority. At the moment UCI is accountable to nobody and serves the interests of "cycling", favoring the minority in a position of influence (primarily themselves).

I think a reasonable argument can be made that a majority of pro cyclists benefited from the popularity boost brought to the sport by Armstrong, and the UCI's support thereof. This is one of the main reasons everyone was so reluctant to talk.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

LA's reign might have favored the majority of Pro roadies. The UCI's mandate is actually to represent the interests of all competitive cyclists, pro and amateur, in all cycling disciplines globally. Without doing the numbers, I'm guessing pro-roadies are in the minority.

If more mountain biking and cyclocross and track people were involved at the governance level of the sport, maybe the UCI wouldn't be so idiotically mesmerized by meddling in pro road racing.

 

[skippy]

Whatever the Sport they participate in , many use Cycling in All it´s forms for cross training . Pro Athletes are likely to do as " Shamateurs " and use PED in varying degrees .

Here in Austria it is reported that 30=59% of " shamateurs " are using "supplements "! What is happening world wide in ANY Sport is open to Question .

Seeing JV suggest a "truth & reconciliation " run by the WADA Org. , yesterday , encourages me to believe that there will be some progress made in the "UCI Management Meeting " today .

For Athletes to avoid " double jeopardy " IOC " MUST work with WADA and establish an " Amnesty period " sanctioned by ALL World Governments ! Without Governments standing back , those such as Austrian , Italian & other Athletes WILL NOT put their hands up to a " WADA/IOC Commission " and rely on " Good Fortune " with their Own Government Anti Doping Bodies !

Come on John Fahey & David Howman , get Le Clerc & Ashenden involved uin a " Commission " that ALL Athletes will TRUST !