UCI and ASO

[NickM]

If ASO feel capable of thumbing their noses at the UCI, why should the opinion of the FFC bother them?

 

[Keith Oates]

doyler78, You response is, in my opinion, very good, detailed and balanced I only hope that it somehow reaches people in the UCI and ASO so they could also know what cycling fans think about their respective actions in these troubled (for cycling) times.

 

[Dave_1]

Here we go again, it's time a final and satisfactory solution was found in this game of politics. The loser will be cycling and cycling fans.!!

Details can be found in todays cyclingnews edition.

Hi Keith
I feel ASO are absolute bullies and used L'equipe to do a number on Armstrong in 2005, having journos breaching anonymity of samples etc...so, I think , in all this, I support the UCI and if they have to bring Paris Nice to a halt, then,I would support that. ASO are a law unto themselves as they have a monopoly on the pro racing.

ps. was in Hk and in Canny Man during 4 days stay on Feb 10th...good memories, the girls at Canny Man were asking about you :-)

 

[Keith Oates]

Hi Dave_1

Good to hear from you again, are you staying out this way or returning to the UK.

I didn't know you were in HK, I passed through on Feb 10th but only at the airport.

BTW regarding your posting I agree with your assessment of ASO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Dave_1]

Hi Keith
I feel ASO are absolute bullies and used L'equipe to do a number on Armstrong in 2005, having journos breaching anonymity of samples etc...so, I think , in all this, I support the UCI and if they have to bring Paris Nice to a halt, then,I would support that. ASO are a law unto themselves as they have a monopoly on the pro racing.

ps. was in Hk and in Canny Man during 4 days stay on Feb 10th...good memories, the girls at Canny Man were asking about you :-)

Yes, we are at 1 on ASO eh...they are like Microsoft...need broken up, or broght under control as we see now.

ps. I only decided at last minute to do 4 days in HK before starting work on Feb14th in Scotland...should have mailed you, sorry. I'll be back in China later this year..miss it too much :-)

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Well reasoned response Doyler (even if you avoided answering my questions).

OK, here's the thing. Do the 3 grand tours need support from any other organisations eg UCI in order to continue to be successful? They clearly think not. I tend to agree but have been influenced by your points, inasmuch as that to be run fairly they should adhere to a commonly agreed set of standards / rules.

Trouble is that they see the UCI as toothless, mismanaged, disorganised and whimsical (whilst ASO are clearly guilty of the latter too). Not representative of the sort of ideals and values which you draw attention to.

At the same time, it's worth pointing out that ASO do have a right to try and protect the image of their product, which is what they're trying to do. Yes there are examples from the past of double-standards, and yes the staff at Astana have changed hugely, but you can't dispute the fact that in the world of cycling that team name is badly tarnished, and arguably tarnished more than any other. Possibly even the biggest since Festina. ASO themselves admit to failings in the past but they're trying to take action to sort out the problems now, and at a team level as opposed to rider level, which I think is also more appropriate (but probably another debate entirely).

 

[doyler78]

Well reasoned response Doyler (even if you avoided answering my questions).

OK, here's the thing. Do the 3 grand tours need support from any other organisations eg UCI in order to continue to be successful? They clearly think not. I tend to agree but have been influenced by your points, inasmuch as that to be run fairly they should adhere to a commonly agreed set of standards / rules.

Trouble is that they see the UCI as toothless, mismanaged, disorganised and whimsical (whilst ASO are clearly guilty of the latter too). Not representative of the sort of ideals and values which you draw attention to.

At the same time, it's worth pointing out that ASO do have a right to try and protect the image of their product, which is what they're trying to do. Yes there are examples from the past of double-standards, and yes the staff at Astana have changed hugely, but you can't dispute the fact that in the world of cycling that team name is badly tarnished, and arguably tarnished more than any other. Possibly even the biggest since Festina. ASO themselves admit to failings in the past but they're trying to take action to sort out the problems now, and at a team level as opposed to rider level, which I think is also more appropriate (but probably another debate entirely).

I didn't directly answer any questions because I feel that they are the position that ASO would put in any opening negotiations with regard to a change in the structures and therefore only amount to an opening statement.

What I did do was then to reason why there is a need for ASO to take a more global view of their position and the responsibility that position brings with it. A successful resolution will require compromise by both parties instead of the current inflamatory responses which both organisations have adopted. Crying to the media rarely makes for a quick resolution and they both need to catch a grip.

I believe there needs to be a separation of powers and therefore I couldn't support any structure which was ASO dominated as that distorts balance and makes abuse of that power more likely.

I don't believe there is such a huge gulf between everyone its just that the views have become entrenched and therefore no one is really willing to now back down and as the whole situation has become more polarised and more inflamed if any were to back down it could be seen as the fatal blow that permanently damages either organisation. That's a bitter pill to swallow however the decision will be made for them if they don't try to resolve it and try to do so in a manner which can help both sides save face. I say made for them as what will happen is that team, sponsors and riders will align behind one and that would likely be ASO as the teams and their riders want to ride the classics & grand tours.

ASO are great at organising well run races but are they really in a position to take on all the other functions of the UCI? What are the administrations skills like? What relationships have the developed with other sports organisation such as the Olympic Committee? They are not equipped to do this therefore to permanently try to damage the UCI when you can't provide a full alternative would be destabilise cycling and could threaten its very ability to properly function.

It's not that I love the UCI its just that I fear more a total breakdown of the regulatory and administrative framework which can't be so easily repaired. I think what you say about ASO view of the UCI is not far of what many see however proper leadership can largely sort those problems.

 

[rich p]

It's not that I love the UCI its just that I fear more a total breakdown of the regulatory and administrative framework which can't be so easily repaired. I think what you say about ASO view of the UCI is not far of what many see however proper leadership can largely sort those problems.

Well that's all right then as we all appear to agree. We would all like the UCI to be well run, tough on drugs and provide a coherent umbrella (without the Protour) but therein lies the rub. It hasn't done so and doesn't appear to be about to do so which is why ASO have taken the steps that they have. Not ideal but inevitable.

 

[Mac66]

It seems that some sanity still remains in cycling as shown by this report in Cycling news:


"With goodwill on both sides, we can now avoid a major breakdown in our sport, and move forward together to address the other serious issues and develop our great sport in all its many facets".

Precious little good will around if you ask me and without wishing to tar an entire nation with the same brush, I think we know how stubborn the French can be once they have dug there heels in, for fear of loosing face.

 

[mondobongo]

I think Gentleman we have an Impasse! Aso as Mac says dont want to show weakness by backing down the UCI continue to make threats. Whether they would implement heavy sanctions as they threaten its already having an impact as Wiggins and Cav are now riding in the Tirreno-Adriatico rather than risk being banned from the Olympics which was always their target for this year.
Reports are that the Court of Arbitration for Sport has been asked to mediate but will they resolve things for this year leaving problems to rise again or can they resolve things completely.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Yep CAS have been asked by the cyclists to get involved. It's difficult not to think that yet another level of bureaucracy has just come to the table.

Who would be a pro cyclist in the current climate? Not me.

Actually, on second thoughts, it still beats what I do day in day out!!

 

[Keith Oates]

The cyclists do seem to be getting the rough end of the stick but it was the ones that resorted to taking drugs that really started the whole thing off, so they must take most of the blame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mondobongo]

If the UCI had done their job properly years ago and come down hard including introducing longer bans on the dopers rather than looking the other way and hoping those naughty cyclists would go away we would probably not be in this mess. ASO would not be throwing their toys out of the pram in pursuit of drug free racing and the UCI would be seen as a tough governing body not to be crossed and therefore no pushing and poking on the part of ASO to see how much they can get away with, with the UCI.

The Cyclists could then get on with the job in hand racing bikes.

Keith I agree if the Pros had behaved and not doped things may be different but it was allowed to go on for far too long, things should have been sorted out when Simpson died.

 

[Keith Oates]

If only!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tetedelacourse]

We're not just dealing with single pros cheating here. Whole teams had institutionalised doping regimes remember, so it's more complicated than simply chastising the riders.

I used to think like that to be honest, but I genuinely take my hat off to the likes of Sinkewitz who tried to expose the real problem, admittedly only after he'd been caught!

Last year was the first team-level expulsion at the tdf in a long time (I wait to be corrected on that!) and I think this is the way forward. A while back, someone here suggested some sort of clemency (reduction in length of ban, not let off the hook obviously) for riders who are caught but give details of the practices, names etc involved in getting the gear. I think that's what should be happening.