Ride the Puddles

Why UCI?

Posted by bikezilla on March 25, 2011

This is not so much an article as a collection of loose thoughts. Some of them were added prior to looking up this or that, so they may seem to answer themselves at times. They’re in no particular order.

I’m sharing them because this issue comes up over and over again, and I’m curious about it.

Feel free to add your own thoughts or answers to the comments section.

— What exactly is UCI’s mandate? Is it so broad or so vague that UCI can manipulate its meaning to control every single aspect of professional cycling?

Now UCI is subverting control of skateboarding in an effort to increase its revenues. This is just evidence that there must be an end to UCI’s unfettered and unchecked power.

— As an organization run by the IOC, which itself is an organization governing AMATEUR sports, why does UCI have total control of PROFESSIONAL cycling?

— According to wikipedia, UCI was formed by a handful of national federations in 1900 to oppose and replace the International Cycling Association.

It wasn’t subverted by the IOC until at least 1965.

— Each national federation has one vote toward the election of UCI’s president every four years.

According to Cycle Racing there are 99 national federations

— If I’m counting properly, Pat McQuaid has three years left on his current term.

It would seem like a considerable amount of time to run a systematic campaign to rally the national federations against him.

It would also seem that USA Cycling (the U.S. national federation) and the FFC (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, the French national federation) are already two votes in the bank against McQuaid.

— If we can blog and use social media for causes like doping and the governance of professional cycling, why can’t we use it to promote the ouster of Pat McQuaid from UCI leadership? Or even the ouster of UCI itself.

— Why is it at all tolerated for UCI, an arm of the IOC which controls much of AMATEUR sports, to thump its chest and rule PROFESSIONAL cycling?

Why haven’t teams and riders gotten together and built a real governing body, intended to actually oversee PROFESSIONALS and their interests, needs and concerns?

Why is there a need to form a “new league”? Instead, UCI should be relegated to its proper level of authority and governance and a true, professional governing body should be formed.

Then, if teams and players elect guys like Ochowicz, Bruyneel, LeLangue, Riis and Armstrong to positions of power, they have only themselves to blame for the continuance of professional cycling’s mafioso culture of doping.

And they can work out issues like radio usage to fit their needs, whether that’s unrestricted usage, select races and stages with bans, or a safety only network.

— UCI is itself a creation of the national federations, created and put in place for the purpose of removing another governing body.

It’s abandoned professional cycling to serve the will of the IOC.

So it should strike McQuaid and his cronies as no surprise that they should, in turn, be replaced by a similarly created organization.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: