Cape Town Cycle Tour and the CSA Forbidden Races Rule

[GoLefty!!]

I think you are right in that money is a key motivator for CSA in terms of wanting entry fees from PPA. PPA on the other hand wants to hold on to the money. They are both motivated by money in as far as the present issue goes. The thing is, the roles they play are completely different I that CSA is more of a regulatory body and PPA is more of a race organizer. If they both wipe away the muck in their eyes, put money motives aside and get together, one has a fantastic race organizer/promoter AND the only "legitimate" regulating body working together for the good of cycling in SA, not for the purpose of fund raising for a burgeoning overhead (which seems to be inevitable for regulating bodies the world over).

 

But then again, I have been told more than once that I'm a bit of an idealist!

 

 

 

PPA are not motivated by money but they do recognize that in order to achieve goals and fight legal cases its good to have a pot of cash that can pay without having to resort to fickle members funding every court visit

[BDF]

PPA are not motivated by money but they do recognize that in order to achieve goals and fight legal cases its good to have a pot of cash that can pay without having to resort to fickle members funding every court visit

Perhaps you are right but even my idealistic self doubts that they are not motivated by money. That may not be their only motivation but for sure it is a big one. If not, this whole matter would not have gone the way it has. I realize as someone from Gauteng that money is not such a big deal in Cape Town, what with the mountain and all, but it does pay the bills...

[Fly2High]

PPA are not motivated by money but they do recognize that in order to achieve goals and fight legal cases its good to have a pot of cash that can pay without having to resort to fickle members funding every court visit

I disagree about PPA and money, please go and have a look at the PPA Trust fund with R20mio in it, that is membership fees, collected due to members paying subs, due to you and me riding events and PPA collecting a slice . Heck, PPA could pay each and every CSA license needed and it would not make a dent in the cash box. Why does PPA need a Trust fund? PPA Income for last year was in excess of R8.3mio of which R4.7mio came from the Tour..  R3.5mio from Subs(membership fees), Do you want to tell me the CSA payment of R350,000.00 is going to make a difference .  They then donated R15.6mio to a trust fund .. What the frig ..  This is your and my money sitting in some fund doing what, helping whom, assisting cycling in what manner. Every claim PPA has on their site about assisting events is subscription fees that have been paid and club members expect that from a club. I expect a MTB board from my club, I expect that an event organiser should have some form of timing. PPA states it as a subsidy ... I will also agree that CSA is not snowy white in all of the above but  ... 

Edited February 18, 2015 by Fly2High

[Shebeen]

I've illustrated this with pictures.

 

 

CSA to PPA

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_SenlfHdYs/U5jAt46oCZI/AAAAAAAAI5s/eBanamSuITQ/s1600/middle-finger.png

PPA to CSA

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_SenlfHdYs/U5jAt46oCZI/AAAAAAAAI5s/eBanamSuITQ/s1600/middle-finger.png

CSA to riders

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_SenlfHdYs/U5jAt46oCZI/AAAAAAAAI5s/eBanamSuITQ/s1600/middle-finger.png

riders to CSA

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_SenlfHdYs/U5jAt46oCZI/AAAAAAAAI5s/eBanamSuITQ/s1600/middle-finger.png

PPA to riders

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_SenlfHdYs/U5jAt46oCZI/AAAAAAAAI5s/eBanamSuITQ/s1600/middle-finger.png

 

riders to PPA

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x_SenlfHdYs/U5jAt46oCZI/AAAAAAAAI5s/eBanamSuITQ/s1600/middle-finger.png

[gypsy]

Maybe the licensed cyclists who are going to be sanctioned and because of this, choose not to ride, should form group legal action against the CSA, for incurred costs lost for accommodation, flights, inconvenience etc. After all in an earlier statement CSA sanctioned the event and has now had an about turn creating misconception. It could be a sizable combined lawsuit.

 

I am still weighing up the pro's and cons and stand to lose in excess of R20k should i choose not to ride.

 

In my opinion the CSA should resolve with UCI and licensed cyclists should not be the scapegoat for their bumblings.

 

Most inconvenient

[carbon29er]

I disagree about PPA and money, please go and have a look at the PPA Trust fund with R20mio in it, that is membership fees, collected due to members paying subs, due to you and me riding events and PPA collecting a slice . Heck, PPA could pay each and every CSA license needed and it would not make a dent in the cash box. Why does PPA need a Trust fund? PPA Income for last year was in excess of R8.3mio of which R4.7mio came from the Tour..  R3.5mio from Subs(membership fees), Do you want to tell me the CSA payment of R350,000.00 is going to make a difference .  They then donated R15.6mio to a trust fund .. What the frig ..  This is your and my money sitting in some fund doing what, helping whom, assisting cycling in what manner. Every claim PPA has on their site about assisting events is subscription fees that have been paid and club members expect that from a club. I expect a MTB board from my club, I expect that an event organiser should have some form of timing. PPA states it as a subsidy ... I will also agree that CSA is not snowy white in all of the above but  ... 

Where does R350k from from?

[Donovan Le Cok]

Posted on twitter an hour ago from CSA:

 

Only full CSA licensed riders will face penalty, not CSA members.

 

 

http://www.cyclingsa.com/news-and-press/2015/2/18/clarity-of-uci-rule-12019-forbidden-races-and-csa-general-membership

 

NEWS AND PRESS

Clarity of UCI Rule 1.2.019 Forbidden Races and CSA general membership

February 18, 2015

Please note that the UCI rule 1.2.019 pertaining to Forbidden races only applies to Full Racing Licence holders and not to those cyclists that hold a general Cycling South Africa membership.

 

The full racing licence is for cyclists from the age of 17-years-old who wish to be eligible for provincial and national selection and respective colours award. Find out more about Cycling SA’s membership and full racing licence options here: http://www.cyclingsa.com/membership/

 

Cyclists who hold a general CSA-membership can participate in whichever cycling event they so desire without the risk of penalties in any way.

 

Cycling South Africa’s function is to make all of our members and full racing licence holders fully aware of rule decisions made and enforced by the UCI. As an affiliate of the UCI, Cycling South Africa is obliged to conform to the rules and regulations of the UCI.

 

This UCI rule prohibits licence holders from participating in any event that has not been included on the national, continental or the UCI’s world calendar or in an event that has not been recognised by the National Federation, the continental confederation or the UCI. The UCI rule 1.2.019 and ensuing penalties is listed below once again for ease of reference.

 

Forbidden races

 

1.2.019 No licence holder may participate in an event that has not been included on a national, continental or world calendar or that has not been recognised by a national federation, a continental confederation or the UCI.

 

Depending on the circumstances, a national federation and the UCI may grant special exceptions for particular races or events run in its own country.

 

Particular races or events may consist of:

 

·   Events organised occasionally only and which do not belong to the organised sports movement;

 

·   Events whose format is not covered by the UCI regulations.

 

Any national federation intending to grant a special exception must submit its reasoned request to the UCI administration in the beginning of the season and at least two months before the respective event. The decision of the UCI in this respect is final and shall not be subject to appeal.

 

1.2.020 Licence holders may not participate in activities organised by a national federation that has been suspended, save in application of article 18.2 of the UCI constitution.

 

1.2.021 Breaches of articles 1.2.019 or 1.2.020 shall render the licence holder liable to one month's suspension and a fine of CHF 50 to 100.

 

 

 

 

[Pure Savage]

Posted on twitter an hour ago from CSA:

 

Only full CSA licensed riders will face penalty, not CSA members.

 

https://twitter.com/Cycling_SA/status/568043688808587264

 

http://www.cyclingsa.com/news-and-press/2015/2/18/clarity-of-uci-rule-12019-forbidden-races-and-csa-general-membership

 

NEWS AND PRESS

Clarity of UCI Rule 1.2.019 Forbidden Races and CSA general membership

February 18, 2015

Please note that the UCI rule 1.2.019 pertaining to Forbidden races only applies to Full Racing Licence holders and not to those cyclists that hold a general Cycling South Africa membership.

 

The full racing licence is for cyclists from the age of 17-years-old who wish to be eligible for provincial and national selection and respective colours award. Find out more about Cycling SA’s membership and full racing licence options here: http://www.cyclingsa.com/membership/

 

Cyclists who hold a general CSA-membership can participate in whichever cycling event they so desire without the risk of penalties in any way.

 

Cycling South Africa’s function is to make all of our members and full racing licence holders fully aware of rule decisions made and enforced by the UCI. As an affiliate of the UCI, Cycling South Africa is obliged to conform to the rules and regulations of the UCI.

 

This UCI rule prohibits licence holders from participating in any event that has not been included on the national, continental or the UCI’s world calendar or in an event that has not been recognised by the National Federation, the continental confederation or the UCI. The UCI rule 1.2.019 and ensuing penalties is listed below once again for ease of reference.

 

Forbidden races

 

1.2.019 No licence holder may participate in an event that has not been included on a national, continental or world calendar or that has not been recognised by a national federation, a continental confederation or the UCI.

 

Depending on the circumstances, a national federation and the UCI may grant special exceptions for particular races or events run in its own country.

 

Particular races or events may consist of:

 

· Events organised occasionally only and which do not belong to the organised sports movement;

 

· Events whose format is not covered by the UCI regulations.

 

Any national federation intending to grant a special exception must submit its reasoned request to the UCI administration in the beginning of the season and at least two months before the respective event. The decision of the UCI in this respect is final and shall not be subject to appeal.

 

1.2.020 Licence holders may not participate in activities organised by a national federation that has been suspended, save in application of article 18.2 of the UCI constitution.

 

1.2.021 Breaches of articles 1.2.019 or 1.2.020 shall render the licence holder liable to one month's suspension and a fine of CHF 50 to 100.

[dev null]

The club I belong to, Wannabees cycling Club is affiliated to WPCA .  No racing teams but the club covers road and MTB .  Some club members race : Road, MTB , Track & Downhill.  Wannabteam.com

 

OK, I am also a Wannabee, but somehow this message has not filtered through the grapevine to me.  Maybe I have not done my homework well.  I do know they have a new website.

[City Cycling Athletic Club]

Maybe the licensed cyclists who are going to be sanctioned and because of this, choose not to ride, should form group legal action against the CSA, for incurred costs lost for accommodation, flights, inconvenience etc. After all in an earlier statement CSA sanctioned the event and has now had an about turn creating misconception. It could be a sizable combined lawsuit.

 

I am still weighing up the pro's and cons and stand to lose in excess of R20k should i choose not to ride.

 

In my opinion the CSA should resolve with UCI and licensed cyclists should not be the scapegoat for their bumblings.

 

Most inconvenient

you got it the wrong way round - ppa don't have to apply for any of their events to be sanctioned by the csa as per their application to the courts -  now they have made an about turn and are asking the csa to sanction the argus. csa are abiding by the courts ruling. talk about a cockup of note. i wonder who is having more sleepless nights - steve hayward or william newman.

i have seen the emails from ppa to csa and csa's reply - the 2015 argus was never sanctioned by csa.

btw - i agree with you the cyclists should not be the sacrificial lamb in this fight and its going to interesting to see what happens post argus if the status quo remains.

i know of at least 5 sanctioned events taking place in Ctown before the end of march and which would attract 90% of licensed roadies. i would like to meet the person who has the guts to stand before a racing bunch and call out the names of suspended riders.

Edited February 18, 2015 by warG

[Fly2High]

Where does R350k from from?

Apparently CSA  want R10.00 per rider to be paid ..

[Fly2High]

OK, I am also a Wannabee, but somehow this message has not filtered through the grapevine to me.  Maybe I have not done my homework well.  I do know they have a new website.

If you received the latest Buzz (newsletter) the times for the various rides are listed, else check out the web site calendar. last week-end we had "the Monster" where members rode the various MTB trails and about 6 people rode the complete network of about 98km's. also see the Facebook page. else in message my id and we can chat...

[Tubehunter]

you got it the wrong way round - ppa don't have to apply for any of their events to be sanctioned by the csa as per their application to the courts -  now they have made an about turn and are asking the csa to sanction the argus. csa are abiding by the courts ruling. talk about a cockup of note. i wonder who is having more sleepless nights - steve hayward or william newman.

i have seen the emails from ppa to csa and csa's reply - the 2015 argus was never sanctioned by csa.

btw - i agree with you the cyclists should not be the sacrificial lamb in this fight and its going to interesting to see what happens post argus if the status quo remains.

i know of at least 5 sanctioned events taking place in Ctown before the end of march and which would attract 90% of licensed roadies. i would like to meet the person who has the guts to stand before a racing bunch and call out the names of suspended riders.

 

There has already been mention of the fact that WPCA agreed to sanction the invitational race group at the head of the CTCT earlier on this thread or in the CSA vs PPA one. How do you then make the claims you are? 

[Icycling]

Where does R350k from from?

Where is the R20 million going? Imagine PPA closed up shop how the hell would the auditors calculate which member or past members should receive what amount of fund!!! The fund belong to the members.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Icycling

[carbon29er]

Apparently CSA  want R10.00 per rider to be paid ..

Apparently your facts are wrong.

 

In order to ride in a sanctioned ride a participant must hold a CSA licence, either annual or day.

 

So R350k is not even a quarter of the amount demanded to sanction the event in terms of the CSA rule book.

 

As stated on page 3 post #37

[carbon29er]

Where is the R20 million going? Imagine PPA closed up shop how the hell would the auditors calculate which member or past members should receive what amount of fund!!! The fund belong to the members.

The constitution of the PPA clearly states where the money will go if the PPA were to close up shop, as you so quaintly put it.

 

However, the PPA is in robust financial health because of the quality of their Exco and the fact they guard against the exact waste of resources that has been the downfall of some other sporting bodies where sustainability not been important.