WTF CSA?

[Eldron]

Can't we just close the CSA and give the PPA the UCI accreditation?

 

PPA seem to run a much more professional and consistent ship.

 

My experience with CSA has been mostly limited to "hand over my fees" with the one or two racing issues I had with them being handled pretty poorly.

[milky4130]

what club do you belong to?

I'll bet you a 6 pack of beers or coffee at the next race, he doesn't belong to an affiliated club.

[gtr1]

You need to remember that the structure of CSA, Regions, Sub-region, clubs etc, is actually prescribed by SASCOC, and hence government. Not by CSA.

 

And I see a lot of people complaining, but very few really offering solutions, or willing to get involved.

[Patchelicious]

You need to remember that the structure of CSA, Regions, Sub-region, clubs etc, is actually prescribed by SASCOC, and hence government. Not by CSA.

 

And I see a lot of people complaining, but very few really offering solutions, or willing to get involved.

Lots of people have solutions, but I think few have the energy to keep farting against incompetent thunder.

 

Like all failing state owned things, their function of supporting cycling will get privatized. Look at Support SA Talent as an example, passionate people doing CSAs job for them. Spur series with parents and schools getting involved. Qhubeka doing cycling charity work... there is stacks of passion. Just not a working controlling body.

 

When you don’t have public money to piss away, you tend to look after your resources a bit more.

Edited June 5, 2018 by Patchelicious

[Rolling Stone]

You need to remember that the structure of CSA, Regions, Sub-region, clubs etc, is actually prescribed by SASCOC, and hence government. Not by CSA.

 

And I see a lot of people complaining, but very few really offering solutions, or willing to get involved.

I agree there are a couple of guys on here that are just repeating what has already been said, and miss the fact that we all agree on most counts that things were miss managed. Not so sure about the corrupt, would be very interested to hear what was uncovered. What I see is an organization that ran out of funds and simply did not implement cost cutting measures until it was too late. This also happens in the corporate environment. I am sure the structure have changed and new people did get involved, actually gave their time to try and turn things arround.

 

It is almost as if they cannot accept the fact that CSA has managed to turn things around are could actually be on the right track again. It will take time though.

 

If cycling was an elitist sport, why are our top performers then not self-funded or being showered with offers of sponsorship for their international exploits. I do agree that cycling has a large elitist following, but cycling has always been a sport for the middle class as well. Some of our best talent come from broken homes or families that cannot afford to self-fund their high-performance training and international exploits. These guys and girls need the support of a national association. 

 

I understand that everyone on this forum means well and gets upset when they see things are not going the way they would like or even worse, a rider needs to go and find crowd funding because CSA could not manage their affairs properly.

 

Do they even understand what damage they are doing to the sport by just shooting from the hip like this? When last year’s facts and speculation is being brandished as today’s truth with a couple of choice words like corruption and bankruptcy thrown in.  

[Patchelicious]

I agree there are a couple of guys on here that are just repeating what has already been said, and miss the fact that we all agree on most counts that things were miss managed. Not so sure about the corrupt, would be very interested to hear what was uncovered. What I see is an organization that ran out of funds and simply did not implement cost cutting measures until it was too late. This also happens in the corporate environment. I am sure the structure have changed and new people did get involved, actually gave their time to try and turn things arround.

 

It is almost as if they cannot accept the fact that CSA has managed to turn things around are could actually be on the right track again. It will take time though.

 

If cycling was an elitist sport, why are our top performers then not self-funded or being showered with offers of sponsorship for their international exploits. I do agree that cycling has a large elitist following, but cycling has always been a sport for the middle class as well. Some of our best talent come from broken homes or families that cannot afford to self-fund their high-performance training and international exploits. These guys and girls need the support of a national association.

 

I understand that everyone on this forum means well and gets upset when they see things are not going the way they would like or even worse, a rider needs to go and find crowd funding because CSA could not manage their affairs properly.

 

Do they even understand what damage they are doing to the sport by just shooting from the hip like this? When last year’s facts and speculation is being brandished as today’s truth with a couple of choice words like corruption and bankruptcy thrown in.

“Ran out of funds”? That’s one way of putting it I suppose.

 

And yes it does happen in corporate companies, but the difference is that those corporate companies then go banctrupt, it also isn’t usually money that you were forced to pay. Rather compare it to tax wasteage, that’s more accurate.

 

While you preaching about how it’s better and that there are good people at CSA, you need to understand that people don’t care about plans and changes, they care about different outcomes. Don’t expect people to trust it until the outcomes have changed.

 

You should most certainly not blame them for the downfall of CSA and not blame them for the damage being done. Cycling is the victim here, not CSA. CSA screwed this up, not the thousands of people who paid their licenses as they were made to do.

 

If CSA want to change perceptions about “last years facts” THEY should come out on social media or traditional media and do it. It’s not the public’s responsibility to “forget and move on”.

Edited June 6, 2018 by Patchelicious

[Rolling Stone]

“Ran out of funds”? That’s one way of putting it I suppose.

 

And yes it does happen in corporate companies, but the difference is that those corporate companies then go banctrupt, it also isn’t usually money that you were forced to pay. Rather compare it to tax wasteage, that’s more accurate.

 

While you preaching about how it’s better and that there are good people at CSA, you need to understand that people don’t care about plans and changes, they care about different outcomes. Don’t expect people to trust it until the outcomes have changed.

 

You should most certainly not blame them for the downfall of CSA and not blame them for the damage being done. Cycling is the victim here, not CSA. CSA screwed this up, not the thousands of people who paid their licenses as they were made to do.

 

If CSA want to change perceptions about “last years facts” THEY should come out on social media or traditional media and do it. It’s not the public’s responsibility to “forget and move on”.

 

Now this is where I can and do agree with you.

[gogo@]

Yes, SASCOC.

But, PPA - why is CSA not going the inclusive route?  Why was I told to look after the top 5 riders with prize money and not worry about the rest? I think that's what people mean about elitist - not in terms of wealth, but performance.  So, we give prize money to the pros, and Jo and Josephine soap whose R35 day license (to which we add the rider levy organizers must pay, plus commissaire costs, sanctioning and calendar fees), annual membership or license fees, plus the sponsorship we raise ourselves, must go to support (after all expenses) nobody else?  What about the Grand Master (who often knocks the socks off the top order) and the Youth riders who are starting out? Where is their encouragement?

I get that CSA had a problem with finances last year (which itself was mismanaged, if you ask me) but the problem is older and deeper than that.  And yes, in part it is structural (aka SASCOC, maybe UCI) but it is not only that.  Hence a lot of people point to the PPA.

I have other examples, and I'm not wingeing on the sidelines.

Maybe it will always be like this? Because cycling is not an easy sport to administer.  But please, where there's enthusiasm, don't snuff it out with rules and regulations aimed at a minority, who you then expect to pay their own way, anyway.

[Rolling Stone]

Yes, SASCOC.

But, PPA - why is CSA not going the inclusive route?  Why was I told to look after the top 5 riders with prize money and not worry about the rest? I think that's what people mean about elitist - not in terms of wealth, but performance.  So, we give prize money to the pros, and Jo and Josephine soap whose R35 day license (to which we add the rider levy organizers must pay, plus commissaire costs, sanctioning and calendar fees), annual membership or license fees, plus the sponsorship we raise ourselves, must go to support (after all expenses) nobody else?  What about the Grand Master (who often knocks the socks off the top order) and the Youth riders who are starting out? Where is their encouragement?

I get that CSA had a problem with finances last year (which itself was mismanaged, if you ask me) but the problem is older and deeper than that.  And yes, in part it is structural (aka SASCOC, maybe UCI) but it is not only that.  Hence a lot of people point to the PPA.

I have other examples, and I'm not wingeing on the sidelines.

Maybe it will always be like this? Because cycling is not an easy sport to administer.  But please, where there's enthusiasm, don't snuff it out with rules and regulations aimed at a minority, who you then expect to pay their own way, anyway.

Please elaborate a bit, I am also not aware of these so-called CSA rules/guidelines with regards to prize money.  Was this a National or Provincial event?

 

What I can tell you is that a large part of Day licenses and Riders levies are or should be going back to rider development and support within the regions.

In Central Gauteng alone, we have just recently approved R 115k worth of funding that will be going to youth rider support and coaching initiatives this year. It is not a lot, but if you keep in mind how many R5's you need to make up R115k then 23000 cyclists have contributed to that figure. This is were clubs now have to make sure that their members make use of these initiatives. I cannot elaborate right now, but the communications are busy going out to all clubs in our region this week still.

 

If I may add, the majority of this money we received from CSA as part of arrears from 2016 and 2017 that they are catching up on.

 

Sadly only one race organiser in our region collected and payed day licenses over to CGC  in 2017.  And that is a huge chunk of money that was lost. I am not sure what the situation was in other regions. In our case it can be blamed largely on a breakdown of the relationship between the region, cyclists, clubs and race organisers.  We had ower own little mismanagement issue right here in the heart of Gauteng that carried on for just too long.

[City Cycling Athletic Club]

Yes, SASCOC.

But, PPA - why is CSA not going the inclusive route?  Why was I told to look after the top 5 riders with prize money and not worry about the rest? I think that's what people mean about elitist - not in terms of wealth, but performance.  So, we give prize money to the pros, and Jo and Josephine soap whose R35 day license (to which we add the rider levy organizers must pay, plus commissaire costs, sanctioning and calendar fees), annual membership or license fees, plus the sponsorship we raise ourselves, must go to support (after all expenses) nobody else?  What about the Grand Master (who often knocks the socks off the top order) and the Youth riders who are starting out? Where is their encouragement?

I get that CSA had a problem with finances last year (which itself was mismanaged, if you ask me) but the problem is older and deeper than that.  And yes, in part it is structural (aka SASCOC, maybe UCI) but it is not only that.  Hence a lot of people point to the PPA.

I have other examples, and I'm not wingeing on the sidelines.

Maybe it will always be like this? Because cycling is not an easy sport to administer.  But please, where there's enthusiasm, don't snuff it out with rules and regulations aimed at a minority, who you then expect to pay their own way, anyway.

throwing it back at you - why do the PPA donate their income to charities ,

nothing towards the sport. its only recently that they are rewarding the

top 3 juniors with funding for o/seas trips.

regarding the structures - SASCOC have forced the geo political structures

onto the sports federations - only soccer,cricket and rugby have ignored

them - why - funding. if you dont conform to SASCOC structures - no funding.

its one of the boxes any club/district/province have to tick when applying.

and this was another reason why PPA withdrew from CSA - they wouldn't/couldnt

conform to SASCOC structures.

[gogo@]

Please elaborate a bit, I am also not aware of these so-called CSA rules/guidelines with regards to prize money. Was this a National or Provincial event?

 

..... Sadly only one race organiser in our region collected and payed day licenses over to CGC in 2017. And that is a huge chunk of money that was lost. I am not sure what the situation was in other regions. In our case it can be blamed largely on a breakdown of the relationship between the region, cyclists, clubs and race organisers.

No problem with collecting CSA’s dues from us, invoice is presented 2-3 days after the event.

Prize money was not policy, obviously, but advice, which reflects everything about priorities. Yes, racing is important but not all events are equal on this score, thus my position about supporting and encouraging the base that funds the top.

[Rolling Stone]

No problem with collecting CSA’s dues from us, invoice is presented 2-3 days after the event.

Prize money was not policy, obviously, but advice, which reflects everything about priorities. Yes, racing is important but not all events are equal on this score, thus my position about supporting and encouraging the base that funds the top.

Point taken. 

[Patchelicious]

https://twitter.com/joffersmyboy/status/871745548113641473

So it’s been a year. Who has been held accountable for this? Edited June 7, 2018 by Patchelicious

[shaper]

So it’s been a year. Who has been held accountable for this?

 

Who has lost

In summary as I see it, correct me if am wrong

• hastily made payment to get cover
• had a meeting where it was decided to internally investigate themselves and conduct
• agreed to produce a report on the matter (yet to be seen, perhaps not even done)
• patted themselves on the back for deemed good governance once the cat had been let out of the bag with regard to mismanagement at CSA and that of the funds
• No firing of committee for incompetence
• Appointed a financial officer to try to sort out the mess who promptly resigned and left the country (perhaps he did not like what he saw)
• wandered off to the bar to have a johnny walker in celebration of how they think they saved themselves
• got back on the gravy train 
• lost probably a considerable number of cyclist who will not renew their licenses
• lost lotto funding and have very little in the way of sponsorship

In a nutshell.... carry on as you were!!

[gogo@]

throwing it back at you - why do the PPA donate their income to charities ,

nothing towards the sport. its only recently that they are rewarding the

top 3 juniors with funding for o/seas trips.

regarding the structures - SASCOC have forced the geo political structures

onto the sports federations - only soccer,cricket and rugby have ignored

them - why - funding. if you dont conform to SASCOC structures - no funding.

its one of the boxes any club/district/province have to tick when applying.

and this was another reason why PPA withdrew from CSA - they wouldn't/couldnt

conform to SASCOC structures.

Missed your reply yesterday, apologies.

PPA don't put money into the sport? Seriously? Or do you mean support to people racing?  Because my understanding is they are the only body concerned, for one thing, about safe cycling.  I haven't seen CSA involved there at all.  Any club with proper financials etc. can apply for funds for various projects to PPA, but not to CSA, that I know of.  I don't follow in detail who gets funds for what club projects but in the past money has gone into developing infrastructure like pump tracks, trail upgrades and making bikes available.  The facility is there for people to apply.

I think you're talking about support to the top cyclists, which is what CSA has made their mandate.  PPA as far as I know has a very different mandate that is more inclusive.  They have their problems, I'm sure, but putting money into developing cycling is not one of them from what I have seen.  CSA?  Their own finances are in a mess, so they have a long way to go to get back to where they should be.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not completely anti-CSA (and yes, SASCOC) but from where I am, I do see the practical effects of their problems on developing the sport.

Yster Xatasi was involved in development in the Eastern Cape.  I hope he can do something positive.  As for the rude comments on Facebook aimed at him, pathetic.

[Rolling Stone]

So it’s been a year. Who has been held accountable for this?

 For running out of funds or not having the insurance cover in place ?

I do not see any of the affected parties bitching on here lately, they possibly got sorted out somehow.

Will try ask the question, may even get an answer.