CSA fining members for riding choc mtb

[Eldron]

Do you think that is because of the economy and people expecting more bang for their buck or are people just gatvol of events.

I think it's a combo of the cycling bubble bursting, the kæk economy and the rise of gravel/ebiking etc where the emphasis is on enjoying the riding not racing.

 

I've been out of SA for a while though so my finger is off the pulse a bit...

[Gen]

I think it's a combo of the cycling bubble bursting, the kæk economy and the rise of gravel/ebiking etc where the emphasis is on enjoying the riding not racing.

 

I've been out of SA for a while though so my finger is off the pulse a bit...

Yeah they are going to have to think outside of the box to improve things.

 

Wonder why CSA and the regional offices haven't thought of starting cycling tour services..that may be a way to generate income [emoji2368] it is just an idea..instead of catering only for racers only they can cater for those guys maybe new to the sport just wanting go have a jol on their bikes with friends...but don't know where to go.

 

 

They could even get a local up and comer youngster to act as guide, who knows maybe that kid impresses someome so much while chatting on the rides that they land a sponsor.

[scotty]

Can tell you from a region like Central Gauteng that revenue is down almost 40%. on 2017

 

With the numbers significantly lower than in previous years, race organisers are finding it tough to turn a profit and will start looking at ways to cut costs. One of these is not to sanction and give CSA their cut.

Other race organisers will sanction and will then drag tbeir feet when it comes time to pay over day license money and levies.

 

Things are just simply tough out there at tbe moment and sponsors are not so easy to find.

Well there its is. I was a CSA member from 2000 until last year. In all this time CSA, CGC etc did diddly squat for me. Being a marshal at races sanctioned by CSA, I have yet to see what they do for Open groups who make up the the bulk of the field and therefore contribute the bulk of income, they stand around at the start aloof drinking coffee and chatting only to disappear once the various lic category winners are in leaving the majority of riders to the orgs to handle.

 

Where were CSA/CGC etc when there are cycling awareness and safety rides, why is it left to ordinary Joe Soaps to initiate responses. What rider initiatives have they come with for the broader cycling fraternity? A few years back a Hubber started a campaign called "Sigh Up"  with donations to erect cycling signs on regular cycling routes, CSA/CGC involvement and input NONE. When CGC fragmented into smaller regions like Gauteng East, where was the communication to riders informing them of this, who appointed them and what are their contact details ? I sent an email to CSA asking about this but it was ignored. I repeat ALL CSA is interested in is a constant revenue stream for their coffers with very little value add. I would go further and claim that PPA, an organization based mainly in WC has done more for cycling in Gauteng than CSA/CGC etc. I ride with MTB and road groups and one thing comes up, more and more riders are getting "gatvol" of CSA.  

[Slowbee]

So my dad got a 1 month suspension and R750 fine for riding the choc mtb race.

Apparantly CSA cares not that this is an event that raises money for kids with cancer.

I'm speechless

Do you by any chance know if any other riders from the event have been fined ?

 

I would be keen to get a list of events from the previous two months and compare against CSA fines.

 

I presume CSA makes public all the bans and fines it issues.

[Velouria]

Hang on - a couple of years ago I was at an event where the CSA chairman/CEO/bossman took part took. The event was not sanctioned, and yet we had some pro-conti guys as well as a world tour guy taking part, as well as several riders with racing licences.

 

SO I KNOW THEY CAN BEND THE RULES IF THEY WANT TO.

 

 

There's a good rule to live by - don't be a d!ck - yet, I suspect CSA go out of their way to do the opposite.

[stringbean]

So they don’t have the balls to sanction guys currently serving a ban but still racing but will fine Joe Soap for riding a non sanctioned event.

NICE

[Eugene]

I don't want to defend CSA but as Eldron pointed out it is an UCI rule and not a new & obscure one. If you have a racing license there is a responsibility on you to be aware of the rules & comply with it. If we give zero sympathy to a rider who accidentally take a banned substance we should apply the same reasoning to the other rules.

 

The full racing licenses are not aimed at the weekend warriors (that is what the normal CSA censorship is for), they are for people who take their racing seriously. So there is an obligation on them to take the rules seriously and not just plead ignorance when it suits them.

 

There are lots of good reasons to bash CSA, I think here we are picking the wrong one.

There is also a rule that allows CSA to grant exemptions (somebody posted the rules early on in this thread), surely childhood cancer would be worthy of an exemption for the licensed riders to compete in.

[gogo@]

To the best of my knowledge your R35 Day license does NOT cover you for medical emergencies related to the event. Organizers take out separate liability insurance which also won’t cover your medical bills unless there is proof of liability on the part of event organizers. It’s simply a CSA tax. Doesn’t cover commissaires at the event or anything else. Insurance from CSA is only available if you take out an annual membership or racing license. Correct me if I’m wrong but that’s how I have it.

[Eldron]

There is also a rule that allows CSA to grant exemptions (somebody posted the rules early on in this thread), surely childhood cancer would be worthy of an exemption for the licensed riders to compete in.

Yup but the race would have to apply for exemption - we don't know if this was done was so passing judgement either way would be unfair.

[Skubarra]

There is also a rule that allows CSA to grant exemptions (somebody posted the rules early on in this thread), surely childhood cancer would be worthy of an exemption for the licensed riders to compete in.

Great! I agree. Did anyone apply for such an exemption or should this just automatically be given by CSA?

 

Almost every funride are raising funds for a charity, school, church or good cause. Using that argument almost every unsanctioned funride would be exempted so I'm not sure it makes this race unique.

[Gen]

There is also an agreement (2015) between PPA and CSA that none of PPA's fun rides need have to be sanctioned and participants won't be banned if they do..unless that all had changed since then..[emoji2368]

[GaryvdM]

As far as I know, CTCT is not sanctioned but is exempt. This was after CTCT took CSA to court.

 

This is my recollection. I'll look for sources to back this up when I'm on my laptop.

[Gen]

As far as I know, CTCT is not sanctioned but is exempt. This was after CTCT took CSA to court.

 

This is my recollection. I'll look for sources to back this up when I'm on my laptop.

There was an agreement in 2015..I will post the link..

 

The agreement comes after the court case.

 

https://www.pedalpower.org.za/news/ppacsa-and-the-ctct-reach-agreement/

[Shebeen]

It's actually a UCI rule that the CSA is "forced" to implement and it's only for holders of racing licenses.

 

The fine is only at races the CSA doesn't sanction.

 

Oddly enough I kinda agree with it. It keeps the pros away from smaller races and gives developing talent a chance to shine.

 

The reason CSA are now being tough about it is questionable of course. I don't like the CSA at all and I suspect they're getting tough to try and force races to be CSA sanctioned (and scalp their chunk of the entry fee of course!).

If that's the case then there would be similar fines happening elsewhere around the world.

USA, Australia, Holland, UK and more all have non UCI sanctioned cycling events.

I don't see anyone else getting fines.

 

Just as one example Martin maes won a UCI world cup, he races EWS song with many more others.

I wonder if the Cannondale EF drapac riders will be able to ride the gravel events planned for next year?

 

Happy to be shown wrong, but I think it's only CSA who take this seriously and issues fines.

If that's the case then they are officially chops.

 

Edit: appears it's just ory suits who do this

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/peloton/comments/9tau89/ef_drapac_and_uci_rule_12019/

[Skubarra]

If that's the case then there would be similar fines happening elsewhere around the world.

USA, Australia, Holland, UK and more all have non UCI sanctioned cycling events.

I don't see anyone else getting fines.

 

 

Mr Google have a lot of references though of different countries cycling bodies warning cyclists about entering unsanctioned races so I think it is slightly misleading to say it is only a thing in SA.

 

CSA also didn't publicly punish the riders so nobody would have known until someone complained on the hub, would probably be a similar situation in other countries.

 

Look, it's a stupid rule and I'm certain not applied consistently but it is also a bit of a storm in a tea cup as this only affects a tiny portion of cyclists.

[Barend de Arend]

Mr Google have a lot of references though of different countries cycling bodies warning cyclists about entering unsanctioned races so I think it is slightly misleading to say it is only a thing in SA.

 

CSA also didn't publicly punish the riders so nobody would have known until someone complained on the hub, would probably be a similar situation in other countries.

 

Look, it's a stupid rule and I'm certain not applied consistently but it is also a bit of a storm in a tea cup as this only affects a tiny portion of cyclists.

 

You need to check the dates.  USAC tried this in the US in 2013/2014, and then the UCI suspended the rule.  The main argument is that it stifles new races and development.

 

So if you google this, please check the dates of the articles you're matching.

 

I don't want to make it unimportant because it's a tiny portion of cyclists.  That's a dangerous path.  If it has a large effect on just one person, it shouldn't happen.

 

If it has a small effect on just one person, that's a different story. (only if it's not a specific person -- edited)