Never thought I would agree with LeMond...

[TNT1]

"Cycling no longer needs the UCI," LeMond told Reuters. "The UCI is just

there to stamp licenses and make the regulations. The solution for cycling

is very simple: organisers and riders should create their own federation

and take over the sport.

 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/jul08/jul09news4

 

 

 

 

[Poison Ivy]

LeMond only opens his mouth when its TdF time....

[Cruxpearl]

He won three times when it was TdF time, so that earns him the right to open his mouth when it's TdF time...

[PPWTF]

 

But just this once the truth has a sweet sweet ring to it..... take control of your own destiny and see the sport looked after by passionate people with real rolls to play, those actually involved in the day to day of the sport, not bureaucrats in expensive suits who feel the need to justify their own feelings of self importance by making life miserable for anyone not paying them or buying into there take on things..... sounds positively French if you ask me!

 

Viv le revolution, viv le republic 

PPWTF2008-07-09 08:22:33

[linnega]

LeMond only opens his mouth when its TdF time....

He actually opens his mouth a whole lot more often.  Just the local press  (and the US) only reprot on it during Tour time.

 

He did a whole edition of Procycling a few months back.

[Poison Ivy]

passionate people with real rolls to play' date='  [/quote']

 

I'm not going to argue with any one...... but remember what I'm saying today:  people are only passionate as long as they can make lots of $$$$ ....

 

 

[widget]

I agree with him anyway.

 

The UCI is just a dinosaur with a financial appetite and the organisers are getting tired of supporting this never ending dinner. The UCI dos nothing the organisers cant do themselves and by getting rid of them they can control their own destiny.

 

I can only hope it happens here too.

  

[PPWTF]

 

passionate people with real rolls to play' date='  [/quote']

 

I'm not going to argue with any one...... but remember what I'm saying today:  people are only passionate as long as they can make lots of $$$$ ....

 

 

 

We're a passionate bunch here on the hub, but how many of us make any money out of cycling.....? I'm a realist and know that rampant commercialism is driven by rampant consumerism, but not everything has to be totally driven by these forces, does it?

 

[Poison Ivy]

but not everything has to be totally driven by these forces' date=' does it?
[/quote']

 

agreed

[cycleq]

So LeMond's view prevails and the pro teams go off and start a rival body under ASO. Who caters to development riders in the rest of the world? Who cares for cycling on the myriad levels other than top-rank pro racing?

I personally prefer a body like the UCI that has some regulatory authority and can look after the development of the SPORT rather than pure commercial interests.

cycleq2008-07-10 01:04:53

[TNT1]

 

 

I personally prefer a body like the UCI that has some regulatory authority and can look after the development of the SPORT rather than pure commercial interests.

 

Agreed. However, the UCI will have to remove its head from its @rse, or at least get rid of that excess pound of dick it has, before it can or will do what you suggest... Because right now, all the UCI is interested in is money...

TNT12008-07-10 01:08:07

[cycleq]

 Because right now, all the UCI is interested in is money...

That is the current 'anti' view although how you weigh this up against the motives of a decidedly commercial organization such as ASO might be interesting. The UCI needs money - like any statutory body - to run itself and more importantly, to develop the sport in historically deprived areas. The Pro Tour is a minor part of its scope as a world body, albeit one that does contribute important revenue in the form of race sanction and scheduling. But to leverage this into labelling the UCI as only interested in money is a bit disingenuous.

 

Mamy years ago I was part of an initiative trying to get SACF operating on a more effective level (long before the advent of CSA) and we came up against just this issue: Pro riders ONLY interested in the next pool of prize money, irrespective of where it came from, and race organizers unwilling to part with ANY of their income to fund the federation - despite demanding a place on the official race calendar. 

 

As McQuaid said in response to LeMond - he really doesn't have any real understanding of the issues at play. All he wants is exposure so he can sell bikes.

[jabbathemutt007]

 

So LeMond's view prevails and the pro teams go off and start a rival body under ASO. Who caters to development riders in the rest of the world? Who cares for cycling on the myriad levels other than top-rank pro racing?

I personally prefer a body like the UCI that has some regulatory authority and can look after the development of the SPORT rather than pure commercial interests.

 

It might be better if there were separate bodies for pro and amateur cycling. Some of the UCI rules are obviously aimed at pros and don't make any sense at all for amateurs and some just are just dumbl. Witness that dumb leg warmers rule for example, and race commissars bitching at beginner riders with camelbaks.

 

[TNT1]

 

and race commissars bitching at beginner riders with camelbaks.

 

I'm going to buy a camelbak, ride with the beginners... Witness the commissar with a bicycle wheel shoved up his @rse...

 

[Dirty Twin]

and race commissars bitching at beginner riders with camelbaks.

I'm going to buy a camelbak' date=' ride with the beginners... Witness the commissar with a bicycle wheel shoved up his @rse...
[/quote']