Downhill Riders,including current SA National Champ, overlooked for World Champs

[DieselnDust]

I didn’t see snide remarks around character or ability. I did see a few facts relating to 2024 results. The emotional over reaction isn’t helping the understanding either.

CSA says they published the selection criteria in December. I recall this to be true as I paid for membership and in December and checked other documentation relating  to road selection. DH was there,

So how did WCDH only learn of

new criteria in March…? 
 

not really interested in what your name dropped spokes persons have said. I saw their reels already and those were as lacking in substance and high on emotions as the complaints posted here.

no one has offered answers in any media 

 

ps: it’s your cause so present it in a way that lays out the facts timelines , problem statement, solutions explored and solutions proposed. Don’t tell your reader to go and do their homework because then you’ve lost the cause. 

[Skubarra]

2 hours ago, Jewbacca said:

Also, why do we have 5 slots available? Who earned those slots? Did the snubbed riders accrue UCI points towards the available slots?

I really have no dog in this fight, but this confuses me. If there are 5 extra slots available, and those riders can sponsor themselves - what is the harm in filling those slots? Or phrased differently, what is CSA / SA Cycling gaining by not using those slots? As long as they are good enough not to be a danger to themselves or others I dont see the harm? If CSA have to foot the bill then I would understand not filling them.

[MORNE]

Gatekeeper syndrome, like the Karen on the body corporate…
it gives them great satisfaction being the enforcers. Its the case with almost any ‘national committee’ in any hobby/sport. They take your money for a license and pitch up to an event to tell you not to swear and to wear your helmet while on the bike or else, then you never see them again. Cushy gig…

20 minutes ago, Skubarra said:

I really have no dog in this fight, but this confuses me. If there are 5 extra slots available, and those riders can sponsor themselves - what is the harm in filling those slots? Or phrased differently, what is CSA / SA Cycling gaining by not using those slots? As long as they are good enough not to be a danger to themselves or others I dont see the harm? If CSA have to foot the bill then I would understand not filling them.

 

[DieselnDust]

23 minutes ago, Skubarra said:

I really have no dog in this fight, but this confuses me. If there are 5 extra slots available, and those riders can sponsor themselves - what is the harm in filling those slots? Or phrased differently, what is CSA / SA Cycling gaining by not using those slots? As long as they are good enough not to be a danger to themselves or others I dont see the harm? If CSA have to foot the bill then I would understand not filling them.

 

look at it another way that's maybe relatable.

Your company has access to 5 slots at a prestigious International conference. Its a Working event so SME's are gathering to discuss challenges in the industry .

They only have 1 SME qualified to go and a few part timers. The organiser of the Conference only wants the best minds in the industry there as its not a learning workshop but a problem solving one.

Company has its nominee lined up but the part timers are asking to go along as well and are willing to pay for themselves even though they will contribute nothing but they will have attendance on their CV.

Do you allow them to go but they will still have be under your company blessing and therefor disrespect the criteria for attendance or,

Don't allow them to go and respect the Conference organisers criteria for attendance?

[Skubarra]

1 hour ago, DieselnDust said:

 

look at it another way that's maybe relatable.

Your company has access to 5 slots at a prestigious International conference. Its a Working event so SME's are gathering to discuss challenges in the industry .

They only have 1 SME qualified to go and a few part timers. The organiser of the Conference only wants the best minds in the industry there as its not a learning workshop but a problem solving one.

Company has its nominee lined up but the part timers are asking to go along as well and are willing to pay for themselves even though they will contribute nothing but they will have attendance on their CV.

Do you allow them to go but they will still have be under your company blessing and therefor disrespect the criteria for attendance or,

Don't allow them to go and respect the Conference organisers criteria for attendance?

Do they meet the criteria of the UCI? If not I don't know why this is a discussion, but if they do then back to my original question, what do CSA gain by having a more stringent criteria than the UCI? Is there an arrangement where UCI criteria is ambigious but local organisers are expected to be gatekeepers applying their own judgment? 

Edited July 17, 2024 by Skubarra

[Shebeen]

6 hours ago, Jewbacca said:

So I remember there was a similar argument surrounding our Hockey team a few years ago.... We had qualified for something but by default. 

SASCOC decided to say 'the men's hockey team will not be going to X despite having qualified because they are crap'

They didn't go.

No one made an online petition and no one shed big tears because the truth was, our team was rubbish and wouldn't have made it out of the groups.

It's a logical decision. I really have no idea why some people are so butthurt that CSA hasn't chosen to select people who aren't good enough to compete. 

well they did actually and it even got 15k signatures!

https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2015-11-17-petition-will-not-change-sascoc-policy/

 

Apples and pears really. Hockey and waterpolo should send both teams to every olympics. They are massive schoolsports, with very limited pro setups once you get to senior ranks.

[DieselnDust]

9 hours ago, Skubarra said:

Do they meet the criteria of the UCI? If not I don't know why this is a discussion, but if they do then back to my original question, what do CSA gain by having a more stringent criteria than the UCI? Is there an arrangement where UCI criteria is ambigious but local organisers are expected to be gatekeepers applying their own judgment? 

Technically they don’t. They haven’t met CSA selection criteria and therefore that of the UCI. Somebody has to be the gatekeeper or it’s a free for all.

[mazambaan]

While I love DH I have no dog in the fight but two comments.

1. Ideally someone should "replace" GM at some stage so at least one "under study" could be picked if this objective was focussed on. BMX is different but I understood that they threw a big effort (and money) into Sifiso and maybe a few others back in the day.

2. Sponsorship is key. Quite a few niche sports get key sponsors where they are wealthy and their family is involved (SA has had a number of bodyboarding world champs due to this; real unsung heroes IMHO). I personally think quite a number of people / organisations have made good money out of cycling, particularly "mountain biking" and they could plough more back in.

Some of the SA exclusions have just been petty and unfair (the very first men's hockey team exclusion was just racist politics IMHO). I hope the DH ones aren't and would love to see more SA participants.

[Danger Dassie]

It isn’t a free for all, it’s as far from anything like it. The only thing gatekeeping accomplishes is to deny taking advantage of the opportunities available. 
That has ramifications for future riders and the discipline. An administration can only ride the coattails of a single athlete’s success for so long with such a dogmatic approach. 

[Underachiever]

11 hours ago, BaGearA said:

Nobody wants to bring up the FACT that the riders asking for the exemption did NOT qualify.

 

And by saying that I'm somehow disparaging the riders.

 

Bowing out cause rationality is so far removed from what's constantly being asked here.

I'm reading all the arguments, some with clouded with emotion, with interest.

I work for a large corporate and the tendency to celebrate mediocrity is getting more. Sending the dimwits to the expert convention for a jolly, and getting nothing in return.  For the sake of development  

The schools advocate this culture quite hard.  Everyone is a winner.  I do understand the rationale.  Everyone cannot be a CEO, CFO, COO... someone needs to sweep the floor and those also needs praise for doing their best..

The principle and gatekeeping needs to be in place to maintain the standard 

So if you best is not good enough, you can't go, since you haven't qualified...

Try harder next year...

 

 

[Headshot]

10 hours ago, Shebeen said:

well they did actually and it even got 15k signatures!

https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2015-11-17-petition-will-not-change-sascoc-policy/

 

Apples and pears really. Hockey and waterpolo should send both teams to every olympics. They are massive schoolsports, with very limited pro setups once you get to senior ranks.

Exactly they did petition but we have fake news being spread here. Disappointing 

[Headshot]

48 minutes ago, Underachiever said:

I'm reading all the arguments, some with clouded with emotion, with interest.

I work for a large corporate and the tendency to celebrate mediocrity is getting more. Sending the dimwits to the expert convention for a jolly, and getting nothing in return.  For the sake of development  

The schools advocate this culture quite hard.  Everyone is a winner.  I do understand the rationale.  Everyone cannot be a CEO, CFO, COO... someone needs to sweep the floor and those also needs praise for doing their best..

The principle and gatekeeping needs to be in place to maintain the standard 

So if you best is not good enough, you can't go, since you haven't qualified...

Try harder next year...

 

 

What we also have in SA is a growing culture of irrational rules and regulations that condone bad administrative decisions and cover those who make them. I stand by my point that CSA are ill equipped to deal with DH. They don't understand it and their behavior does nothing for the riders.

Easy to say they shouldjust try again next year when they're already  battling to pay their way to make a go of it as it is. 

[Skubarra]

1 hour ago, DieselnDust said:

Technically they don’t. They haven’t met CSA selection criteria and therefore that of the UCI. Somebody has to be the gatekeeper or it’s a free for all.

"free for all" is not quite the situation here though? But even if it is a "free for all" you will have 6 guys show up and not make it past the untelevised qualifiers along with 2/3rds of the field. UCI doesn't seem to care so its hard for me to understand why this would bring shame on hubland and CSA.

Wouldn't seem like it but I actually really do not have a dog in this fight, so let me step out and stalk another thread 🤣.

[Irvin85]

2 minutes ago, Skubarra said:

"free for all" is not quite the situation here though? But even if it is a "free for all" you will have 6 guys show up and not make it past the untelevised qualifiers along with 2/3rds of the field. UCI doesn't seem to care so its hard for me to understand why this would bring shame on hubland and CSA.

Wouldn't seem like it but I actually really do not have a dog in this fight, so let me step out and stalk another thread 🤣.

I get what you are saying. No harm done to include them. 

My point of view is it should be a prestige event, and there should be pride and honor in representing your country at such a event and that should be earned. Not handed out just because there is slots available. 

That is it for me. 

[MORNE]

Can we just stop referring to some of these riders as dimwits or also rans haha? 
If you see what some of these people can do on a bike you will likely re-asses why you even try to turn a crank.

They are that good. You and I get better trying our best by taking their advice on weekends, riding their lines to go faster etc. And progress, but still be a minute slower down a 3minute track lol. Similarly, they need exposure to faster people than themselves to progress.

Competition is fierce…especially in something like DH where the difference between qualifying or not can be counted on one hand. Top ten in milliseconds over a 2min run. EVEN the GOAT has fallen short on many occasions due to how close it can be.

Anyway, it doesn't effect me really, but I wont call these guys ‘lower management’ being sent to ‘directors’ conferences. They are associates looking to make the step but are being held back because of the ‘oldboys club and nepotism’. (To play the comparison) 
 

Anyway, they’ll figure it out. They care enough and have the potential/talent. 
 

 

 

Edited July 18, 2024 by MORNE

[Underachiever]

28 minutes ago, MORNE said:

Can we just stop referring to some of these riders as dimwits or also rans haha? 
If you see what some of these people can do on a bike you will likely re-asses why you even try to turn a crank.

They are that good. You and I get better trying our best by taking their advice on weekends, riding their lines to go faster etc. And progress, but still be a minute slower down a 3minute track lol. Similarly, they need exposure to faster people than themselves to progress.

Competition is fierce…especially in something like DH where the difference between qualifying or not can be counted on one hand. Top ten in milliseconds over a 2min run. EVEN the GOAT has fallen short on many occasions due to how close it can be.

Anyway, it doesn't effect me really, but I wont call these guys ‘lower management’ being sent to ‘directors’ conferences. They are associates looking to make the step but are being held back because of the ‘oldboys club and nepotism’. (To play the comparison) 
 

Anyway, they’ll figure it out. They care enough and have the potential/talent. 
 

 

 

Hi Morne

I don't know any of these riders from a bar of soap.  I used a corporate example and tendency to illustrate a principle. I did not call or refer to them as dimwits. 

Oldboys club...and nepotism...eish that exists in probably all orgs is some shape or form.

Life isn't always fair.

But my motto in life is "never, ever give up" ,so I always try again!!!

 

Edited July 18, 2024 by Underachiever