CramCycle A wholly unreasonable man
#16

Sounds like a crock of ****. I understood this a few years ago where numbers were less and risk was greater. Looking at the numbers from last year, that risk is minimal and equally weighted against WLCC

Weepsie Registered User
#17

I understand you can't name the objector, but if when all is done and it's known who it is, I would abstain from their events on principal for their pettiness.

It may all eventually blow up in their face and they'll lose numbers from People who also think such small mindedness is regressive

1 person has thanked this post
harringtonp Registered User
#18

Weepsie said:
I understand you can't name the objector, but if when all is done and it's known who it is, I would abstain from their events on principal for their pettiness.

It may all eventually blow up in their face and they'll lose numbers from People who also think such small mindedness is regressive


Why can't he name the objector ? If someone is objecting and believes they are right in their objection why would they have a problem with people knowing they are objecting....

Esroh Registered User
#19

Lads.
I asked the Club Chairman about answering your question.
This is what's he told me.

There was no official objection inline with the C.I rules so naming the objectors would be taken as hearsay.

The decision to pull the race was taken officially by C.I. quoting rules that were not applicable in Jan. Weeks after the date(30th of Nov.) by which races to be published in the calander for 2017 were sanctioned. So the dispute is between C.I and WLcc.


Personally. If I have frustrated people on here I apologise.
As a non-racing club member I give up my time for the races the club run without hesitation. I see what our races do for the local areas from an economic point of view and have got more agitated by all this than I should have.
Hopefully we can work it out

4 people have thanked this post
CramCycle A wholly unreasonable man
#20

Fair play and you do seem to be on the ball. The objector may have went off on their own without club permission as well. You never could tell. Have ye heard anything back from cycling Ireland yet or are you just drawing a blank?

Is there anyone to contact in Connacht cycling to represent you to CI, as an indirect route? Although to be fair, I would understand why you wouldn't be too pushed if they are not too pushed getting back to you.

1 person has thanked this post
Esroh Registered User
#21

There has been constant contact with C.I. for the last few weeks after we countered each of their quoting of rules which we were in contravention of in Janurary when they first told us they were withdrawing the race from the calender.
We do have the full support of Connach Cycling and the Clubs who have let their feelings be known
At one stage there was indirect contact with the other promoting club through two longterm members of both. Contact was broken off when we asked them to change a restriction on A3s to Connacht riders rather than only Mayo riders.
Connacht Riders are the ones who support our other races and we felt it was unfair to tell Sligo riders for example that their only option was a race 200km+ away while we had a race 70km away.
What sort off reaction would there be if Riders in Dublin were told they had to race in Waterford when there was a race on in Drogheda on the same day

Our decision to withdraw the rest of our races was the only way to get C.I. to sit up and take us seriously and get clubs outside of Connacht to take notice of what was going on.
It has worked re Clubs but so far not with C.I.

3 people have thanked this post
CramCycle A wholly unreasonable man
#22

Our own club had a meeting tonight about unrelated matters and this came up. While I have not been to any of your events, it is fair to say, they have a great reputation among those who have taken part, and the only things said were it was a shame that ye have withdrawn, and big hopes that this would change sooner rather than later.

The restriction thing, I am not sure understand, have you been asked not to let Mayo riders ride your race? Or you asked them not to let Connacht riders ride their race? Sorry, that bit lost me.

1 person has thanked this post
Esroh Registered User
#23

CramCycle said:
Our own club had a meeting tonight about unrelated matters and this came up. While I have not been to any of your events, it is fair to say, they have a great reputation among those who have taken part, and the only things said were it was a shame that ye have withdrawn, and big hopes that this would change sooner rather than later.

The restriction thing, I am not sure understand, have you been asked not to let Mayo riders ride your race? Or you asked them not to let Connacht riders ride their race? Sorry, that bit lost me.

We were asked to only have Mayo A3s. We wanted them to extend it to Connacht A3s.

1 person has thanked this post
CramCycle A wholly unreasonable man
#24

Esroh said:
We were asked to only have Mayo A3s. We wanted them to extend it to Connacht A3s.


Being asked to have a restriction at all sounds ludicrous, but you were very accomodating by even giving that concession. Hope it all gets sorted soon, better people than me though, I would not be offering the restriction at all after that.

1 person has thanked this post
Homer1798 Registered User
#25

I can't agree a race could be restricted within a category, if it's open to A3's any A3 that holds a CI licence should be allowed to enter. Anyone who pays for a licence takes it out beliveing that they can enter any race desiginated to their category, imagine the outrage if a race like the Gorey was restricted to riders from Leinster??

However I can't understand CI's stance, once again the West is being deprived of quality events, but after what has happened to the Nenagh Classic I'm not entirely surprised. Objectors need to be able to stand behind their objections and CI should have at the very least arranged a meeting of all the involved parties for mediation to see if there was a way around this before knocking 10 events on the head.

4 people have thanked this post
buffalo Registered User
#26

We've had to cut 7 riders from our ToU roster who had booked and paid for their entries due to the event being oversubscribed. This weekend could well support another stage race.

1 person has thanked this post
miller_63 Registered User
#27

buffalo said:
We've had to cut 7 riders from our ToU roster who had booked and paid for their entries due to the event being oversubscribed. This weekend could well support another stage race.


And include A4's into the Stage racing Id say it would be oversubscribed!

1 person has thanked this post
Bambaata Registered User
#28

It's a shambles of a situation. I'm over west a fair bit and would have made a good few Of The events. It's making getting races in to suit the other half too a lot harder.

1 person has thanked this post
CramCycle A wholly unreasonable man
#29

Easily would have had a decent field without affecting other races

1 person has thanked this post
Esroh Registered User
#30

buffalo said:
We've had to cut 7 riders from our ToU roster who had booked and paid for their entries due to the event being oversubscribed. This weekend could well support another stage race.


Motion to Agm is the only answer. Could you PM which Club you are. Might help our Committee. Thanks

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!