Cycling Grants announced

morana

Cycling Ireland

€40,000 – Podium: Catherine Walsh, Mark Rohan, Colin Lynch

€20,000 – Podium: Daniel Martin

€20,000 – World Class: Cathal Miller, Nicholas Roche, Caroline Ryan

€12,000 – International: Ciara Horne, Eoin Mullen, Martyn Irvine, Philip Deignan, Enda Smyth, Katie George-Dunleavy, James Brown, Andrew Fitzgerald

The pilots of the tandems get a matching grant from CI funds.
These are awarded by ISC and have nothing to do with CI bar the agreement of criteria which are broadly similar across most sports. We vet applications by the athletes and merely forward them to ISC if they satisfy criteria.

If an athlete was previously carded and was sick we can make a medical case on their behalf. These are reviewed every quarter.

snollup

I know I'm going to get shot down for this, but... Is giving guys cycling for the worlds top teams not akin to giving grants to soccer players playing for premiership teams? God knows, there's little enough money around these days. I would think there are athletes more in need.

(expecting barrage of abuse, sorry in advance).

morana

snollup wrote: »

I know I'm going to get shot down for this, but... Is giving guys cycling for the worlds top teams not akin to giving grants to soccer players playing for premiership teams? God knows, there's little enough money around these days. I would think there are athletes more in need.

(expecting barrage of abuse, sorry in advance).

Would agree totally with that. In fairness to our guys they pay back a percentage for the programs we run for them. The pros have been very supportive of this, so some of tis money would make its way back to dev programs (as are the non pro guys supportive!!)

kumate_champ07

I agree, if youre a pro and earning decent wages why would you need a grant

Beasty

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

I agree, if youre a pro and earning decent wages why would you need a grant

My reading of morana's post is that it's the Sports Council funding this. The fact that the likes of Martin and Roche qualify increases the overall level of funding available to cycling, and these guys are actually finding a way to pass (at least some of it) back to the wider cycling community. If this is the case, it seems to me that cycling wins (albeit at a cost to other sports and/or the taxpayer)

12 sprocket

I think you will find that what some of them are getting is actually like a performance bonus for achieving big results rather than a grant, and this seems fair enough.

For example if one of the irish professionals were to win the Tour De France what would that be worth to ireland in regard to international recognition and spinoff through tourism national morale to mention a few. so give them a bonus, money well spent.

ROK ON

morana wrote: »

The pros have been very supportive of this, so some of tis money would make its way back to dev programs (as are the non pro guys supportive!!)

Beasty wrote: »

If this is the case, it seems to me that cycling wins (albeit at a cost to other sports and/or the taxpayer)

If that is the case, maybe the posts should not be stated in a public forum, otherwise it looks as if CI are securing backdoor funding via a transfer pricing operation via funded sports stars?
(I have no problem with this btw - but I can see why other people outside cycling may have).

LeoD

morana wrote: »

Cycling Ireland

€40,000 – Podium: Catherine Walsh,...

The pilots of the tandems get a matching grant from CI funds.

Are you saying Catherine Walsh's pilot gets €40,000 also?

edit: Just got my answer on the IVCA vs. CI thread. Handy money.

GlennaMaddy

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

I agree, if youre a pro and earning decent wages why would you need a grant

To cover costs incurred when representing Ireland, no?

RobFowl

GlennaMaddy wrote: »

To cover costs incurred when representing Ireland, no?

Costs for Pro's are covered fro the Worlds/Olympic which is the only time they represent Ireland.
CI did not set up the system and I'm sure would prefer the scarce resources were prioritised differently.......

Beasty

LeoD wrote: »

Are you saying Catherine Walsh's pilot gets €40,000 also?

edit: Just got my answer on the IVCA vs. CI thread. Handy money.

The pilot is making the same commitment as the stoker, and may well be giving up more in terms of a potential career to pursue World and Olympic titles

All three of the athletes on €40k are current world champions, as is Catherine's pilot Fran Meehan

Fr D Maugire

I agree that I find the idea of riders who are already getting an annual salary, plus winnings and most likely bonuses, just ridiculous.

Cmon, Martin and Roche must be earning around 100k per season if not more. Deignan less but still getting a wage nevertheless.

What do they spend the cash on as they are already training full-time and getting paid to do so. They have most of the back-up required from their teams already and what else is there?

Should get nowt in my opinion and I like those guys. Give it to athletes who are making huge personal sacrifices to just try and make the Olympics.

Casati

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

I agree that I find the idea of riders who are already getting an annual salary, plus winnings and most likely bonuses, just ridiculous.

Cmon, Martin and Roche must be earning around 100k per season if not more. Deignan less but still getting a wage nevertheless.

What do they spend the cash on as they are already training full-time and getting paid to do so. They have most of the back-up required from their teams already and what else is there?

Should get nowt in my opinion and I like those guys. Give it to athletes who are making huge personal sacrifices to just try and make the Olympics.

So if Katie Taylor earns similar money via personal advertising/ endorsement she does, do you think she should lose her grant too? If the grant is there to reward the athlete that has a chance of a medal at worlds or olympics, then why should their personal circumstances be considered? Another thing to remember is that although the tops athletes in any sport might make significant money especially in an olympic year, how many years prior to that did they sacrifice their earning potential by training full time for zero wages?

Slideshowbob

12 sprocket wrote: »

I think you will find that what some of them are getting is actually like a performance bonus for achieving big results rather than a grant, and this seems fair enough.

For example if one of the irish professionals were to win the Tour De France what would that be worth to ireland in regard to international recognition and spinoff through tourism national morale to mention a few. so give them a bonus, money well spent.

the riders hardly consider that grant during those events so it's wrong to consider it a bonus!!

Beasty

As already stated by morana, CI do not set the rules for this - the Sports Council oversee the whole thing. If these "elite" athletes do not apply for a grant, it's not as if there will be more money to go round everyone else - it's simply lost to the sport altogether

In answer to ROK ON's point about it looking like CI may be securing backdoor funding, perhaps I should have been a bit more careful with my words.

If the likes of Roche and Martin receive these awards, and decide to plough some of their own income (which would include the grants) into projects for the wider cycling community, or to pay for some of the support they receive or have received from CI, I for one would not see it as an issue.

Clearly I am not privvy to any actual arrangements, and am only going on morana's posts

CtrlAltDelete

I agree with many of the posts here and disagree with others..lets face it everyone on that list has made some kind of sacrifice to get where they are but my biggest issue with some of the recipients is their age,profile ( in relation to their development through the levels of the sport ) and physiological limitations.. there are many on the list that will never make it to world and or olympic medal performances.. Then its stated as 'funding for podium contenders for 2012'..what a JOKE..anyone that has ever trained for any kind of sports event knows the process takes time..with attainable goals set along the way..TYPICAL Irish approach.. FORGET funding for 2012.. fund our sport at grass roots level for 2020.. thats where development is at.. We as a nation will end up in the same auld scenario as always.. listening to excuses and critics wondering where it went wrong the week proceeding London 2012.. big in the media for a week or so then back to the same thing all over again..' do what you always do, get what you always got'

Slideshowbob

I must say I find it odd certain matters that may not be public common knowledge regarding CI's use of allocated monies is aloud remain on this site

morana

Slideshowbob wrote: »

I must say I find it odd certain matters that may not be public common knowledge regarding CI's use of allocated monies is aloud remain on this site

Once again as Beasty pointed out twice. This isnt CI's money.

• Our role in the process is to agree the ctriteria with the ISC
• Publish the Criteria.
• Process their application when they have achieved the criteria
• Pass it on to the ISC for their approval.
• If somebody is a medical case we can review and recommend/deny it
• Thats it. We dont see the money. Its not ours.

This is money from the Irish Government to the Athletes when they achieve podiums in international events such as Europeans, Worlds, Olympics. There is a document on our website and stickybottle did a good article on it about 4 weeks ago about wht you need to do to get funding. Furthermore our Para Athletes who have been the stars of not only cycling but or all para sports with their achievements are quite rightly the bulk of recipients for cycling.

All our dealings are public and transparent. There isnt 1c of money that cant be accounted for! If you wish to know about anything go to the agm and ask and you will get the answer.

CtrlAltDelete

Slideshowbob wrote: »

I must say I find it odd certain matters that may not be public common knowledge regarding CI's use of allocated monies is aloud remain on this site

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/new-irish-sports-council-grants-for-fifteen-cyclists-the-full-details/

elduggo

have no issue at all with anyone receiving a grant. It is curious that the better chance you have of winning something the more money you get. Perhaps theres a separate 'development' type grant?

Its strange how the national road champions (Bennett and Brammier) were overlooked.

CtrlAltDelete

Personally I think the problem stems from a 'blanket criteria' from the ISC.. at least thats how it seems.. who ever it is that 'passes it on to the ISC' needs to take their finger out of their rear socket and work with the ISC to help develop and direct the future of our sport. Surely it is their role to work with the ISC in relation to the future development of the sport..I mean someone surely works on development right? I think its time for Ireland to move on from the 'throw it at the wall and hope it sticks' approach .

morana

elduggo wrote: »

have no issue at all with anyone receiving a grant. It is curious that the better chance you have of winning something the more money you get. Perhaps theres a separate 'development' type grant?

Its strange how the national road champions (Bennett and Brammier) were overlooked.

They didnt get the criteria as far as i know.

CtrlAltDelete wrote: »

Personally I think the problem stems from a 'blanket criteria' from the ISC.. at least thats how it seems.. who ever it is that 'passes it on to the ISC' needs to take their finger out of their rear socket and work with the ISC to help develop and direct the future of our sport. Surely it is their role to work with the ISC in relation to the future development of the sport..I mean someone surely works on development right? I think its time for Ireland to move on from the 'throw it at the wall and hope it sticks' approach .

What would you suggest? We put together a comprehensive Development plan with squads, coaches, events and targets in place perhaps and present it to them?

Now why didnt we think of that?

CtrlAltDelete

I dont know why not! lack of foresight maybe???? OBVIOUSLY this has been done but like what I stated in my earlier post..' do what you always do, get what you always got'..

The point I am trying to make is that the current system needs to change. Sure its the same now as its always been.. just because we have representatives at the highest level of the sport right now doesnt mean they got there through any outlined structure from grass root level..I have been in the sport for many years and there are names there that have only recently cropped up and their seniors.. hats off to them but statistics prove that for individuals to develop into world class athletes they need to begin at youth level as developing ones physiological capabilites takes many years.

For sure our current representatives at this level fought,battled and persisted ( all of which is required regardless of what system is in place ) to get where they are and I admire each and every one of them for getting where they have got under the circumstances..My point is ..funding should start at grass root level through the many schools of our nation. Wheres the sense in throwing money at 'podium contenders for London 2012' 6 months before the event..QUICK..grab the bikes ! If we had a correct structure we would have a very good idea who will be representing us in 2016..even 2020.

I will say no more.:)

morana

CtrlAltDelete wrote: »

I dont know why not! lack of foresight maybe???? OBVIOUSLY this has been done but like what I stated in my earlier post..' do what you always do, get what you always got'..

The point I am trying to make is that the current system needs to change. Sure its the same now as its always been.. just because we have representatives at the highest level of the sport right now doesnt mean they got there through any outlined structure from grass root level..I have been in the sport for many years and there are names there that have only recently cropped up and their seniors.. hats off to them but statistics prove that for individuals to develop into world class athletes they need to begin at youth level as developing ones physiological capabilites takes many years.

For sure our current representatives at this level fought,battled and persisted ( all of which is required regardless of what system is in place ) to get where they are and I admire each and every one of them for getting where they have got under the circumstances..My point is ..funding should start at grass root level through the many schools of our nation. Wheres the sense in throwing money at 'podium contenders for London 2012' 6 months before the event..QUICK..grab the bikes ! If we had a correct structure we would have a very good idea who will be representing us in 2016..even 2020.

I will say no more.:)

I suggest you write to Mr Michael Ring in the Dept of Sports and ask him to change the current system.

This year we will fund our own Dev system. We recognise the importance of Dev and hence the reason we put in place the squads and got the best people possible to man them.

again you have to understand how we are funded by central government. A Hp grant based on the achievements plans and likelyhood of success are funded by the ISC,. This funds posts (HPD etc) and events. On the other side we get cor grant funding which is the day to day running of the organisation providing the support for clubs to carry out the activities. Additional funding comes from your licences fee, sponsorship, etc.

We would then budget for a program such as Sprocket Rocket etc. and if we have anything left over we would try augment programs or maybe use the funds to produce educational material.

the funding has been there for years now and you see the fruition of that spending in our para's for example.

We all want success and I believe what we have done last year and this year will put us in good shape going forward.

Fr D Maugire

Casati wrote: »

So if Katie Taylor earns similar money via personal advertising/ endorsement she does, do you think she should lose her grant too? If the grant is there to reward the athlete that has a chance of a medal at worlds or olympics, then why should their personal circumstances be considered? Another thing to remember is that although the tops athletes in any sport might make significant money especially in an olympic year, how many years prior to that did they sacrifice their earning potential by training full time for zero wages?

If Katie Taylor was also receiving a salary that more than sustained her normal life, then yes I would have a problem with it. Relying on advertising/personal endorsements it not quite the same as earning a consistent salary or having a contract over a number of years.

Secondly, the Olympics are the main focus for Katie Taylor, everything she does this year is aimed at winning an Olympic medal. For the cyclists, it is nowhere near the focus, its just another race on their calendar. They will not be doing any significant training geared towards the Olympics that they wouldnt be doing anyway.

The three pro cyclists mentioned have all been professional since they were 20/21 so how many years were they making zero money, even before they turned pro, they competed in France for a club La Pomme who gave them limited financial assistance when they were 19/20. These guys have had to make no major financial sacrifices to get where they are since they were 17/18 and there are loads of people at that age doing what they done without ever making it. Pro cyclists are nowhere in the same league as someone like Katie Taylor who has had to scrimp and scrape to get backing.

I have no problem with funding going to the Para Cyclists or the other cyclists who are not earning a significant salary from the pro side of the sport.

The main question is this, would Martin, Roche, Deignan be out of pocket personally in aiming for the Olympics without these grants? No.

Would all the other cyclists on the list be out of pocket personally without the grants? Absolutely.

I follow pro cycling closely and these guys are my favourite riders but I just find the idea of them getting grants as wasted money better spent on those who will be out of pocket financially in trying to even make the Olympics.