McQuaid nominated unanimously by Switzerland (read warning post #78)

pelevin

12 sprocket wrote: »

So do I take it Irish Peleton that the ethics of some of the people leading the charge against Mc Quaid and the UCI doesnt concern you? Would you or your fellow signatories not have some concerns that your campaign is being used by people that might have other agendas.

Have you given up on the idea of McQuaid's intergrity, and instead are pinning your hopes on people like Jamie Fuller not being Daz white? Not that anyone will be voting for Jamie Fuller presumably. Or is your point that people shouldn't vote for Jamie Fuller if he does go forward?
Not that of course the behaviour of Jamie Fuller or anyone else makes the UCI and Pat McQuaid's behaviour any more palatable.
Maybe it is a bit like politics where disgust with the shower that are in leads people to wish desperately and naively that who will come in will be better/ more idealistic, but then again without hope where would we be? To be stuck with the creeps in office without hope of accountability tends to be too much for the human spirit to bear.

Beasty

12 sprocket wrote: »

Beasty
maybe one of the others should be that paragon of virtue and ethic Jamie, theres a report below from ACCA about ethics

Neither Jaimie Fuller nor any of the “Famous Five” are seeking to run as the head of a global sports authority. I guess you are desperately trying to find any evidence that can be used against any member of the “anti-McQuaid Brigade”. However I would suggest you are probably better off not going down the "hypocrisy" route as Pat is a Master in this particular field. He can teach us all lessons on this. Indeed very recent examples include

• the setting up of the independent enquiry only to disband it as soon asit dared to suggest it might actually act independently

• His recent letter to the national federations

  the UCI will always be a democracy while I am in office

  – he then goes behind his own federation’s back in an attempt to get a nomination and avoid the democratic process he started when asking for a nomination from CI

• In the same letter he highlight a donations to the UEC and yet continues to “defend”the Armstrong donations

That letter was seriously misjudged in my opinion and does nothing to dispel a general perception that McQuaid will resort to any dirty tactics he can to try and get re-elected

This guy is prepared to get the UCI to issue what are in effect private electioneering press releases

How can we possibly entrust the future of the sport in the hands of a guy who consistently displays such an appalling lack of judgement?

MrCreosote

There should be two separate but linked aims:

1: Get rid of Pat McQuaid
2: Elect a successor that is better than him

Obviously aim 2 is impossible without the first, but personally I'd be happy to see only the first one being achieved.

ROK ON

12sprocket
You are playing the man all of the time no the ball.
This is simple beyond belief.
Many CI members are of the opinion that McQuaid is undeserving of another attempt as head of the UCI.
I have not heard ANY argument WHATSOEVER supporting McQuaid. Nor have to points made against McQuaid been refuted by his supporters.

Jamie Fuller, Cookson, the Ruskies are an irrelevance in this debate at the present. You really need to sh1t or get off the pot.

Tbh I think the mods that are involved should pass this over to an unbiased mod because where I am sitting 12Sprocket is trolling.

Make an argument or p1ss off.

Captain Havoc

My time is tight, can you please report specific posts of trolling?

Beasty

Holy Sh!t!!!

Walkiewicz claims McQuaid offered Makarov a UCI position in return for support in the UCI elections

Surely McQuaid must (be forced to) resign if there is any truth in this?

morana

Beasty wrote: »

Holy Sh!t!!!

Walkiewicz claims McQuaid offered Makarov a UCI position in return for support in the UCI elections

Surely McQuaid must (be forced to) resign if there is any truth in this?

I suppose it gives those who dont want a russian in a bit of an issue.

why do you think he would step down after this?

Beasty

morana wrote: »

I suppose it gives those who dont want a russian in a bit of an issue.

why do you think he would step down after this?

Offering secret deals to people in return for support - totally unethical

EDIT - clearly these are only allegations at this stage - I presume the UCI has some kind of ethics committee that would determine one way or other and any sanctions to take should the allegations be upheld. However it's without doubt a resigning matter in my books if it is true

morana

Beasty wrote: »

Offering secret deals to people in return for support - totally unethical

EDIT - clearly these are only allegations at this stage - I presume the UCI has some kind of ethics committee that would determine one way or other and any sanctions to take should the allegations be upheld. However it's without doubt a resigning matter in my books if it is true

are these the same individuals that have agendas and are using you and I?
I just cant keep up!

High Nellie

Beasty wrote: »

Holy Sh!t!!!

Walkiewicz claims McQuaid offered Makarov a UCI position in return for support in the UCI elections

Surely McQuaid must (be forced to) resign if there is any truth in this?

Horror, Horror - offering jobs in return for support! Unbelievable! Like, no Taoiseach-elect ever promised Cabinet jobs in return for support??
How do you think politics works? Are you really naive or just being disingenuous.

Beasty

High Nellie wrote: »

Horror, Horror - offering jobs in return for support! Unbelievable! Like, no Taoiseach-elect ever promised Cabinet jobs in return for support??
How do you think politics works? Are you really naive or just being disingenuous.

Call me naïve if you wish - if it is the way McQuaid operates (and as I've already indicated these are simply allegations at this stage) he should be thrown out of the job - this is a major sports organisation we are talking about here and I would be staggered if the UCI allows jobs to be handed out by the President without the agreement of others in the organisation. Basically it's all about transparency - political "jobs" are pretty openly negotiated - do you really believe a Taoiseach-elect would offer such jobs without the agreement of others in his party?

pprendeville

Agree with Beasty - jobs in an organisation like The UCI should be given on merit and done as a group, not by one man deciding. More anti-democracy here.

RobFowl

morana wrote: »

are these the same individuals that have agendas and are using you and I?
I just cant keep up!

Are you 2 not just political activists?

dave2pvd

Beasty wrote: »

I presume the UCI has some kind of ethics committee that would determine one way or other and any sanctions to take should the allegations be upheld.

Now you're the one trolling Beasty!

tfrancer

Beasty wrote: »

Call me naïve if you wish - if it is the way McQuaid operates (and as I've already indicated these are simply allegations at this stage) he should be thrown out of the job - this is a major sports organisation we are talking about here and I would be staggered if the UCI allows jobs to be handed out by the President without the agreement of others in the organisation. Basically it's all about transparency - political "jobs" are pretty openly negotiated - do you really believe a Taoiseach-elect would offer such jobs without the agreement of others in his party?

Yes, you are naive if you expect people in the upper echelons of international sports bodies to behave like Mother Teresa!

smacl

tfrancer wrote: »

Yes, you are naive if you expect people in the upper echelons of international sports bodies to behave like Mother Teresa!

World of difference between how you expect somebody to behave and how you suspect they actually do behave. Where people fail to meet minimum standards expected of them in a professional capacity the normal course of action is to fire them. (Or if they're politicians, drag them onto Prime time and let people slag them off for half an hour).

Beasty

So what's your club doing? Have they consulted with their membership and decided which way they are going to vote? Have they filled their delegate slots? Remember last time when so many people regretted not having done more before that initial CI "meeting" that endorsed McQuaid? This really is the final chance for the CI membership to have its say on the matter.

I know a number of clubs are meeting this week and I also aware that some people think that this is now in the hands of the Swiss Federation. Nothing can be further from the truth. The decision that CI will take is going to be absolutely critical in determining the direction that cycling will take over the next few years

The meeting is this Saturday at 11am at the Red Cow Moran Hotel, Naas Road, Dublin 22 - offer to take up any available delegate slots if you really care about this issue and can spare the time to come along. The more people that turn up and vote (whichever way) the more notice the rest of the Cycling World will take of the decision taken.

RobFowl

Beasty wrote: »

The more people that turn up and vote (whichever way) the more notice the rest of the Cycling World will take of the decision taken.

This really is the point. It's not an issue you can really be neutral on. Support him or oppose, not showing up simply says you can't be bothered......

buffalo

Beasty wrote: »

I know a number of clubs are meeting this week and I also aware that some people think that this is now in the hands of the Swiss Federation. Nothing can be further from the truth.

Just to re-emphasise this:

PRESS RELEASE



LEGAL ACTION HAS BEEN NOW FILED TO STOP THE SWISS ENDORSEMENT OF THE UCI PRESIDENT

11 June 2013



A legal claim has now been filed requesting an arbitration proceeding to challenge the Swiss Cycling Federation endorsement of Pat McQuaid to seek re-election, as President of the UCI. Mr Kurt Buergi has informed SKINS that Mr Mattia Galli, a former member of the Swiss Cycling Board, and Mr. Patrick Calcagni, a former professional rider, will join with him as co-claimants in the action.

In the arbitration papers, Mr Buergi has appointed an arbitrator and according to the Swiss Cycling Arbitration Rules, Swiss Cycling will now have to appoint an arbitrator, with the two arbitrators jointly appointing a President of the arbitration. Once constituted, the arbitral tribunal will receive written submissions and conduct a hearing of the claims made. Mr. Buergi has indicated that all of the Swiss Cycling Board members and Pat McQuaid have been named as witnesses for the hearing in an attempt to clarify the authenticity of the endorsement and what reasons were communicated by the Board to decide to present Mr. McQuaid as its candidate for the position of President of the UCI.

SKINS Chairman, Jaimie Fuller, said “It is time for Pat McQuaid and Richard Chassot to be accountable in a legal proceeding for their actions and dealings. The witnesses will be interrogated and required to tell the truth. Each will be made aware that under Swiss law there are severe criminal sanctions for providing false testimony.”

Mr. Buergi claims that the endorsement of Mr McQuaid by Swiss Cycling was irregular for two main reasons. Firstly, that Mr McQuaid cannot be a member of two National Federations for the purposes of seeking the endorsement of both organisations and secondly, that Swiss Cycling did not properly act as a Board to support the endorsement. Further, it is likely that Mr. Buergi will submit that Swiss Cycling’s purported decision to present Mr. McQuaid is invalid both formally and substantially, in light of the obvious conflict of interests existing between Mr. McQuaid and members of the Swiss Cycling Board including the relationship between Mr. McQuaid, Mr. Chassot and the Tour de Romandie.

Mr Kurt Buergi said, “The arbitration will seek the truth in this matter. Once the arbitration is in motion, the procedure is confidential but I am hoping that a decision will be handed down before the UCI Congress in September. If the decision is not finalised prior to the Congress and Pat McQuaid is elected as President for a further 4 year term, that Presidency will be under serious doubt and will have to be annulled when we are successful in the action.”

- ENDS -

nilhg

Beasty wrote: »

So what's your club doing? Have they consulted with their membership and decided which way they are going to vote? Have they filled their delegate slots? Remember last time when so many people regretted not having done more before that initial CI "meeting" that endorsed McQuaid? This really is the final chance for the CI membership to have its say on the matter.

Looks like I'll be there, and hopefully I'll have another from our club with me.

Because of the WW200 I missed going out with the club last weekend I wasn't talking directly to the lads but based on what I'm told there's not much support for PMcQ among our members.

Beasty

Further notice confirming voting arrangements here

If you're turning up to vote or observe, don't forget your current CI membership card...

Inquitus

gooner wrote: »

Cookson on RTE radio today. While he said he doesn't want to get into a slagging match with McQuaid he did find his comments in the letter and e-mail patronising. Lemond comes on afterwards and gives his views on it all.

Starts 17 mins in.

http://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A3546375%3A0%3A%3A

Cookson on rte radio lifted from cyclingnews forum

Casati

Beasty wrote: »

Further notice confirming voting arrangements here

If you're turning up to vote or observe, don't forget your current CI membership card...

I notice that provinces have a vote, does anybody know if they have reached out to their clubs to gauge opinion- I dont remember seeing anything from Leinster

RobFowl

Casati wrote: »

I notice that provinces have a vote, does anybody know if they have reached out to their clubs to gauge opinion- I dont remember seeing anything from Leinster

Didn't hear a dickie bird from any of them

Super Freak

Beasty wrote: »

So what's your club doing? Have they consulted with their membership and decided which way they are going to vote? Have they filled their delegate slots?

As quoted already on this thread Laois cycling and touring club have voted with a resounding 16-0 against the motion.

I'll be doing my bit and will represent our club with another delegate on Saturday. With lunch afterwards in the poitin still

Any idea how long the meeting will go on for?

thebionicdude

Casati wrote: »

I notice that provinces have a vote, does anybody know if they have reached out to their clubs to gauge opinion- I dont remember seeing anything from Leinster

I was talking to a person on the Leinster Committee, they met a couple of weeks ago to discuss and vote on the matter. The person didn't disclose what way Leinster would be voting (of course, I asked).

Murph100

MOD VOICE: Unproven accusations will be treated harshly, unless you have proof, then don't say it, it is against the rules of the forum and the site.

Anyone else does it and they will be stopped from posting on this issue.

Any issues PM me

CramCycle

Inquitus

Quoting deleted post

Murph100

Its pretty much standard in Irish politics, so no surprise that it might happen in this scenario ... and it might also be from both sides !

Just reinforces the importance of getting your asses in there and voting.

RobFowl

Quoting deleted post