McQuaidversusCookson blog

12 sprocket

Some interesting snippets in here, even the revolution in Ireland gets a mention
http://mcquaidvscookson.wordpress.com/

Chips Lovell

Ummmm, I think that blog is meant to be tongue in cheek???

Inquitus

If he hadn't been hung I'd swear he was writing this blog.

Beasty

Quite amusing reading really - the hypocrisy that blog highlights in McQuaid's behaviour does him absolutely no favours

Of course, unlike McQuaid's "detractors", whoever is behind it has declined to make their identity (ies?) known.

Anyway - keep up the good work whoever you are

Beasty

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Ummmm, I think that blog is meant to be tongue in cheek???

I suspect some misguided McQuaid supporters are behind it, which if true really does add to the enjoyment of its content

Chips Lovell

I honestly don't think it's for real. It's way OTT. They're talking about a "coup d'etat" in Swiss cycling or the "teeny revolution in Ireland".

Beasty

Well I guess if you wanted to help sabotage McQuaid's campaign it would be a good way to go about it, but I do believe his supporters are behind it. I have seen "known" supporters of McQuaid refer/link to it in a way that suggests they believe it helps his cause. I've also seen a member of the McQuaid family thank a link to it on Facebook ...:D

Chips Lovell

Really? Now I'm baffled.

CramCycle

I would have thought it was the Cookson camp pretending to be a member of the McQuaid camp to make them look bad by idiocy, no one could possibly think this paints Pat in a good light.

That or its an OTT p155 take.

doozerie

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Ummmm, I think that blog is meant to be tongue in cheek???

I was reading it a week or two ago and found myself wondering exactly that. I eventually gave up trying to figure out whether it was serious or not.

If it is serious it seems to be incredibly biased in favour of McQuaid, to the extent that I felt like the spittle was flying off the web page right at me as the author(s) vented their spleen(s), and if it is tongue in cheek then it's either done well enough to be convincing or so poorly that it comes across as deranged rather than funny. I couldn't fathom it at all.

morana

"What about the Cycling Ireland nomination revocation? Much has been made and discussed on the issue, with those opposing McQuaid touting this as their proof McQuaid shouldn’t be allowed to run in the UCI presidential election. Not many people are aware that only 32 of Ireland’s 330 clubs supported the call for an EGM. In fact, rumors still persist today that Fuller paid for transportation of those members who would attend and vote against McQuaid."

This is from the blog! Again he is wrong on thi,s we had over 40 clubs who said in principle they would call for an EGM. The process that would need to be followed is the Pres and Sec of the clubs would have to ask for it in writing and also you need 10% of the total vote to have the members call an EGM. These clubs came forward in 24hrs! I reckon we could have got 80 clubs if we let it run for a week.

Lets put an end to this one that Fuller paid for transportation.

Again I proposed that the provinces put on buses to assist people who might not want to drive all to Dublin or maybe couldnt afford too as afaik the provinces have healthy bank balances. Fuller never had anything to do with our campaign. Never. Nor did Kimmage, Marakov, Cookson or Walkovich!!

Typical of the McQuaid side try and muddy the waters sure why let the truth get in the way.

Edit: and if we are being pedantic, he was never nominated by CI as the first meeting was not deemed to be a Board meeting and therefore any decisions taken were null and void.

Beasty

Ah morana - you're letting facts get in the way of a good story again ...

It is interesting though when you are actually in possession of the facts (and I am close enough to this whole process to know a lot of what has gone on) to see how certain people can attempt to twist the message. One thing I am comfortable with is the behaviour of those of us who have actively campaigned against McQuaid's nomination within CI - none of us have anything to be ashamed of nor anything to hide. We went out of our way to ensure everyone knew who we are and could assess for themselves any conflict of interest. The mcquaidvscookson blog remains anonymous making it difficult to assess whether it's genuine or someone deliberately trying to cast a shadow over the McQuaid campaign. The fact that some of his supporters seem to think it actually benefits McQuaid speaks volumes in my mind

Lumen

I love that blog. It's beautifully written; my attempts to identify the author(s) by writing style have failed miserably.

Obviously it's wrong, factually and objectively, but it's wrong in an absurd, extravagant, sexy loser sort of way, like Benito Mussolini.

Eamonnator

I'm very disappointed.
Nobody offered to pay for my transportation to the E.G.M. Is it too late for me to
Send an expenses claim to Fuller?

pelevin

doozerie wrote: »

I was reading it a week or two ago and found myself wondering exactly that. I eventually gave up trying to figure out whether it was serious or not.

If it is serious it seems to be incredibly biased in favour of McQuaid, to the extent that I felt like the spittle was flying off the web page right at me as the author(s) vented their spleen(s), and if it is tongue in cheek then it's either done well enough to be convincing or so poorly that it comes across as deranged rather than funny. I couldn't fathom it at all.

Overall pretty much my reaction. Doesn't manage to be funny imo, even while being so ott biased surely no sane person could think they're reading something even vaguely resembling truth.

Eamonnator

Lumen wrote: »

I love that blog. It's beautifully written; my attempts to identify the author(s) by writing style have failed miserably.

Obviously it's wrong, factually and objectively, but it's wrong in an absurd, extravagant, sexy loser sort of way, like Benito Mussolini.

Or like PMcQ.

doozerie

Lumen wrote: »

I love that blog. It's beautifully written; my attempts to identify the author(s) by writing style have failed miserably.

Obviously it's wrong, factually and objectively, but it's wrong in an absurd, extravagant, sexy loser sort of way, like Benito Mussolini.

In terms of writing style, it strikes me as a mix of the subtlety and tact of this guy:



mixed with the, er, good-natured honesty and common sense of this pairing:



That's honest-to-god Irish sex appeal right there, no wonder some people are clambering for McQuaid to keep his high profile position, his "popularity" is a magnet for the media and gives the sexy fellas pictured above an opportunity to sell this largely ignored aspect of the country. Phwooooaaarrr, wha'!

12 sprocket

Having read the latest edition of the blog i can understand why it seems to upset some of you, have a read about some more on mr fullers record who is obviously a hero to some people. Latest edition here. http://mcquaidvscookson.wordpress.com/

Beasty

It doesn't upset me - I find it amusing in places

But tell me 12 sprocket, do you genuinely believe that whoever is behind it do actually support McQuaid? (I do btw, but you will see there is some scepticism on this point)

12 sprocket

Beasty wrote: »

It doesn't upset me - I find it amusing in places

But tell me 12 sprocket, do you genuinely believe that whoever is behind it do actually support McQuaid? (I do btw, but you will see there is some scepticism on this point)

I havent a clue who writes it, but some of that stuff about fuller is shocking and already on the record on government websites and reputable newspapers. So that seems to be fact rather than opinion, which is very worrying in the context of him getting involved with campaigns against any organisation or person.

Lumen

12 sprocket wrote: »

I havent a clue who writes it, but some of that stuff about fuller is shocking and already on the record on government websites and reputable newspapers. So that seems to be fact rather than opinion, which is very worrying in the context of him getting involved with campaigns against any organisation or person.

FUD. Smells like desperation.

Beasty

But Fuller's not standing for the position of UCI President

12 sprocket

Beasty wrote: »

But Fuller's not standing for the position of UCI President

So your happy with somone with his history to be influencing an election? That a very different level of standards that you seem to demaind from others. So is it high ethics all round or just whoever you feel should maintain high standards?

pelevin

12 sprocket wrote: »

mr fuller who is obviously a hero to some people. Latest edition here. http://mcquaidvscookson.wordpress.com/[/QUOTE]

Mr Fuller is obviously a hero to who? Since it is so obvious that he is some people's hero, it should be easy for you to furnish proofs of this. Tobh I don't think many give a monkey's about Fuller. The almost universal dislike of McQuaid is all to do with McQuaid. It really has nothing whatsoever to do with Jamie Fuller, Brian Cookson or the Man in the Moon.

Beasty

12 sprocket wrote: »

So your happy with somone with his history to be influencing an election? That a very different level of standards that you seem to demaind from others. So is it high ethics all round or just whoever you feel should maintain high standards?

McQuaid should not be in the election - simple as that

12 sprocket

Beasty wrote: »

McQuaid should not be in the election - simple as that

Ah beasty, i thought you would do better than that. Thats a good ostrich imitation, what about jamie?

Beasty

12 sprocket wrote: »

Ah beasty, i thought you would do better than that. Thats a good ostrich imitation, what about jamie?

Don't know him, never met him, never spoken to him - in fact the only communication I've ever had with him was he responded to one of my tweets to other day.

Fuller is simply not the issue. What he does, what he's done and what he's going to do does not bother me. I buy his gear and I'm aware of his stance on this issue, but that's as far as it goes

McQuaid on the other hand has been shown the door by his federation precisely because of his record in his current role. He's proceeded to try and get the rules changed retrospectively to suit him and only him as he knows damn well he has no valid nomination without such a rule change. He has consistently shown he is unfit for the role as President of the UCI and continues to employ every devious tactic in his armoury in a desperate attempt to cling onto power

This is primarily about McQuaid. It's also about Cookson, but it's certainly not about Fuller (or Beasty, or morana, or Robfowl, or 12 sprocket etc.)

pelevin

Tobh it's a self-irritating and total waste of time to attempt to engage with someone who uses phrases like "the Paddies doing the spadework for the Brits again." And to link without irony or shame to such a site that, if not a parody of some strange sort, hasn't the honesty to declare itself to be the rabidly pro-McQuaid site it is, but instead actually tries to pass itself off as some kind of neutral observer of the UCI Presidency shake-up . . .

Though I suppose there is a kind of beauty in that site in that it almost perfectly encapsulates and distils the ethos and dignity of McQuaid through this whole extended affair - the human soul trawling through muck searching for advantage.

ragazzo

pelevin wrote: »

Tobh it's a self-irritating and total waste of time to attempt to engage with someone who uses phrases like "the Paddies doing the spadework for the Brits again." And to link without irony or shame to such a site that, if not a parody of some strange sort, hasn't the honesty to declare itself to be the rabidly pro-McQuaid site it is, but instead actually tries to pass itself off as some kind of neutral observer of the UCI Presidency shake-up . . .

Though I suppose there is a kind of beauty in that site in that it almost perfectly encapsulates and distils the ethos and dignity of McQuaid through this whole extended affair - the human soul trawling through muck searching for advantage.

Thread becoming a bit boring and repetitive at this stage.
Probably time for some of you to find a new hobby or at least a new topic to discuss.

Beasty

ragazzo wrote: »

Thread becoming a bit boring and repetitive at this stage.
Probably time for some of you to find a new hobby or at least a new topic to discuss.

The thread was started by someone who clearly supports McQuaid's campaign to be re-elected. It's perfectly reasonable for posters to challenge some of the points raised by that poster or in the blog to which he regularly links (in an apparent attempt to support their position)

If you want to discuss something else, please feel free to start a new thread - some of us may well chip-in if you can make it interesting enough

buffalo

Lumen wrote: »

FUD. Smells like desperation.

On the button. FUD was exactly the term of which I thought upon reading:

morana wrote: »

"What about the Cycling Ireland nomination revocation? Much has been made and discussed on the issue, with those opposing McQuaid touting this as their proof McQuaid shouldn’t be allowed to run in the UCI presidential election. Not many people are aware that only 32 of Ireland’s 330 clubs supported the call for an EGM. In fact, rumors still persist today that Fuller paid for transportation of those members who would attend and vote against McQuaid."

Rumours still persist today? Or, "I heard someone once say something, and so I'll repeat it, despite knowing the facts to the contrary, but I'll say it's just a rumour, and therefore nobody can say I'm incorrect."

FUD.

niceonetom

I don't know whether that blog is written by a genuine McQuaid supporter or by some satirist intending to lampoon McQuaid's supporters.

Increasingly that's also the way I feel about 12sprocket too.

Leroy42

Having read some of the blog I find it ironic that many of the points made about Fuller can in one way or another be laid directly at PmQ.

They go on about secrecy, and lack of transparency about the money. PMQ refuses to even tell the other board members what he is paid. It goes on about Fulelr using whatever means, even bending the truth, to get his aim. Pot, kettle, black.

12Sprocket, you posted this up, do you not see the irony involved?

Dermot Illogical

niceonetom wrote: »

I don't know whether that blog is written by a genuine McQuaid supporter or by some satirist intending to lampoon McQuaid's supporters.

I would be amazed if it was the output of anyone other than a paid McQuaid publicist.
Anything else would be just creepy, as well as hilarious (which it obviously is in any event).

12 sprocket

Jamie is at it again!.. does anyone know is he even a member of a cycling club?

http://mcquaidvscookson.wordpress.com/

morana

12 sprocket wrote: »

Jamie is at it again!.. does anyone know is he even a member of a cycling club?

http://mcquaidvscookson.wordpress.com/

Is pat?

How ironic his club had no vote at the EGM. shambolic..put that in your blog

buffalo

Speaking of Jaimie Fuller, short piece today from Ger Gilroy, though nothing new: http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/off-the-ball-looks-like-wheels-have-fallen-off-mcquaids-bid-29532369.html

He's been an activist on the drugs front ever since he realised that he'd bought the hype pedalled his way

Nice to see someone misuse the other 'pedal' for once. :P

Leroy42

12Sprocket. You seem to miss the significant difference between Fuller and PmQ. Fuller is the CEO of a business, his sole aim and job is to make the best possible return on investment. He is looking for profit, pure and simple.

The president of the UCI has a very different role, that of promoting and protecting cycling at all level and across all disciplines around the world. He is not there to make profit, but to continue to advocate and promote, and to increase the ability of cycling to grow not only during his term but also with a view to the long term.

Fuller ca basically say what he likes, and people can either buy his products or not. As a cyclist, I am forced to suffer the consequences of PmQ decisions and non-actions.

It is a very different position, and why the blog thinks that attacking fuller is in any way a help to PmQ is beyond me. Fuller is not running for president.

Junior

@12 sprocket - How does it sit with you as a McQuaid supporter to have Aaron Brown working for ye ? You know the guy who emptied the Kimmage fund, who's wanted for tax evasion, and non payment of child support by Canadian authorities.

happytramp

Junior wrote: »

@12 sprocket - How does it sit with you as a McQuaid supporter to have Aaron Brown working for ye ?

Sorry, What? Aaron Brown is working for McQuaid? How?

12 sprocket

Leroy42 wrote: »

12Sprocket. You seem to miss the significant difference between Fuller and PmQ. Fuller is the CEO of a business, his sole aim and job is to make the best possible return on investment. He is looking for profit, pure and simple.

The president of the UCI has a very different role, that of promoting and protecting cycling at all level and across all disciplines around the world. He is not there to make profit, but to continue to advocate and promote, and to increase the ability of cycling to grow not only during his term but also with a view to the long term.

Fuller ca basically say what he likes, and people can either buy his products or not. As a cyclist, I am forced to suffer the consequences of PmQ decisions and non-actions.

It is a very different position, and why the blog thinks that attacking fuller is in any way a help to PmQ is beyond me. Fuller is not running for president.

So if fulleris just for profit, which is perfectly ok as a business person running a business. Are you not concerned as to his motives and methods in this election issue, is cycling being used to promote the business?

Lumen

PAT TO 12 SPROCKET.
CHIN UP, ALL NOT LOST.
DON'T LET BEGRUDGERS GET YOU DOWN.
KEEP IT ABOUT FULLER.
LOVE YOU LONG TIME.
MESSAGE ENDS.

oflahero

It's an overused cliché I know, but quite honestly you could not invent this kind of entertainment.

12 sprocket

Lumen wrote: »

PAT TO 12 SPROCKET.
CHIN UP, ALL NOT LOST.
DON'T LET BEGRUDGERS GET YOU DOWN.
KEEP IT ABOUT FULLER.
LOVE YOU LONG TIME.
MESSAGE ENDS.

lumen your a gas man, I love your second line about begrudgers, Brendan would be proud of you but he would have used stronger language..

Why do a lot of people seem to get upset if anything is posted about Jamie?

Leroy42

12 sprocket wrote: »

So if fulleris just for profit, which is perfectly ok as a business person running a business. Are you not concerned as to his motives and methods in this election issue, is cycling being used to promote the business?

Not worried about his motives at all, I know his motives (or at least part of them) is to sell more product. He does say that only a very small portion of their revenue is derived from cycling, although it would help if they got the UCI to sanction their products. Is that part of the reason? probably.

However, he is a businessman, that's his job. Just like a sponsor gets involved not because they want to spread the gospel of cycling but because they want to make a return on the investment.

However, he has made pretty stringent arguements against PmQ and the need for change. Instead of attacking the man and his motives, attack the arguement. Either he has a point, and should then be listened to regardless of his motive, or he doesn't, in which case simply give the counter arguement.

What I am more worried about is the motives behind PmQ openly trying to cut off the Tygart investigatino, openly trying to silence Kimmage, openly calling Hamilton and Landis scumbags. I am worried about his constant lack of transparency with regard to LA, his dope tests and the money the UCI accepted from him. I am worried about a man who seems to think we should accept that the president is quite prepared to 'bend' the rules of the nomination process when things don't go his way.

Fuller is a business man out to make a profit, what is PmQ's motive?

mcgratheoin

12 sprocket wrote: »

is cycling being used to promote the business?

Absolutely cycling is being used to promote the business - what's wrong with that?

Fuller says that McQuaid's tenure as head of the UCI was bad for cycling which was bad for his business. The rest of us are free to agree or disagree with him as we please, it's no different to individual federations supporting candidates because of what's in it for them. The UK get influence at the top table from Cookson, Malaysia get the tour of Langkawi ranked on the same level as the tour of California, Ireland decided that the benefits that may accrue to Ireland from having an Irish head were not sufficiently greater than the damage that the sport has suffered during his tenure.


I don't understand the gross over-simplification of arguments here to be honest. Every interest group will have a preferred candidate, why are you letting that inform your decision? Most people are perfectly capable of taking a nuanced approach and making an educated decision on who they want to vote for - it's done all the time in elections. On one level you get a tax evading politician like Michael Lowry elected for what he can do locally, on another level you get Michael D elected for his overall performance for the country.

Dermot Illogical

Am a bit confused. Do I go to the McQuaidversusfuller blog if I want to get "the true dope" on Cookson?

Lusk_Doyle

RobFowl

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Am a bit confused. Do I go to the McQuaidversusfuller blog if I want to get "the true dope" on Cookson?

If you want a jaundiced slant full of factual inaccuracies and ignoring basic facts then it's for you....

Chips Lovell

12 sprocket wrote: »

Why do a lot of people seem to get upset if anything is posted about Jamie?

We're all on his payroll. Every single one of us.

Beasty

I don't get upset at all - in fact whenever I see this thread bumped for another blog entry I have a little chuckle

It's absolutely staggering to think that McQuaid and his supporters possibly believe that blog may be of benefit to him. Another indication of poor judgement if it is the case