Is it time for Pat to go?

Beasty · 24-10-2012 03:43PM

Eamonnator wrote: »

A couple of questions.
1) Is it only Cycling Ireland, who can nominate Pat McQuaid for President?
2) Who instructs C.I. on whom to nominate?
3) If a motion at C.I. AGM is in favour of not nominating Pat for President, would this motion be binding on C.I. reps at the U.C.I. AGM, which elects President?

Thanks in adveance.

From Article 51. 1. of the UCI Constitution:

The candidates for the presidency shall be nominated by the federation of the candidate.

I don't think anyone "instructs" CI who to nominate, but if the membership express their dissatisfaction with McQuaid as President it would be very difficult for the Board to ignore the wishes of it's membership

Lusk Doyle · 24-10-2012 04:25PM

http://m.rte.ie/sport/touch/cycling/2012/1024/342902-uci-go-on-the-offensive-against-usada/

What a sap. Give the evidence to an independent body! That would be a judge, right? Didn't a certain Lance Armstrong say no to that option?

Really Pat? Seriously? You must be on something yourself to come out with crap like that.

Go straight to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect €200.

Lumen · 24-10-2012 04:41PM

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

What a sap

Rather than analysing the news coverage it might be an idea to read the actual document.

Pat seems to have conceded all points, albeit with a great deal of moaning.

Lusk Doyle · 24-10-2012 05:29PM

I don't have the time to read it. Just give me the gist of it.

Oh, maybe that's what pat said.

My point was intended to point out the pointlessness of the statement when they agreed with the usada findings.

el tel · 24-10-2012 05:42PM

Say Pat was to 'go' (go where I wonder, maybe a town called Fukyasilf?) is there a likely replacement CI nominee waiting in the wings?

Would the CI nomination normally go to the CI president, or could be any CI member, or other?

Is having had Pat as UCI chief been of any specific benefit to CI?
Could he have an ace in the hole whereby he's got CI by the bollocks on some other front?

Too many questions!! I will hold off renewing my membership pending the outcome! We need to have faith in our national body to do the right thing.

morana · 24-10-2012 05:58PM

el tel wrote: »

Say Pat was to 'go' (go where I wonder, maybe a town called Fukyasilf?) is there a likely replacement CI nominee waiting in the wings?

Would the CI nomination normally go to the CI president, or could be any CI member, or other?

Is having had Pat as UCI chief been of any specific benefit to CI?
Could he have an ace in the hole whereby he's got CI by the bollocks on some other front?

Too many questions!! I will hold off renewing my membership pending the outcome! We need to have faith in our national body to do the right thing.

Nobody has CI by the bollocks!

Lusk Doyle · 24-10-2012 06:06PM

morana wrote: »

Nobody has CI by the bollocks!

Except your respective missuses!

AngeGal · 24-10-2012 06:56PM

sled driver wrote: »

Hara kiri is based on an honour code, a set of rules or ethical principles that define honourable behaviour, carried out to maintain personal integrity. Alot of words I would not associate with them at present.

Thanks. I thought it meant being so stupid/stubborn as to cause the death of yourself without meanng to do so, learn something new every day!

el tel · 24-10-2012 07:47PM

Has it been required that Pat was nominated by CI every year through his tenure at the UCI? Just wondering how he's managed to stay at the top for so long.

noddy69 · 24-10-2012 08:11PM

How he can stand and face the press and say what he does is beyond me. Along with V he makes the UCI look like a pack of jokers to the cycling world. To actually say Lance has no place in cycling...on the back of a USADA case that he did everything he could to obstruct, then took his time looking for faults is ridiculous. You would swear he actually did something. The taking no responsibility for any of it, passing the book to the cyclists. It is not professional nor what is needed in cycling.

What I get from Pat's time is.

The UCI are not responsible for what happened, thats all the bad cyclists dont ye know.
The Uci are not responsible for catching them, thats the tests dont ye know.

What the f are the UCI responsible for and what is Pat getting paid for. Get rid now.

el tel · 24-10-2012 08:28PM

noddy69 wrote: »

What the f are the UCI responsible for and what is Pat getting paid for. Get rid now.

Saddle position, minimum weight limits and aeroness of cross-sections.

morana · 24-10-2012 10:10PM

el tel wrote: »

Has it been required that Pat was nominated by CI every year through his tenure at the UCI? Just wondering how he's managed to stay at the top for so long.

No its a 7 year term I think

Casati · 24-10-2012 10:33PM

morana wrote: »

No its a 7 year term I think

Morana Do you know if its even possible for the motion as referenced in the SBP to be accepted from the floor on the day of the AGM?

morana · 24-10-2012 10:36PM

Casati wrote: »

Morana Do you know if its even possible for the motion as referenced in the SBP to be accepted from the floor on the day of the AGM?

I would rather let the proposer answer that.

Casati · 24-10-2012 10:44PM

morana wrote: »

I would rather let the proposer answer that.

Ok, well to put it another way, if any club delegate at the AGM, puts forward such a proposal to the floor at the AGM, would the chairman allow it to be heard or do the rules of the AGM permit this?

morana · 24-10-2012 11:15PM

Casati wrote: »

Ok, well to put it another way, if any club delegate at the AGM, puts forward such a proposal to the floor at the AGM, would the chairman allow it to be heard or do the rules of the AGM permit this?

I think it would fall outside of the standing orders of the AGM! a discussion could be held.

If people wanted to specifically put a motion which would direct the board of CI going forward there is provision for this in the Tech Regs. This is namely the calling of an EGM.

RobFowl · 24-10-2012 11:24PM

Casati wrote: »

Ok, well to put it another way, if any club delegate at the AGM, puts forward such a proposal to the floor at the AGM, would the chairman allow it to be heard or do the rules of the AGM permit this?

The answer is here grasshopper, just need to know the question

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/248ab4f5-4ec7-4fc2-9a80-8d4491f55307/Arts-and-Memos.aspx

Casati · 24-10-2012 11:48PM

morana wrote: »

I think it would fall outside of the standing orders of the AGM! a discussion could be held.

If people wanted to specifically put a motion which would direct the board of CI going forward there is provision for this in the Tech Regs. This is namely the calling of an EGM.

Thanks for confirming.

Looks like Pat won't lose too much sleep over the CI AGM, even if such a motion was allowed I can't see it been voted on by the average member attending

Beasty · 24-10-2012 11:53PM

Casati wrote: »

Thanks for confirming.

Looks like Pat won't lose too much sleep over the CI AGM, even if such a motion was allowed I can't see it been voted on by the average member attending

I suspect most of those who make the effort to attend (which involves being formally nominated as delegates by their respective clubs) will be reasonably au fait with the current situation cycling finds itself in

ktz84 · 25-10-2012 05:56AM

lemond's post

Pat's verbal diahorrea is about to need a slurry tank :-)

Interesting how he thinks the money should be used however that's not really an option as it could be seen as fraud but I do like the idea.

Dermot Illogical · 25-10-2012 09:45AM

ktz84 wrote: »

lemond's post

Wow! That's seriously raising the stakes.

mcgratheoin · 25-10-2012 09:54AM

ktz84 wrote: »

lemond's post

"I have a file with what I believe is well-documented proof that will exonerate Paul."

Yesss!!

petethedrummer · 25-10-2012 09:56AM

The Velocast lads having a good go at everyone...

http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race-radio/2012/10/24/all-change-at-the-top.html

mcgratheoin · 25-10-2012 10:03AM

Good summary of the court case against Kimmage here

Apologies if it's already been posted

Quigs Snr · 25-10-2012 10:57AM

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Good summary of the court case against Kimmage here

Apologies if it's already been posted

Not only is mcquaid swimming against the tide of public opinion, he is going after the little guy in what is little more than a cheap pr stunt. That makes him a coward and a bully. It also lends credence to his many detractors claims. From a non cycling perspective, anyone can see this is stupidity of truly staggering proportions.

Earlier in a previous thread I was of the opinion that mcquaid should be given the benefit of the doubt and verbruggen the boot. I take it back. I love cycling. It's being dragged through the dirt. Mcquaid is making a bad situation worse (along with the "shocked" pro's - any pro who says they are shocked is basically admitting doping in the court of public opinion - and that particular court is the one the sponsors are interested in as recent events show). The weasley uci press releases are embarrassing especially for those of us who work in that field and those of us with brains who can see what is really being said. Donation made to kimmages defense fund. I suggest others follow suit. It may not be much but it's the only material way I can think of making a difference apart from wasting time venting on a internet forum.

petethedrummer · 25-10-2012 12:10PM

<sarcasm>He may be an inept president of the UCI but he's OUR inept president of the UCI.</sarcasm>

Leroy42 · 25-10-2012 12:25PM

This whole 'it’s not on the agenda' business drives me mad, and I believe it is a reason why most people don't bother with the AGM. It is a predetermined agenda, with no ability to take account of anything that isn't already part of the agenda.

CI needs to wake up. The tide has turned against Pat, against the UCI. Everyone can see that terrible as LA has been, it is the very organisation charged with running our sport that is damaging it. If CI don't make a stand on this issue it sends out the signal that CI are perfectly happy with how things are being run.

Simply claiming that it wasn't on the agenda is a cop out. This is the biggest news story around; it is certainly the biggest news story in our world, so CI should take a stand on the issue. While it may not achieve anything (I don't know the implications of such an action) but it would at least put CI on the right side morally.

Sometimes all it needs for evil to prosper is good men to do nothing (or something along those lines) and this is a chance to do something. Lemonds call for not renewing licence for a year is a great idea. If CI don’t stand up then I think it is beholden to all of us to take a stand. Yes it will hurt, yes it will probably have more impact in Ireland than UCI, but something needs to be done. Why don't CI disassociate from the UCI, nothing to stop them still running cycling in Ireland.

One thing is certain, the UCI and procycling will continue on as before if everybody just continues on as normal. I for one am fed up with friends/family/co-workers etc feeling they have the right to ridicule me and the sport I partake in because of the actions and inactions of others. Is there any wonder that car drivers etc gives us so little respect when apparently we don't even respect our own sport.

buffalo · 25-10-2012 12:30PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

This whole 'it’s not on the agenda' business drives me mad, and I believe it is a reason why most people don't bother with the AGM. It is a predetermined agenda, with no ability to take account of anything that isn't already part of the agenda.

CI needs to wake up. The tide has turned against Pat, against the UCI. Everyone can see that terrible as LA has been, it is the very organisation charged with running our sport that is damaging it. If CI don't make a stand on this issue it sends out the signal that CI are perfectly happy with how things are being run.

Simply claiming that it wasn't on the agenda is a cop out. This is the biggest news story around; it is certainly the biggest news story in our world, so CI should take a stand on the issue. While it may not achieve anything (I don't know the implications of such an action) but it would at least put CI on the right side morally.

Sometimes all it needs for evil to prosper is good men to do nothing (or something along those lines) and this is a chance to do something. Lemonds call for not renewing licence for a year is a great idea. If CI don’t stand up then I think it is beholden to all of us to take a stand. Yes it will hurt, yes it will probably have more impact in Ireland than UCI, but something needs to be done. Why don't CI disassociate from the UCI, nothing to stop them still running cycling in Ireland.

One thing is certain, the UCI and procycling will continue on as before if everybody just continues on as normal. I for one am fed up with friends/family/co-workers etc feeling they have the right to ridicule me and the sport I partake in because of the actions and inactions of others. Is there any wonder that car drivers etc gives us so little respect when apparently we don't even respect our own sport.

So you'll be raising this in 'any other business' at the AGM, right? You've got my vote!

mcgratheoin · 25-10-2012 01:00PM

It's all kicking off now...

witty username · 25-10-2012 01:15PM

Dear god, what is it about that family? They can't stop themselves from going full retard on a regular basis.

Is it time for Pat to go?

Comments