Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

Is it time for Pat to go?

1…45679

Comments

  • #242
    hardCopy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    Trojan wrote: »

    Will there be an EGM?

    Anyone?


  • #243
    RobFowl
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 11,672 Mod ✭✭✭✭RobFowl


    hardCopy wrote: »
    Anyone?

    Board did not comment one way or the other.
    Other options being explored but awaiting legal advice.


  • #244
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 78,484 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Wow - the "no" vote has just increased by 12.5% and now stands at 9....

    Based on what I witnessed today I do not believe CI will nominate Pat McQuaid for re-election without calling an EGM. The one thing that has worked in his favour ahead of the AGM was backing down on the absurd case that he was proposing to take against Kimmage.


  • #245
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,133 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    So was there an actual vote on whether an EGM should be held on the matter? @Beasty my reading of your last comment is that it is up to the board to decide.


  • #246
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 78,484 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    The Board can call an EGM should they wish. They have the power to nominate Pat McQuaid for re-election (assuming he requests their nomination) without an EGM. However I believe it was clear from the general feeling at the AGM that they cannot be assured that such a decision would be generally supported by the membership. In those circumstances I believe it is in the best interests of CI and it's membership to call an EGM, and the Board are required to work for the best interests of the membership. I would add that one of the delegates who spoke out most strongly in favour of McQuaid stepped down from the Board during the meeting. I am not sure if his replacement has similar views to him.

    If the Board do not call an EGM it remains open for the clubs to call one. That would be very cumbersome as it would require 10% of the "electorate" to support it. However they were not entirely sure what the "electorate" is and are taking advice (it's either the number of clubs, or the votes they carry)

    One Board member raised the point that there is a question over which Federation would be required to nominate Pat McQuaid, given he lives in Switzerland. The rules state it's his "home" federation, and there is an argument that thie could be where he actually lives (and the Swiss Federation will have issued his UCI licence). I think it would be a very odd move if he requests this given it was CI that originally nominated him and his licence will have an Irish code (unless he has changed nationality!). I would find it even odder if the Swiss Federation were agree to nominate him in the circumstances.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    wav1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,978 ✭✭✭wav1


    Regardless of where anyone stands on this matter,I would think that unless the board themselves call an EGM the chances of 10 per cent of the clubs calling for one is pretty slim given the turnout for the AGM.Therefore my honest opinion on the matter is that there will not be an EGM.


  • #248
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 78,484 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    wav1 wrote: »
    Regardless of where anyone stands on this matter,I would think that unless the board themselves call an EGM the chances of 10 per cent of the clubs calling for one is pretty slim given the turnout for the AGM.Therefore my honest opinion on the matter is that there will not be an EGM.
    I would disagree - I think there is now a high chance the Board will call one, and a number of clubs not represented at the AGM expressed support for the call for a vote of confidence. It will be a complete pain (logistically) having to go through the process of getting 10% of the "electorate" signed up, but if people are passionate enough to get in touch with the clubs I'm pretty confident that there is enough support to get an EGM called.

    Only 5% of the clubs would have to actually turn up, although with a more accessible location for the majority of clubs than for yesterday's AGM (and bearing in mind the board themselves represent around a quarter of this requirement) I don't think that would be an issue.


  • #249
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,133 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    I might be misunderstanding this but I can't see a reference anywhere to where a vote was taken on whether an EGM was to be held. It seems as if a dicussion was indeed held but that the board have now gone off to decide whether to hold a vote for an EGM.

    Was a vote held on the possibility of an EGM? I was under the impression that if enough delegates proposed a vote then one would be held. If a vote was held was it won or lost? I certainly sent my views forward (unfortunately with kids etc I couldn't go) and I know from this forum that others were intending to vote.

    Just a little confused as to what happened and what the situation actually is?


  • #250
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,277 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    There was no vote. Here's why. The dealine for motions had passed before the UCI response to the Usada report was issued. The chairman of CI said that he had taken legal advice on the matter and had been informed that he couldn't allow a motion from the floor. A discussion was allowed after the close of the meeting. Conor spoke and asked that the board call an EGM. Three people spoke in support of him. Three against. The board may consider this at its next meeting. If you weren't at the agm and want an EGM to be called I would suggest emailing board members, quoting your membership number and asking them to call an EGM. The clubs too can call an EGM but this process is far more complicated. I believe the board will give this serious consideration if they believe enough members want it. Calling an EGM isn't in itself a vote of no confidence by the board in McQuaid. It would be simply recognition of a demand that this issue be debated.


  • #251
    High Nellie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭High Nellie


    paulmcquaid wrote: »
    You're all hillarious.

    It's getting Real Hilarious now .....


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    RobFowl
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 11,672 Mod ✭✭✭✭RobFowl


    Gerry Kelly on LM FM is covering this at 2:15 today...

    http://www.lmfm.ie/on-air/show/late-lunch/8a25779a-e65e-45db-a91f-faf2ab39047d


  • #253
    Veesport
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 ✭Veesport


    We may not have to continue with the poll.

    http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/cycling-sportswear-company-sues-uci-armstrong-scandal-230955143.html


  • #254
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,187 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Veesport wrote: »
    We may not have to continue with the poll.

    Way to get my hopes up, thought he was resigning.


  • #255
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 78,484 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    High Nellie wrote: »
    It's getting Real Hilarious now .....
    Veesport wrote: »
    We may not have to continue with the poll.

    http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/cycling-sportswear-company-sues-uci-armstrong-scandal-230955143.html
    We already have discussions on the Skins claim in the Armstrong and Kimmage threads, so it would be appreciated if we try to avoid going over the same ground here

    Thanks

    Beasty


  • #256
    Veesport
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 ✭Veesport


    Beasty wrote: »


    We already have discussions on the Skins claim in the Armstrong and Kimmage threads, so it would be appreciated if we try to avoid going over the same ground here

    Thanks



    Hey Mr Beastly, what if posters haven't read the other threads?

    Is it a free speech forum or can we only post information that we somehow know you mightn't be aware of yet?

    Or

    Should I read all the threads on boards before adding to a thread?


    Or

    Should you just be quiet and allow the thread continue?

    Or

    Do I have to send the Hodge Twins an email about you??


    Veesport


  • #257
    el tel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,991 ✭✭✭el tel


    Veesport, the very story re. Skins v UCI is already on this very thread. :)


  • #258
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,187 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Veesport wrote: »
    Mr Beastly

    ooh, that's a paddlin'.


  • #259
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 78,484 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Veesport wrote: »
    Hey Mr Beastly, what if posters haven't read the other threads?
    Read them - there's little point in going over the same stuff again and again. Someone started a specific thread on the topic this morning that was closed for exactly the same reason. Basically if there's a thread covering the topic, stick to it and don't bring it into other threads. As it is, we've allowed discussion to continue on 2 threads, which is quite unusual on Boards
    Veesport wrote: »
    Is it a free speech forum or can we only post information that we somehow know you mightn't be aware of yet?
    No Boards is not a "free speech forum". It's privately owned and the owners determine what is and what is not allowed to be posted. They put in place Adminstrators to implement policy, and the Admiistrators appoint CMods and Mods who are generally given "editorial control" over content, within the constraints imposed by the Owners and Admins
    Veesport wrote: »
    Should I read all the threads on boards before adding to a thread?
    That's not necessary - I gave a gentle steer to where these issues are being discussed above
    Veesport wrote: »
    Should you just be quiet and allow the thread continue?
    You are perfectly welcome to continue contributing to this thread within the parameters laid down - I am simply askimng you to discuss the Skins case elsewhere because there are already 2 threads with that topic well established. If it had been raised in this thread before the others I would hae allowed the discussion to continue here ahead of those others[/quote]
    Veesport wrote: »
    Do I have to send the Hodge Twins an email about you??
    Only you can take that decision;)

    Now one final point - if you do have any questions about mod actions PM the mod to discuss it (or report the post - all the forum Mods and CMods are notified). Do not question it in thread, as that detracts from the underlying discussion

    Thanks

    Beasty


  • #260
    Veesport
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 ✭Veesport


    Beasty... you need to chill a bit.

    Veesport,

    667 the neighbor of the beast.


  • #261
    RobFowl
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 11,672 Mod ✭✭✭✭RobFowl


    Veesport wrote: »
    Beasty... you need to chill a bit.

    Veesport,

    667 the neighbor of the beast.

    Beasty is a friend of mine and I can confirm he quite a chilled out dude already.
    Bloody good Mod as well..


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    Lusk Doyle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,365 ✭✭✭Lusk Doyle


    RobFowl wrote: »
    Beasty is a friend of mine and I can confirm he quite a chilled out dude already.
    Bloody good Mod as well..

    ****e cyclist though, to be fair.


  • #263
    RobFowl
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 11,672 Mod ✭✭✭✭RobFowl


    http://www.lmfm.ie/music/podcasts-list.aspx?show_guid=8a25779a-e65e-45db-a91f-faf2ab39047d

    24 mins in .....


  • #264
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,187 ✭✭✭buffalo


    http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13234/Cycling-Ireland-members-debate-McQuaid-presidency.aspx

    Article about that attention-seeking fella at the CI AGM.


  • #265
    TheBlaaMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,488 ✭✭✭TheBlaaMan


    it would be nice to think this is not an unreachable dream....
    http://worldwidecyclesblog.com/2012/11/06/guinness-is-the-answer/


  • #266
    downwiththatsor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 971 ✭✭✭downwiththatsor


    http://www.newstalk.ie/programmes/all/offtheball/listen-back/

    Today Nov 14th Part 1 39mins 58 secs interview with Dr Conor McGrane, the official doctor to Cycling Ireland re efforts to organise a vote of no confidence in UCI president Pat McQuaid


  • #267
    ROK ON
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭ROK ON


    Sticky Bottle reporting that Pat McQuaid seeking the nomination of CI for a third term as president of UCI.

    Will this require an egm or are the board entitled to nominate him without seeking the opinions of members?


  • #268
    wav1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,978 ✭✭✭wav1


    ROK ON wrote: »
    Sticky Bottle reporting that Pat McQuaid seeking the nomination of CI for a third term as president of UCI.

    Will this require an egm or are the board entitled to nominate him without seeking the opinions of members?
    No meeting required.Board have the right to nominate him.Even if an EGM was called and a vote of no confidence was successful they would still hold the right to nominate him.As I suggested in an earlier post on this thread I dont think theres an earthly of there being an EGM.Clubs not interested in whether he's president or not.Just my opinion.


  • #269
    hardCopy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    Out of curiosity, what points were raised in his favor, other than the fact that he's Irish?


  • #270
    niceonetom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,833 ✭✭✭niceonetom


    I would hope that those of you with strong opinions on this will contact those who are going to make this decision.

    http://www.cyclingireland.ie/Home/Contact-Cycling-Ireland.aspx

    The board members are all there.

    My email was acknowledged by one board member, one who has publicly defended McQuaid and expressed his support for him. I was informed that the board "will continue to review this position as events at the UCI develop. The Board notes and welcomes the appointment by the UCI of the independent review panel." which, to me, sounds like a sop with which to suppress those who wish to see more than a superficial change in policy but an actual change in leadership.

    In my view, if no EGM is called, and the board re-nominate McQuaid without even allowing a public discussion of the matter they will have done us, their membership, a great disservice.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,277 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    I don't believe the board would go ahead and renominate him if they believed there was significant opposition to that move.

    Complaining on boards counts for relatively little. As Tom said, anyone who has a position on this should really email them and let it know.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement