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

Beasty · 16-05-2013 11:13AM

check_six wrote: »

What is the Board of Cycling Irelands' view on this?

They were all set to endorse him initially, then they acquiesced to the EGM, and now?

How do they feel? Embarrassed? Jilted? Not bothered? Delighted someone else has taken the responsibility/blame?

Give them chance - this has only just hit the newswire ...

Beasty · 16-05-2013 11:14AM

slow wrote: »

The UCI rule is that you hold the licence of the country in which you spend the most time - Dan Martin in Spain, Nico Roche in Monaco, Pat McQuaid in Switzerland. They still have IRL on their UCI codes. Honorary membership is just that - honorary. I suspect that some of the CI honorary members have no licences.

The EGM will have to go ahead as CI must follow company law.

Honorary members (indeed all members) of CI are issued with a licence each year - just costs them nothing

The Board called the EGM and can cancel it - no point in incurring further expense if he has withdrawn his request

Beasty · 16-05-2013 11:43AM

UCI Press Release
I am a bit curious as to why the UCI keep issuing what are in effect personal press releases from McQuaid - do UCI rules permit their resources to be used to support it's sitting President's re-election campaign? Seems odd if they do but I guess that's Pat for you ...

buffalo · 16-05-2013 11:46AM

Beasty wrote: »

do UCI rules permit their resources to be used to support it's sitting President's re-election campaign? Seems odd if they do but I guess that's Pat for you ...

I think that's the UCI and Pat all over, from what I learned from that podcast a couple of weeks ago.

slow · 16-05-2013 11:49AM

I think Beasty if you read the Memos and Arts, the Board has no power to cancel the EGM.

ashleey · 16-05-2013 12:00PM

If I was CI Membership Secretary I would get a secure physical validated copy of PMQs membership details and get the Swiss to do the same. Hand both to a trustworthy lawyer. You never know what database 'mistakes' could appear in the next few days.

Beasty · 16-05-2013 12:06PM

slow wrote: »

I think Beasty if you read the Memos and Arts, the Board has no power to cancel the EGM.

I have read them many times in recent months. There may be no express provision to say they can cancel it, but equally there is no express provision that they cannot. This is different from a club-called EGM, where the Board are bound by the request of the clubs.

Given the resolution being put to the members would appear no longer valid, I think they have little choice but to cancel

buffalo · 16-05-2013 12:10PM

I would've liked to have seen the result of the EGM vote, but it does seem an unnecessary and costly exercise now.

Leroy42 · 16-05-2013 12:22PM

This was always a distinct possibility. It is really no surprise.

however, we can all be happy that we did what we could to try to make a difference. It is an embarrasment for PmQ to have to have done it like this, and while it will probably make no difference to him getting the nod, maybe, just maybe, it has made people sit up and take notice of what the board of CI are doing on our behalf in future.

We have lost this battle for sure, but we have struck a blow. Hopefully when PmQ visits Ireland with the Giro he will be treated as a foreign person rather than an Irish person, as that is exactly what he has decided he wants.

He has turned his back on CI, and should be removed from any position within the organisation (honorary membership etc).

kenmc · 16-05-2013 12:35PM

MOD VOICE: Threats in a serious or non serious manner are not taken lightly, the next one will result in a ban

Inquitus · 16-05-2013 12:52PM

It's the smart move for him to make, it probably makes the CI EGM pointless and unlikely to go ahead, gives him some minor bad PR in comparison to what he would get when the EGM decides not to nominate him. Spineless all the same, kinda pissed with the outcome myself.

RobFowl · 16-05-2013 12:52PM

slow wrote: »

The UCI rule is that you hold the licence of the country in which you spend the most time - Dan Martin in Spain, Nico Roche in Monaco, Pat McQuaid in Switzerland. They still have IRL on their UCI codes. Honorary membership is just that - honorary. I suspect that some of the CI honorary members have no licences.

The EGM will have to go ahead as CI must follow company law.

All CI honorary members are issued a licence each year.

REBELSAFC · 16-05-2013 01:23PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

We have lost this battle for sure, but we have struck a blow. Hopefully when PmQ visits Ireland with the Giro he will be treated as a foreign person rather than an Irish person, as that is exactly what he has decided he wants.

Can we send him down to Bunratty Castle and make him sit through that banquet they put on for 'foreign people' ? ?

ktz84 · 16-05-2013 01:25PM

Inquitus wrote: »

It's the smart move for him to make, it probably makes the CI EGM pointless and unlikely to go ahead, gives him some minor bad PR in comparison to what he would get when the EGM decides not to nominate him. Spineless all the same, kinda pissed with the outcome myself.

Might not be as smart as he imagines. If CI cancel the EGM, as is likely, and the Swiss nomination is found to be invalid (less likely) then depending on timescles he may find that if he comes back cap in hand to CI that there is no time to call a new EGM and therefore he as nowhere to go. We can only hope.

mcgratheoin · 16-05-2013 01:32PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

We have lost this battle for sure

I disagree - I think the members of CI (disclaimer- I'm not a member and hence I have refrained on commenting so far) have very much won this battle. The battle was over the following

that Cycling Ireland had failed to adequately take into account the overall wishes of its membership on an issue which they were aware would be controversial
that the majority of members of Cycling Ireland did not support Pat McQuaid continuing as the head of the UCI

Admittedly it was due to an administrative error, but in essence these two points were very strongly won. An EGM was called, reflecting the unease amongst clubs and cyclists and ensuring that the board of Cycling Ireland would hear and take into account the views of its membership. The result of this EGM having been called and Pat gaining a Swiss nomination is that the cycling community in Ireland cannot be assumed to support Pat's campaign for re-election.

As an observer, I think that this is as good a result for cycling in Ireland as could have been hoped for following the initial nomination debacle. Cycling Ireland has shown itself to be a democratic organisation, willing to take on board the views of its membership, and the membership has been shown to have put the greater interests of cycling ahead of parochial concerns.

Captain Havoc · 16-05-2013 01:37PM

ktz84 wrote: »

Might not be as smart as he imagines. If CI cancel the EGM, as is likely, and the Swiss nomination is found to be invalid (less likely) then depending on timescles he may find that if he comes back cap in hand to CI that there is no time to call a new EGM and therefore he as nowhere to go. We can only hope.

Is there any chance if the EGM got cancelled he could still get nominated by CI?

ktz84 · 16-05-2013 01:40PM

Captain Havoc wrote: »

Is there any chance if the EGM got cancelled he could still get nominated by CI?

Oh yes. As the original EGM was called by the Board they are not bound to call another if this one is cancelled and with so many up for nomination themselves this year again they might just take the view that they coudn't care less and nominate anyway.

12 sprocket · 16-05-2013 01:43PM

Beasty
Will you and all your mates leave the knives down for a few minutes, just relax and get your minds in an open position and read the link from cycling irelands website in regard to UCI fight against doping...
Try to at least have some balance in your views and thoughts and have a more informed approach..

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

el tel · 16-05-2013 01:47PM

Do you ever get the feeling there will be a few twists and turns in this yet?

I also wonder if Pat McQuaid has legal council (i.e. outside the UCI's own legal) advising on how he has manages this affair? Or, does he have a supportive message board buried deep within the internet giving him amateur guidance :pac:

Chips Lovell · 16-05-2013 01:53PM

The more I look at this, the more it seems like a very high risk strategy for McQuaid. CI could well cancel the EGM, but if the Swiss nomination turns out to be invalid he could be left going back to CI very late in the day.

pelevin · 16-05-2013 01:56PM

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Cycling Ireland has shown itself to be a democratic organisation, willing to take on board the views of its membership, and the membership has been shown to have put the greater interests of cycling ahead of parochial concerns.

Good post, and Pat McQuaid has shown himself to be opposed to CI behaving as a democracy, and disparaged publicly the CI's efforts to behave as such.

Beasty · 16-05-2013 02:03PM

12 sprocket wrote: »

Beasty
Will you and all your mates leave the knives down for a few minutes, just relax and get your minds in an open position and read the link from cycling irelands website in regard to UCI fight against doping...
Try to at least have some balance in your views and thoughts and have a more informed approach..

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

There was another thread set up for discussing the merits or otherwise of his nomination ahead of the EGM, but I note that you only choose to start such a discussion now

My main issue all along has been about the credibility of the Sport and it's govenance by the UCI, and tbh McQuaid's behaviour in trying to go behind the back of his own Federation (and he may wll have broken the UCI's own rules in doing so) does not provide me with any confidence over his ability to lead the sport forward

The guy is a hypocrite - it's even apparent in his statement today (paid for by the UCI, just like the statement you linked to - basically he's getting the UCI to fund his election campaign!!)

I put myself forward to serve another term as UCI President on my record of developing the sport throughout the world and on combating the scourge of doping in cycling

- he's standing by his record - what more reason do we need to throw him out - look at that record

He didn't even pay lip-service to the "conditions" originally stipulated by the CI Board

He sets up an "Independent Commission" but then disbands it because it wanted to act independently

... need I go on??

D3PO · 16-05-2013 02:16PM

This does as much damage to cycling from the perception of non cyclists as all the doping scandals of the past have done.

The UCI if they allow this will be seen to be as corrupt and insular as FIFA. This is absolutely outrageous and I hope some legal eagle screws McQuaid's dodge here.

As somebody not really in the know. If this nomination stands up is it almost a given that the dictator will be reelected ?

ashleey · 16-05-2013 02:21PM

12 sprocket wrote: »

Beasty
Will you and all your mates leave the knives down for a few minutes, just relax and get your minds in an open position and read the link from cycling irelands website in regard to UCI fight against doping...
Try to at least have some balance in your views and thoughts and have a more informed approach..

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

I have never met Beasty and don't have 'knives out' for anyone.

However, couldn't PMQ have asserted his right to a nomination from CI on his personal belief in his personal campaign against doping, at the EGM, rather than avoid it altogether and go for the Swiss nomination?

morana · 16-05-2013 02:33PM

12 sprocket wrote: »

Beasty
Will you and all your mates leave the knives down for a few minutes, just relax and get your minds in an open position and read the link from cycling irelands website in regard to UCI fight against doping...
Try to at least have some balance in your views and thoughts and have a more informed approach..

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

deluded!

thebionicdude · 16-05-2013 02:39PM

12 sprocket wrote: »

Beasty
Will you and all your mates leave the knives down for a few minutes, just relax and get your minds in an open position and read the link from cycling irelands website in regard to UCI fight against doping...
Try to at least have some balance in your views and thoughts and have a more informed approach..

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

The EGM is essentially a referendum, there is a Yes and No argument. Pat is entitled to state his argument, which CI published. Others are entitled to counter these points to inform the debate amongst the electorate. Morana intimated yesterday that these points are forthcoming (if there will be an EGM), so it may be worth everyone bearing an open-mind on Pat's submission as there are points that will be made to balance his view.

Beasty, morana et al have always stated that they favour a democratic process and are happy to abide by the decision of clubs. Pat's manoeuvre suggests that he does not favour a democratic process. Make of this what you will.

My guess is that there is more to come on this.

RobFowl · 16-05-2013 02:50PM

12 sprocket wrote: »

Beasty
Will you and all your mates leave the knives down for a few minutes, just relax and get your minds in an open position and read the link from cycling irelands website in regard to UCI fight against doping...
Try to at least have some balance in your views and thoughts and have a more informed approach..

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

For a more balanced independent opinion read the USADA reasoned decision http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/
It's damning in it's criticism of the UCI.

It also backs up all its statements with multiple sources of evidence unlike the defence from the UCI which is mostly an opinion piece which is at odds with many other sources, and makes some comments which I would dispute.

mcgratheoin · 16-05-2013 03:00PM

12 sprocket wrote: »

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/getattachment/77e06015-14b7-4706-b333-3a6e2697598c/File-for-national-federations_130513-ENG.aspx

Oh dear God, where to begin on this document. Let's start with the first argument

In January 2013, Lance Armstrong admitted to Oprah Winfrey that the medical prescription that he had provided for the skin cream in 1999 was antedated. The UCI did not know that back in 1999.

Yes, yes it did. When he tested positive for corticosteroids the UCI did not have a TUE form for this treatment from Armstrong. Therefore it was a positive test. The UCI accepted Armstrongs argument (which we now know was a lie) that he had not filed this TUE - therefore circumventing their own anti-doping rules to allow him to continue.

However, the fact that the prescription was ante dated does not alter the fact that the prescription was for a skin cream. Nor does it alter the pattern of corticosteroid traces showing up intermittently, which was and still is compatible with the use of a skin cream.

It's not the UCI's job to provide excuses or explanations for illegal substances found in athletes' bodies. It was illegal without a TUE, he didn't have a TUE and when he produced a prescription the UCI let him away with it.

RobFowl · 16-05-2013 03:04PM

@12sprocket

Have a read of this testimony on oath by Jorg Jaksche
http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/Jaksche%2c+Jorg+Affidavit.pdf

"I Spoke to Pat McQuaid" " as I wanted to be fully open and transparent re my doping and those of others" " and to explain the level of doping which went on at teams I rode for"" The UCI showed zero interest in hearing the full story about doping on these teams and did not seek to follow up with me"
"to the best of my knowledge and belied the UCI did not forward on any evidence of doping I provided to them"

Beasty · 16-05-2013 03:27PM

I will say fair play to 12 sprocket for coming on here to try to defend McQuaid's record. I may not agree with his views, but that is exactly what democracy is about. Allowing people to take informed views is critical, and it's important to hear both sides of every story

However what amazes me is the complete lack of support for McQuaid within the cycling community in Ireland - 12 sprocket you are one of the exceptions, along with a handful of others who have posted on this forum. I respect your rights to express your views, but whenever I interact either online or in real life with people on the subject they either have little interest (which again is fair enough), or express dismay that McQuaid continues to lead this sport. Comments on social media from outside Ireland are equally damning - it seems the people who support him are those tasked with finding a way to get him re-elected

He stands by his record - a record of turning a blind eye to doping as evidenced by RobFowl's link above. What exactly has he done for the sport since he came to power? - yes there have been initiaties to expand within new geographies (often those that carry voting rights for Presidential elections:rolleyes:). How has he benefited women's cycling for example? I know they evened up medals at the Olympics, but I'm not sure that was at the behest of the UCI. What exactly is his manifesto? More of the same it seems - which appears to me to continue the slow decline of this sport