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

Inquitus · 15-06-2013 05:59PM

Casati wrote: »

Leinster, Ulster, The Board, Munster, Youth and College of Commissaries all seem to vote pro McQuaid from what I could see, maybe by accident but if it was left to these voters only I'd say it would have gone 80:20 pro McQuaid

I know some people were upset but comments questioning why so many people turned up when they are not to be seen at AGM's, and I think this is a valid point- I left the meeting thinking that because so few people turn up for the AGM's is a root cause behind why the EGM was called, and why the nomination was voted against.

Simply put not enough people are putting themselves forward for commission/ board positions and/ or those turning up at these meetings are not a representative sample. The result is that we have board and indeed commissions/ provence's that do not represent the members interests and opinions

I think the issue is that CI does a good job of running the sport in this country, and people are happy enough with the Status Quo as far as domestic matters go. This, however, was a global cycling issue that will impact our sport for many years to come, things like this don't come along often, and as such it was always likely to galvanise the membership at large to make their voice heard on matters they were passionate about.

Bluefoam · 15-06-2013 06:17PM

Inquitus wrote: »

CI does a good job of running the sport in this country

Maybe the road cycling element... but that's only one aspect of cycling!

Lumen · 15-06-2013 06:18PM

Bluefoam wrote: »

Maybe the road cycling element... but that's only one aspect of cycling!

Don't forget Olympic Skateboarding.

pprendeville · 15-06-2013 06:43PM

Thought Jack Watson's speech today was long winded and didn't help the cause whatsoever especially as he was being interrupted by Rory Wiley and Sam McArdle which seemed to undermine him. In contrast Anto Moran's talk was concise and had a bit of humour. I wonder are all activists entitled to a free haircut?

I personally feel there is a disconnect between a group who are close to PMcQ and the relatively newer generation of cyclists which includes myself. Seemed like most who spoke who supported him were of the old brigade and closely associated with him one way or another while those who were against the motion were weighing up the evidence objectively. One Tiernans/South Dublin (cant remember which) guy put it well that McQuaid never listened to the Irish when it came to Emma O'Reilly, Paul Kimmage and David Walshe and he was spot on. This countered an earlier argument about supporting an Irish candidate if I remember correctly. That better the divil yoo know was not a very strong argument.

Beasty · 15-06-2013 07:48PM

pprendeville wrote: »

South Dublin (cant remember which) guy put it well that McQuaid never listened to the Irish when it came to Emma O'Reilly, Paul Kimmage and David Walshe and he was spot on. This countered an earlier argument about supporting an Irish candidate if I remember correctly.

One of the "Famous Five" (although I note Jack used one of the terms I coined earlier in this thread - the anti-McQuaid Brigade;)) - it was the perfect retort to a number of speakers who seemed to be advocating McQuaid primarily because of his "Irishness"

carltonleon · 15-06-2013 07:59PM

Congratulations to you all, both for showing Irish cycling in a great light and for the civilised manner of the meeting. I am not a member of any club but have always loved and followed cycling and you have done yourselves proud.

Murph100 · 15-06-2013 08:09PM

It was definitely a very interesting meeting, I was a bit stunned at the almost nationalist element from some of the Pro McQuaid camp, but some Pro McQuaid speakers did pretty well, particularly the Doping Control Officer who spoke about Pat's battle to take the drug testing away from the Commissaires and hand it over to independent testers, as it now the norm.

From speaking to the Pro McQuaid camp in the run up to this EGM, it did seem that those who had competed internationally or had put riders/teams abroad had probably benefitted from Pat opening a few doors for them, and I could understand their wish to nominate him again, to return the favour and possibly keep him opening doors for future irish riders.

There was almost a fear factor that it would be more difficult to send riders & teams abroad without one of 'ours' at the top. This I think kept a lot of votes on Pats side.

Finally, the fact that it was a show of hands and not a secret ballot, IMO intimidated some No voters to abstain for fear of repercussions for their club/events.

I think that internationally, todays vote showed Irish Cycling in a very positive light, however domestically, from some feedback afterwards, I do fear some wounds have been inflicted that may take a while to heal. But that was probably always going to be the case whatever the outcome.

morana · 15-06-2013 08:37PM

well I suppose that's the democratic process I admire the likes of the carlow delegate my good friend John O'Brien who told me he would back McQuaid but his club mandated a no and he said he would abide by that. another pleasing aspect was when the result was announced there was not whooping or roaring.

I was relieved when the vote was called and I looked around to see so many with their hands down I knew we had it then.

anyway as I said had the chair not changed we would not be here today......little things huge implications!

High Nellie · 15-06-2013 08:38PM

It would take a Kerryman to sum up the bigger picture for Irish cycling philosophically - this is Gerard Cromwell quoting Tadgh Moriary from the aftermath: "There was a time that I knew everybody in Irish cycling. I must say I knew less than half the people here today. I knew very few of the people that voted against McQuaid. I knew all of the people that voted for McQuaid, so there must be a message there somewhere. Maybe the older brigade are after getting a small push here today and it’s time to let the younger ones take over.”

PeadarCo · 15-06-2013 08:40PM

Murph100 wrote: »

From speaking to the Pro McQuaid camp in the run up to this EGM, it did seem that those who had competed internationally or had put riders/teams abroad had probably benefitted from Pat opening a few doors for them, and I could understand their wish to nominate him again, to return the favour and possibly keep him opening doors for future irish riders.

What has to be remembered about Irish cycling is that it has grown massively over the last number of years. But it takes time for all these new people to work their way into the cycling Ireland system and become aware of how they can influence it. I can understand some of the old guard/long time members complaining about many people not turning up to AGM's before. But I'd say most of these new people only started cycling relatively recently and this was the first issue that got them actively involved in the administration of cycling Ireland.

Given the growth in Cycling Ireland I don't think it should be a surprise that newer/recent members view certain things differently than long time members. Pat McQuaid probably being one of them. Overall I think cycling Ireland has handled the growth very well pretty well and if anything this highlights to members that Cycling Ireland broadly speaking is democratic when members engage.

Beasty · 15-06-2013 08:42PM

High Nellie wrote: »

Maybe the older brigade are after getting a small push here today and it’s time to let the younger ones take over.

That's me finished then ...:D

C3PO · 15-06-2013 08:46PM

Not sure if this has been posted before buts it's an interesting report on today's proceedings!

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/06/news/irish-clubs-vote-to-deny-pat-mcquaid-a-nomination-in-uci-presidential-election_291012

“We always knew … and I’m speaking for the board, who were in favor of the motion, that the anti-McQuaids, if you’d like to call them that, were the favorites in betting terms,” said Cycling Ireland president Rory Wyley afterward.

I think that is a bizarre comment for Rory to make after the meeting - the implication being that the Board always knew that the majority of the members were not in favour of supporting Pat McQuaid's nomination but they were prepared to go ahead and unanimously support him anyway .... very strange!

Eamonnator · 15-06-2013 09:09PM

Beasty wrote: »

That's me finished then ...:D

Me too

Inquitus · 15-06-2013 09:20PM

Cycling Ireland chief executive Geoff Liffey said the governing body voted 91-74 against endorsing McQuaid at an extraordinary general meeting in his home city Dublin on Saturday.

The setback came despite Irish cycling greats Stephen Roche and Sean Kelly speaking in his favour at the hour-long meeting.

Really terrible lazy journalism from the Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/10122976/Cycling-Ireland-vote-goes-against-International-Cycling-Union-president-Pat-McQuaid-at-Dublin-meeting.html

C3PO · 15-06-2013 09:29PM

Inquitus wrote: »

Really terrible lazy journalism from the Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/10122976/Cycling-Ireland-vote-goes-against-International-Cycling-Union-president-Pat-McQuaid-at-Dublin-meeting.html

Copied directly from the Independent (or vice versa)!

http://www.independent.ie/sport/pat-mcquaid-fails-to-secure-cycling-ireland-endorsement-29347525.html

tfrancer · 15-06-2013 09:46PM

Thanks Lads, for giving a "leg up" to the British candidate.

pelevin · 15-06-2013 09:53PM

MOD VOICE: Post not poster, do it again and cards come out in what has been a reasonably civil thread

tfrancer · 15-06-2013 09:57PM

MOD VOICE: Responding to edited post

I'm only reading about the meeting now. I gather that the advice of Kelly and Roche fell on deaf ears. Sad.

RobFowl · 15-06-2013 09:58PM

tfrancer wrote: »

Thanks Lads, for giving a "leg up" to the British candidate.

That sort of nonsense that make me embarrased.
You do know that the war of independence was almost 100 years ago!

wanderer 22 · 15-06-2013 09:59PM

tfrancer wrote: »

Thanks Lads, for giving a "leg up" to the British candidate.

sometimes you'd give anything for an "unthank" button :rolleyes:

Beasty · 15-06-2013 10:01PM

tfrancer wrote: »

Thanks Lads, for giving a "leg up" to the British candidate.

You do realise a lot of contributors to this forum are British? Are you as disrespectful to them?

pelevin · 15-06-2013 10:03PM

tfrancer wrote: »

With respect, I don't think I'm the one with the inferiority complex!

I'm only reading about the meeting now. I gather that the advice of Kelly and Roche fell on deaf ears. Sad.

With respect, I'd say an attitude that would be bringing up "the British" as having some relevance here to how people feel in relation to Pat McQuaid is very much of a stagnant inferiority complex, unfree to think and feel in an independent fashion.

tfrancer · 15-06-2013 10:11PM

The reality is that every vote today against PMcQ strengthened Brian Cookson's position. I respect British people ......they wouldn't have undermined PMcQ in the way that was done here.

pelevin · 15-06-2013 10:13PM

tfrancer wrote: »

The reality is that every vote today against PMcQ strengthened Brian Cookson's position. I respect British people ......they wouldn't have undermined PMcQ in the way that was done here.

So you think you can generalise about 60 or so million people as though they would all behave in the same way. Tobh you're just embarrassing yourself with this rubbish.

morana · 15-06-2013 10:16PM

tfrancer wrote: »

Thanks Lads, for giving a "leg up" to the British candidate.

I think all of the credit should go to pat for that!

fondriest · 15-06-2013 10:19PM

tfrancer wrote: »

With respect, I don't think I'm the one with the inferiority complex!

I'm only reading about the meeting now. I gather that the advice of Kelly and Roche fell on deaf ears. Sad.

The advice from from Roche and Kelly was for a start way too late . Most clubs would have had their EGM's about this issue in the last few weeks and delegates would have arrived today with their clubs decision already made .
Roche and Kelly only gave their views in the last couple of days . Too little too late . They surely should have known that .

RobFowl · 15-06-2013 10:20PM

tfrancer wrote: »

The reality is that every vote today against PMcQ strengthened Brian Cookson's position. I respect British people ......they wouldn't have undermined PMcQ in the way that was done here.

So we should nominate someone the majority of Irish cyclists feel is not up to the job so a "Brit" might not get the job!

th?id=H.4826603686660589&pid=15.1

RobFowl · 15-06-2013 10:21PM

fondriest wrote: »

Roche and Kelly only gave their views in the last couple of days . Too little too late . They surely should have known that .

Maybe they did..........

morana · 15-06-2013 10:23PM

fondriest wrote: »

The advice from from Roche and Kelly was for a start way too late . Most clubs would have had their EGM's about this issue in the last few weeks and delegates would have arrived today with their clubs decision already made .
Roche and Kelly only gave their views in the last couple of days . Too little too late . They surely should have known that .

Roche sent that note to the board in April. its was amended slightly.

Dermot Illogical · 15-06-2013 10:26PM

tfrancer wrote: »

Thanks Lads, for giving a "leg up" to the British candidate.

If it upsets people with opinions like yours that's a bonus, but you should know it wasn't what it was about.

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

Comments