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

joker77 · 20-06-2013 01:12PM

Brian Hayden. End of Tiernan's discussion really.

thebionicdude · 20-06-2013 02:12PM

Did you see the skinny legs on Kieron in that photo? He's the McQuaid that should have moved to Switzerland, he might have done better than Pat in the high mountains.

CramCycle · 20-06-2013 02:14PM

After the EGM, the first thing that happened to me, was that one of the "old guard" as they are being referred to, came up and had a chat with me. The first thing he did was shake my hand and clarify that to offend me was never his intention. He went onto explain, that he had been at this for awhile (for longer than I was alive), and that this was the first time he had seen the majority of the faces in the room. He was worried that this was a one time thing, that those faces will not be seen again.
I understand his fear, I am not knocking him for it, it is fairly reasonable.
He then said that maybe that's the way it goes, new faces are needed, maybe it is time he stepped back.
All I had to say was that he will see me again, and I hope he doesn't step back. This idea that the "anti McQuaid brigade" will force people out or that the "pro Pat party" will not partake in certain things in protest anymore seems ridiculous and unhelpful. As many people have said here and after the EGM, it is done, we have had our voice, our opinions are now a matter of record which we stand behind. I will be at the AGM to see what I can do to in future, I may even submit motions, after discussions with others, if I see anything I feel could be worth a mention.
We need different groups for different goals, disciplines, aims etc. but after that we need to be united in our aim to promote cycling of all types.

I fully understand Kierons reaction, it is a gut reaction, I disagree with it, in fact I disagree with alot of the comments made, many on factual grounds or the fact that they are misleading, but I don't blame him for it, it is a reactive piece, hopefully when he has time to re read it and/or think it through, he will come to the same conclusion, if he doesn't so be it, I won't lose any sleep either way. I have a man from Ulster, who treated me with decency and friendliness after I disagreed with him, to show that I can do something for CI in the future, probably not as much as him but I will give it a shot, hopefully I will be in a group, new and less new, of people willing to do the same.

Slo_Rida · 20-06-2013 02:44PM

CramCycle wrote: »

hopefully when he has time to re read it and/or think it through, he will come to the same conclusion, if he doesn't so be it,
.

Maybe this is his conclusion.
If you're going to let it go then let it go.

kumate_champ07 · 20-06-2013 03:07PM

alot of untruths in the article but have to point out that Pat was asked many times to go on 'Off The Ball' on Newstalk but refused, Paul Kimmage has been on a few times. (I havent listened to the show much since the old team left the station)

*in reference to this: "So, Mr Kimmage feels so empowered now by his own media profile that we are not even allowed to have an opinion if it differs from his. And he is let away with this on a national radio station, Newstalk.

High Nellie · 20-06-2013 04:31PM

'Closing the stable door after the horse has bolted' and all that.

I think this was the choice piece - "we are known as a country that can produce successful journalists who make a nice living from bringing our sport down." Kimmage was vilified widely for telling the truth and is unemployed now - that's not "a nice living".

Funkyzeit · 20-06-2013 04:45PM

Slightly off topic - Cookson (@cooksonforuci) is on twitter in a Q&A session #askbrian

Plenty of great questions - Anto Moran included -but he's chosen to ignore most of them in favour of ones like "do you ride a compact or standard double?" instead. :rolleyes:

Chips Lovell · 20-06-2013 04:46PM

Well. Does he ride a compact?

Kav0777 · 20-06-2013 05:06PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Well. Does he ride a compact?

Triple #biggirlsblouse*

* This answer maybe entirely fictitious

Aodho · 20-06-2013 05:36PM

Kieron McQuaid makes a lot of good, honest points.

I don't think he was personally criticising the likes of Tiernans, et al, but marking the distinction of new clubs (who don't run races but have a largely "leisure" cycling membership) from older traditional racing clubs. Offence was not likely meant in that regard.

Whether you like it or not there are many of those new faces in cycling. Unfortunately though many of them to seem to have a lot of opinions about how the sport should be run (though in all honesty most of them probably have never raced, suported a race, etc but have perhaps done the sportive calendar to death in fairness to them). In my experience I see a lot of their opinions as naive at best, utopian at worst... but begrudgingly band-wagon all the same. And often those opinions are not backed by any research bar clicking "like" on "Pat must go" FB page. Pat is now a sports-politian, like all politics that is not a black-grey world where one falls on the sword because the self-appointed moralists of forums & social media are "outraged". A bit of realism & perspective does seem to be lacking to the various demands such a position attracts (commercial, moral, sporting, regulatory, personal careers, etc, etc).

The people referred to as "old guard" should have their opinions respected, like it or not they have given plenty to our sport & when many of the "new brigade" have moved onto another phase/ craze they will still be there, organising races, developing underage talent and tapping away.

happytramp · 20-06-2013 06:28PM

Aodho wrote: »

In my experience I see a lot of their opinions as naive at best, utopian at worst... but begrudgingly band-wagon all the same. And often those opinions are not backed by any research bar clicking "like" on "Pat must go" FB page.

I'm not sure what you're experience is but I'd say (almost across the board) the people who voted against Pat and those who have issues with his governance in general have repeatedly backed up their arguments in a concise, knowledgeable way.

Harrybelafonte · 20-06-2013 06:46PM

happytramp wrote: »

I'm not sure what you're experience is but I'd say (almost across the board) the people who voted against Pat and those who have issues with his governance in general have repeatedly backed up their arguments in a concise, knowledgeable way.

I think you're right about those who actually voted against McQuaid, but I also think Aodho's right about the general public's response. But, then again, if you're going to use Facebook as any kind of gauge, it is by definition only a representation of the opinion of the unwashed masses and they'll do whatever the monkey beside them does

Joxer_S · 20-06-2013 06:46PM

Aodho wrote: »

And often those opinions are not backed by any research bar clicking "like" on "Pat must go" FB page.

These people made the effort to go and vote at the EGM or let their clubs know their preference, you're hardly comparing that level of engagement to Facebook "likes".

Leroy42 · 20-06-2013 07:09PM

Aodho wrote: »

Kieron McQuaid makes a lot of good, honest points.

Whether you like it or not there are many of those new faces in cycling. Unfortunately though many of them to seem to have a lot of opinions about how the sport should be run (though in all honesty most of them probably have never raced, suported a race, etc but have perhaps done the sportive calendar to death in fairness to them). In my experience I see a lot of their opinions as naive at best, utopian at worst... but begrudgingly band-wagon all the same. And often those opinions are not backed by any research bar clicking "like" on "Pat must go" FB page. Pat is now a sports-politian, like all politics that is not a black-grey world where one falls on the sword because the self-appointed moralists of forums & social media are "outraged". A bit of realism & perspective does seem to be lacking to the various demands such a position attracts (commercial, moral, sporting, regulatory, personal careers, etc, etc).

The people referred to as "old guard" should have their opinions respected, like it or not they have given plenty to our sport & when many of the "new brigade" have moved onto another phase/ craze they will still be there, organising races, developing underage talent and tapping away.

With all due respect this is nonesense. 1st you don't need to have either been in races or organised races to know what good goverence is. 2nd, the old guard got to have their say, in fact the old guard decided to endorse PMcQ without bothering to ask anybody else and only due to Anto and others did the others get to have their say.

And on what evidence did the 'old gaurd' base their decision? Some the reports of the EGM it seems pretty much because PMcQ is Irish! While the no side produced a 30 page report.

3rd, everyone got a vote, the 'old guard' as Keiran seems to be saying voted for PMcQ, had 74 votes while this 'newbie group' got more. Deal with it. As Anto mentioned on the radio if PMcQ was so worried about people making decisions without the facts why not even bother to go the meeting.

Cycling is no longer than reserve of racing cyclists, the whole sport is moving on. CI and by extenstion the UCI seem happy to accept new 'non racing' members in to their ranks, the president can then hardly complain after taking their money about them having a say.

morana · 20-06-2013 07:13PM

Irish clubs came out and Irish clubs said what you have done in the last 8 years has not been good enough.

Vilifying social media is irrelevant and the old guard have nothing to be ashamed of. I think I am old guard btw!

Social media is not going away whether you like it or not it will be there for years to come.

Harrybelafonte · 20-06-2013 07:19PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

With all due respect this is nonesense. 1st you don't need to have either been in races or organised races to know what good goverence is. 2nd, the old guard got to have their say, in fact the old guard decided to endorse PMcQ without bothering to ask anybody else and only due to Anto and others did the others get to have their say.

And on what evidence did the 'old gaurd' base their decision? Some the reports of the EGM it seems pretty much because PMcQ is Irish! While the no side produced a 30 page report.

3rd, everyone got a vote, the 'old guard' as Keiran seems to be saying voted for PMcQ, had 74 votes while this 'newbie group' got more. Deal with it. As Anto mentioned on the radio if PMcQ was so worried about people making decisions without the facts why not even bother to go the meeting.

Cycling is no longer than reserve of racing cyclists, the whole sport is moving on. CI and by extenstion the UCI seem happy to accept new 'non racing' members in to their ranks, the president can then hardly complain after taking their money about them having a say.

By definition cycle racing is the sport, everything else is the activity of cycling.

Beasty · 20-06-2013 07:32PM

OK, let me quote from the first section of the UCI's constitution:

Article 1

1. The International Cycling Union (UCI in abbreviation) is the association of national cycling federations.

2. The UCI is a non-governmental international association with a non-profit-making purpose of international interest, having legal personality pursuant to Articles 60 ff. of the Swiss Civil Code.

3. The registered office of the UCI is in Switzerland, at the place fixed by the Management Committee. Only the Congress has the right to transfer the registered office to another country

Article 2

The purposes of the UCI are:

a) to direct, develop, regulate, control and discipline cycling under all forms worldwide;

b) to promote cycling in all the countries of the world and at all levels;

c) to organize, for all cycling sport disciplines, world championships of which it is the sole holder and owner;

d) to encourage friendship between all members of the cycling world;

e) to promote sportsmanship and fair play;

f) to represent the sport of cycling and defend its interests before the International Olympic Committee and all national and international authorities;

g) to cooperate with the International Olympic Committee, in particular as regards the participation of cyclists in the Olympic Games.

So article 1 encompasses everything that CI is responsible for, which includes leisure cycling and this is explicitly supported in the first 2 purposes set out in Article 2

What this is saying is that the UCI covers all aspects of cycling. Anyone who believes the views of those who are involved in racing are more important or carry any more weight than those who are not is clearly mistaken

Harrybelafonte · 20-06-2013 07:39PM

Beasty wrote: »

OK, let me quote from the first section of the UCI's constitution:

So article 1 encompasses everything that CI is responsible for, which includes leisure cycling and this is explicitly supported in the first 2 purposes set out in Article 2

What this is saying is that the UCI covers all aspects of cycling. Anyone who believes the views of those who are involved in racing are more important or carry any more weight than those who are not is clearly mistaken

Just to be clear, this is not what I was implying, but simply pointing out that cycling comes under sport and activity. I think this is important in to make clear as though the activity may have come on with more leisure cyclists, commuters, sportives etc, the sport has separate issues of its own.

Beasty · 20-06-2013 07:46PM

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Just to be clear, this is not what I was implying, but simply pointing out that cycling comes under sport and activity. I think this is important in to make clear as though the activity may have come on with more leisure cyclists, commuters, sportives etc, the sport has separate issues of its own.

I was quoting it as much to challenge those in the "old guard" who seem to believe their views carry more weight because they have been running races for so long. IMO they have the same weight as those involved in putting on CI-sanctioned leisure events over a similar period (and I accept that in some cases we are talking about the same people arranging both). Whether those of us involved over a shorter period have the same experience/knowledge is a different matter, but in political elections the vote of a teenager carries the same weight as the vote of a pensioner

Harrybelafonte · 20-06-2013 07:51PM

Beasty wrote: »

I was quoting it as much to challenge those in the "old guard" who seem to believe their views carry more weight because they have been running races for so long. IMO they have the same weight as those involved in putting on CI-sanctioned leisure events over a similar period (and I accept that in some cases we are talking about the same people arranging both). Whether those of us involved over a shorter period have the same experience/knowledge is a different matter, but in political elections the vote of a teenager carries the same weight as the vote of a pensioner

Nope, that's totally cool. You didn't quote my post or anything, but having read what you posted I realised my post could imply that the activity was of less value than the sport.

eohealy · 20-06-2013 08:25PM

Re: Comments about DUCC (Trinity CC)

Like St. Tiernans we feel a little aggrieved. Though it is strictly true that we have not organized any open races we feel the manor in which this information was presented is both misleading and disingenuous.

DUCC have, for the last two years, organized the only inter varsity events in Ireland and through doing so have facilitated the growth of a potentially rich vain of talent in an area that has been previously sorely under served-with the sole exception of UCD CC. We have, over the past two years, grown into a club with 115 plus members with a strong core representing us on the racing circuit. We have 1 rider in A1, 2 in A3, 5 in A4 and two active track cyclists.

The main reason DUCC voted against Pat McQuaid's bid for yet another term as UCI president, setting aside all other arguments which we are also cognisant of, was because of the lack of support given or interest shown in developing cycling at 3rd level.

Beasty · 20-06-2013 08:32PM

Alas it is typical of the approach taken by many of those supporting McQuaid's nomination. They have struggled to challenge the arguments put by those opposing (I don't think I've seen a single challenge to anything presented in the McQuaid File for example), so they resort to attacking the personalities and in this case clubs that dared to challenge him. Anyway, I'm happy for them to keep up this approach - it does absolutely nothing for McQuaid's cause and simply highlights the weakness of any arguments in his favour.

letape · 20-06-2013 08:43PM

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Nope, that's totally cool. You didn't quote my post or anything, but having read what you posted I realised my post could imply that the activity was of less value than the sport.

But clearly for the people voting no the "activity was of less value than the sport", on the basis that the majority of those arguments against PMcQ centered on his handling of doping within the sport of cycling.

Diarmuid · 20-06-2013 08:46PM

Aodho wrote: »

Whether you like it or not there are many of those new faces in cycling. Unfortunately though many of them to seem to have a lot of opinions about how the sport should be run

Oh no! There are new faces in cycling, you probably will not like that. And to make matters worse, they have opinions of their own. What a disaster !

RobFowl · 20-06-2013 08:53PM

letape wrote: »

But clearly for the people voting no the "activity was of less value than the sport", on the basis that the majority of those arguments against PMcQ centered on his handling of doping within the sport of cycling.

His handling of the multiple drug scandals was a huge issue that is true. Most cycling clubs clearly felt what he did was not good enough and didn't feel he demonstrated the ability to do better. There were also issues re governance of the uci and the sport in general.
Like it or not pro cycling is the cheerleader for cycling. It's the showcase and needs to be carefully managed. Cycling Ireland is now made up of mostly leisure cyclists and they through their clubs have as much right as even Kelly or Roche to have their opinion heard. If anyone has issues with this the. They ca. Bring it up at the agm and ask for change.

thebionicdude · 20-06-2013 09:52PM

The sport is a beautiful thing regardless of the politics and the bike is a beautiful thing regardless of the sport.

Each of us looks at the bike from the perspective of our own scene but in cycling, as in life, there is a multiplicity of points of view. The more we explore these different scenes the more we realise that we are all passionate about the same thing, we just express it in different ways.

There is no reason for anyone to take offence. I guarantee you that if we get the McQuaids, the old guard, the new guard and people from all the various scenes into a room, we'd all get along great and realise that none of us owns cycling. The bike is the President of us all.

Time to move on, the future of the sport is bike-polo anyway! Ha!

Dotsie~tmp · 20-06-2013 09:56PM

thebionicdude wrote: »

The sport is a beautiful thing regardless of the politics and the bike is a beautiful thing regardless of the sport.

I like that. Is it original.

dave_o_brien · 20-06-2013 09:56PM

The definition of hypocrisy:

A McQuaid supporter pointing out his role in growing the sport as a major achievement, but then questioning the value of these newcomers' opinions on how the sport should be governed, because they have no history in the sport.

thebionicdude · 20-06-2013 09:58PM

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

I like that. Is it original.

thanks. it is.

maloner · 20-06-2013 09:59PM

I'll be brief...

I joined Tiernans late last year and have found my cycling come on in leaps and bounds as a result. I've since done my first 2 open races as a result of the support found in the club, and have been taking part in the inter club league of which Tiernan's are in. A bunch of us meet on Tuesday's for training spins and our weekly club spins are always the challenge I find. I'm hoping to head out with the club in an A4 stage race before the season is out and am also looking forward to participating in or helping out in the clubs open race in September.

Needless to say this mans attitude to a club who helped me and furthered my cycling makes me sick.

And what of people who don't race? Anyone who does a sportive, as far as I know (I'm open to correction), sends €10 CI's way for a one day licence. Don't they count?