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

AstraMonti · 26-06-2013 08:57AM

When are the elections taking place? Can the Swiss still support him if the appealing has not been completed by elections time?

Also:

Pat McQuaid has derided the election manifesto of his challenger for the UCI presidency, describing Brian Cookson's pledges as "half baked, fundamentally flawed and financially impractical.

http://www.neurope.eu/news/wire/pat-mcquaid-slams-election-manifesto-rival-brian-cookson-uci-presidential-race

TinyExplosions · 26-06-2013 09:05AM

AstraMonti wrote: »

When are the elections taking place? Can the Swiss still support him if the appealing has not been completed by elections time?

The elections are September, but iirc nomination close end of July. It's unclear what the situation would be if the nomination is still up in the courts

buffalo · 26-06-2013 09:11AM

TinyExplosions wrote: »

The elections are September, but iirc nomination close end of July. It's unclear what the situation would be if the nomination is still up in the courts

I'm sure someone in the UCI will make a fair and unbiased decision on it. :P

In all seriousness, I'd prefer to see a contest, rather than Cookson stand unopposed.

ktz84 · 26-06-2013 09:44AM

buffalo wrote: »

I'm sure someone in the UCI will make a fair and unbiased decision on it. :P

In all seriousness, I'd prefer to see a contest, rather than Cookson stand unopposed.

The UCI won't get to make that decision. It will be down to the courts to decide if they are asked to rule on it.

CramCycle · 26-06-2013 09:44AM

TinyExplosions wrote: »

The elections are September, but iirc nomination close end of July. It's unclear what the situation would be if the nomination is still up in the courts

The appeal is to take his nomination away, so I presume it stands until the court date and by this I mean, he is nominated by the Swiss as it won't be sorted before the deadline.

I am with Buffalo on this, I really hope a one or two more come forward, I can already think of one candidate who I would have liked to see running although I think she has commented on life being to busy already.

morana · 26-06-2013 09:45AM

ktz84 wrote: »

The UCI won't get to make that decision. It will be down to the courts to decide if they are asked to rule on it.

does it go to an appeals panel of Swiss Cycling rather than the courts?

buffalo · 26-06-2013 09:48AM

ktz84 wrote: »

The UCI won't get to make that decision. It will be down to the courts to decide if they are asked to rule on it.

I meant more whether the UCI would accept a nomination after the closing date if it's delayed by the court process.

thebionicdude · 26-06-2013 09:48AM

It is being reviewed by a 'Swiss Cycling Arbitration Tribunal'. I have not heard yet whether Swiss Cycling appoints the judge and jury or whether it is wholly impartial.

CramCycle · 26-06-2013 09:57AM

buffalo wrote: »

I meant more whether the UCI would accept a nomination after the closing date if it's delayed by the court process.

I don't think it is delayed, he has the nomination, the appeal/court process is to see can it be taken away from him or at least can the decision be re taken, is my understanding. Until that decision is made, he still has it as far as I am aware.

AstraMonti · 26-06-2013 10:07AM

Wouldn't it make sense for the Swiss federation to "pause" (for failure to find a more suited word) the nomination until the appealing has been ruled? Is it even possible for them to do it? What if gets re-elected and the court decides against it? Too much hassle for the cycling world without any benefits.

RobFowl · 26-06-2013 10:18AM

AstraMonti wrote: »

Wouldn't it make sense for the Swiss federation to "pause" (for failure to find a more suited word) the nomination until the appealing has been ruled? Is it even possible for them to do it? What if gets re-elected and the court decides against it? Too much hassle for the cycling world without any benefits.

TBF they can't, the nominations have to be in by today I think. Any after that are too late and won't count.

ktz84 · 26-06-2013 10:19AM

morana wrote: »

does it go to an appeals panel of Swiss Cycling rather than the courts?

It does however if the appeal panel doesn't allow the nomination I'd bet a million dollars it will be taken to the courts and they will ultimately decide.

It wouldn't make sense to pause the action because the Swiss Federation believe they have followed the correct procedures therefore it is for those opposing to show that their interpretation is wrong. If every body paused based on the complaints of others it would just encourage groundless complaints.

Captain Havoc · 26-06-2013 10:29AM

I searched two Swiss news sites there and they have no mention of McQuaid outside of Armstrong. Looks like he could slip under the radar there, so to speak.

RobFowl · 26-06-2013 10:42AM

Captain Havoc wrote: »

I searched two Swiss news sites there and they have no mention of McQuaid outside of Armstrong. Looks like he could slip under the radar there, so to speak.

The Swiss adopting a head in the sand approach to this!

thebionicdude · 26-06-2013 11:36AM

ktz84 wrote: »

It does however if the appeal panel doesn't allow the nomination I'd bet a million dollars it will be taken to the courts and they will ultimately decide.

Is a decision not binding when a case goes to arbitration? I would assume both sides have to agree on who makes up the tribunal such that it is seen to be impartial and thus, binding.

ktz84 · 26-06-2013 12:20PM

thebionicdude wrote: »

Is a decision not binding when a case goes to arbitration? I would assume both sides have to agree on who makes up the tribunal such that it is seen to be impartial and thus, binding.

There is binding and non binding arbitration therefore it depends on how is constituted. CAS I believe is binding ie you can't challenge the decisions only that the processes weren't lawful. Whether that is the model adopted more generally in sport administration I haven't a notion. So you could very well be right.

Beasty · 26-06-2013 08:32PM

It would appear that Pat McQuaid lacks understanding of WADA's rules

The World Anti Doping Agency has countered a claim made yesterday by Pat McQuaid in which he said that Brian Cookson was incorrect in promising a fully independent anti-doping agency to police cycling.

How can we entrust the future of the sport with this guy. He seems incapable of thinking though his responses to any type of challenge, choosing to shoot from the hip without checking his facts first.

ktz84 · 26-06-2013 09:09PM

Beasty wrote: »

It would appear that Pat McQuaid lacks understanding of WADA's rules

How can we entrust the future of the sport with this guy. He seems incapable of thinking though his responses to any type of challenge, choosing to shoot from the hip without checking his facts first.

He might shoot from the hip but he's been trotting that line for a while now so I really do wonder what the UCI legal dept actually does apart from sue people

RobFowl · 26-06-2013 10:03PM

ktz84 wrote: »

He might shoot from the hip but he's been trotting that line for a while now so I really do wonder what the UCI legal dept actually does apart from sue people

That sound like libel to me, expect as call from the UCI

Trojan · 26-06-2013 11:26PM

This guy is an embarrassment to himself and to this country. The quotes are absolutely cringeworthy.

Leroy42 · 26-06-2013 11:28PM

Trojan wrote: »

This guy is an embarrassment to himself and to this country.

yeah, Switzerland must be mortified

Idleater · 28-06-2013 10:43AM

Not sure if this goes here or in the enough is enough thread
@Reuters
Winning without doping was impossible, says Armstrong
http://blink.htcsense.com/web/articleweb.aspx?regionid=4&articleid=10478570

"(UCI president) Pat McQuaid can say and think what he wants. Things just cannot change as long as McQuaid stays in power," he said.

RobFowl · 28-06-2013 10:51AM

Idleater wrote: »

Not sure if this goes here or in the enough is enough thread
@Reuters
Winning without doping was impossible, says Armstrong
http://blink.htcsense.com/web/articleweb.aspx?regionid=4&articleid=10478570

Reported here as well by Shane Stokes http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/14857/Armstrong-Our-system-was-very-simple-very-conservative-and-not-evil.aspx with the nice quote “Pat McQuaid can say and think what he likes, but he has no credit in the fight against doping."

Hermy · 28-06-2013 11:04AM

Armstrong wrote:

Winning without doping was impossible...

Doping and winning are not compatible Lance!

Leroy42 · 28-06-2013 11:43AM

Hermy wrote: »

Doping and winning are not compatible Lance!

of course they are. As LA states he didn't invent doping and neither has it stopped with him. He took the system, abused it, and made sure he was so big that the authorities were scared to go after him.

As much as it grates, he just became the best at the system that was in place. All his compatriats were at it, he seems to have been better at it than them.

Unless the system changes then it is only a matter of time until the next big con is uncovered. Unless you happen to believe that LA is the cause and now that he is gone the problem goes away

RobFowl · 28-06-2013 11:46AM

Leroy42 wrote: »

of course they are. As LA states he didn't invent doping and neither has it stopped with him. He took the system, abused it, and made sure he was so big that the authorities were scared to go after him.

As much as it grates, he just became the best at the system that was in place. All his compatriats were at it, he seems to have been better at it than them.

Unless the system changes then it is only a matter of time until the next big con is uncovered. Unless you happen to believe that LA is the cause and now that he is gone the problem goes away

Not compatible in the long term though! Remember Lance has only won as many tours as you me and every other poster here combined ;-)

Hermy · 28-06-2013 12:04PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

of course they are.

Doping is against the rules - ergo doping means you've won nothing!

Leroy42 · 28-06-2013 12:48PM

^only if you get caught! In LA's view, and seemingly widespread across the cycling culture, doping was necessary and as such was something akin to training. If you didn't do it then you didn't win.

A 'bit' like diving in football , it might not be very nice but the winning is all that matters and footballers/managers would also state that they are simply doing what everyone else doe.

Slo_Rida · 28-06-2013 04:51PM

Lance:
“Pat McQuaid can say and think what he wants, and pretend to be tough on doping. He’s got no credit for this. The sport needs new leadership to try and regain credibility. It simply can’t move on with McQuaid as the leader.”

In a bizarre chain of events, Lance Armstrong is now preaching the exact same message as all the anti-McQuaid posters on here. That must be very close to ironic if not a perfect match!
This is pure entertainment.

Just in case you haven't read my earlier opinion on this...I'm not too pushed by the whole EGM issue.

RobFowl · 28-06-2013 05:08PM

Slo_Rida wrote: »

Lance:
“Pat McQuaid can say and think what he wants, and pretend to be tough on doping. He’s got no credit for this. The sport needs new leadership to try and regain credibility. It simply can’t move on with McQuaid as the leader.”

In a bizarre chain of events, Lance Armstrong is now preaching the exact same message as all the anti-McQuaid posters on here. That must be very close to ironic if not a perfect match!
This is pure entertainment.

Just in case you haven't read my earlier opinion on this...I'm not too pushed by the whole EGM issue.

It's somewhat ironic alright !

I know I argued strongly that by not applying the rules to Armstrong the UCI and PMQ were at best setting a very bad example. Then LA comes along and says PMQ is part of the problem, suspect he's saving the juicy bits for the inevitable book.......

Either way I think both should be consigned to the history books......

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

Comments