An independent anti-doping agency for pro cycling? It sounds likes a great idea, no?
There are regular calls for an independent body and Greg LeMond is the latest to express concerns. Trust in the governing body has been eroded and across all sports there’s an obvious tension between the promotional role of a governing body and its duty to bust the cheats.
But can this be done? Would the WADA Code allow it? And isn’t a lot of testing already independent of the UCI?
According to leaked memos seen by Belgian newspaper Het Nieuwsblad Lance Armstrong tested positive four times in the 1999 Tour de France. Sounds dramatic, no?
Only if parts of the media are reporting this as news (here, here or here) it turns out the UCI mentioned all of this last year in a press release. But whilst news of Armstrong’s positive test is stale as a baguette baked months ago, there’s some fresh insight because the memos appear to show the UCI positioning itself to explain past actions. Rather than analysing what went wrong the memos appear to be trying to present excuses for significant lapses in the UCI’s anti-doping procedures.
The same with the leaked information about Armstrong’s 2001 Tour de Suisse EPO tests. Whilst the media (ici) says there was no “cover-up” of a positive test there are still big questions that have yet to be answered.
…but is Your Bike UCI-approved?
A follow up to Monday’s piece about “forbidden races” where the UCI was instructing all national federations to insist on a rule that bans licence holders from unsanctioned events.
The UCI has now issued a press release saying it will not enforce the rule this year but it’s coming 2014. But this doesn’t solve the issue, it probably makes things worse.
The idea of having rules that people are told to ignore by press release is a novel one. But this isn’t the only rule that was meant to apply to everyone but gets ignored. For example a recent rule requires all UCI licence holders to use approved bikes… only it’s another example of a rule that nearly everyone ignores.
Want to ride a mountain bike race in the USA? A time trial in Britain? A criterium in Australia? A road race in France? A gran fondo in Italy? Careful because whether you’re a novice or a pro you risk being fined and suspended.
A long-standing rule has said licence holders can’t take part in unsanctioned races. Only it’s been ignored by everyone from beginners to grand tour champions. Until now.
In my column in Issue 2 of 2r Magazine I looked at the options available for team licences with a view to bringing some more stability to the system. Whilst we can explore franchises and more, one of the cheapest and quickest solutions is to publish the UCI’s criteria for scoring riders and teams.
For years teams had been ranked on a secret system that few understood leading to a lot of head-scratching and confusion. Only last Thursday the UCI quietly published Annexe-2014/UCI/A-10… better known as the Sporting Value criteria.
David Lappartient is the President of the French Cycling Federation and was elected President of the European Cycling Union, the UEC over the weekend. Does it matter? Well he’s talked of delivering an “electric shock” to pro cycling but in reality “Frenchman running European cycling” is probably as conservative as it sounds.
Lappartient’s agenda isn’t too obvious but he’s made two public statements that stand out. To support President McQuaid and to reject the idea of a closed league format of racing, the so-called “World Series Cycling.”
The UCI has an online survey to sound out opinions on the sport. The UCI is often a remote governing body to outsiders. In fact its staff are often helpful but as an entity it’s rarely accountable to fans and followers. Here is the chance to have a say.
Give it a try for yourself online at uci.ch and follow the link on their page to start the survey. It takes 10-20 minutes.
But the survey is a strange creation with some odd questions that might tempt you to click quickly but sometimes the answers are complicated. Some questions are leading and you can sense the result they want to achieve. It’s worth noting this as new investors look to cycling, or if you’re a sceptic, the barbarians are at the gate. Here’s a look at the questions, where they lead and more.
UCI points are not the greatest talking point. But points are the currency of pro cycling and influence the sport, from the racing to the promotion and relegation of teams.
Changes are coming to the system that will affect riders, teams and the racing alike. It looks like good news for some but worrying for others like Euskaltel or Vacansoleil-DCM. Let’s see what’s planned and how this might change things.
A quick post to examine what’s next for the sport after the Court of Arbitration ruled last Friday that the Russian teams should go back in World Tour.
The ruling might have left the team celebrating their good news but there’s still a smoky veil of uncertainty over what comes next and a headache for the UCI and others. If they are promoted will someone get relegated? And how can a professional sport have promotion and relegation scenarios that get decided during the season by Swiss court hearings?
Joaquim Rodriguez won the Queen Stage of the Tour of Oman today but his future and that of his team is being decided this week. The latest is that Switzerland’s Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will announce its verdict on the Katusha team tomorrow morning. The Russian team was surprisingly ejected at the eleventh hour from the UCI World Tour with little explanation given.
The shocked team appealed the decision. What can we expect from this verdict? It seems the team has the odds against them but if they do win it could turn undermine the very concept of the World Tour. Here’s a look at the likely scenarios, the rules and more.