A good day's work

19 April 2011 | 0:00 - By Philip Gomes

Saying the wrong thing at the wrong time has become a bit of a speciality amongst the many political actors in the great drama that is professional road cycling, writes Philip Gomes.

mcquaid_310_reu_615457061

International Cycling Union President Pat McQuaid (Reuters)

Saying the wrong thing at the wrong time has become a bit of a speciality amongst the many political actors in the great drama that is professional road cycling but none appear to do it better than International Cycling Union (UCI) President Pat McQuaid.

In a meeting with the AIGCP (Association International des Groupes Cyclistes Professionels), reported in Cyclingnews, the ever colourful McQuaid laid out the caste system for those who may have been under the mistaken impression the whole arrangement should include their input.

"They don't realise what their place is. In this sport and in most other international sports, you have an international authority and international federation that is the government and governance of the sport and regulates the sport. Organisers in our sport organise events, teams have riders who ride races," said McQuaid.

"I think what's going on here is the teams want to take other roles. They want to be in roles of governance as well. They can't do that. It doesn't happen anywhere. When FIFA changed the offside rule six or seven yeas ago, they didn’t ask the teams. They did it because they felt it was good for football."

Yep, let 'em eat cake. Can you imagine any chief executive of any other organisation showing such open contempt for the people who sustain the sport he/she governs?

Of course McQuaid is being disingenuous in his 'it doesn’t happen anywhere' myopia, because it does. As I've commented on before, there is Professional Tennis, where the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) effectively runs the sport.

Then there is the International Tennis Federation (ITF), the recognised world governing body - but how often do you hear from that organisation outside of the Davis Cup, Federation Cup (women), Olympics and global grassroots development for which it is responsible?

Do most Tennis fans know who runs the ITF? Are they regularly entertained by the latest thought bubbles to emerge from its top executives? Of course not. The ITF has a certain role to play in the sport. One I would strongly argue the UCI should be modelled after.

Imagine that? A global sporting organisation that takes a back seat to the athletes and event organisers who run the professional side of the sport. Impossible in Pat McQuaid's world.

The problem as I see it is that McQuaid judges himself and his organisation as the 'star' of professional road cycling, the straw that stirs the drink, the life of the party - not the riders, who are in fact the real stars of the sport and whom he places at the bottom of the caste system.

And what of the second most important actors in this ongoing drama? The sponsors, to whom the teams, and not UCI, are indebted? No mention.

McQuaid always seeks to place himself at the center of events when his role should be that of quiet governor.

But McQuaid may have met his match, with men like Jonathan Vaughters and Johan Bruyneel prepared to stand up and be counted. Love them or loathe them - and there is a lot of both to go around if you read the forums - Vaughters and Bruyneel represent some of the future thinking for the sport. On balance both are serious men, have considered views born of real experience on the ground and neither like being taken for fools.

And both are point men in what is clearly a power struggle in the sport, with the seemingly minor issue of race radios precipitating these regular meltdowns by McQuaid. I for one hope they continue to agitate for change.

"The heart of the matter lies in that the UCI continually pretends that the teams and the riders are not key players in cycling," said Bruyneel in a recent blog post.

"There is a serious lack of respect and the teams are treated in an authoritarian way. It appears as if the UCI’s main objective is to take away any single one of the teams’ initiatives. What we see is that the policy of the UCI is very predictable. In an open letter to the riders, they have attempted to pit the riders against the management of the teams. That has been very badly received, both by riders and teams.

"We have never declared war against the UCI. Those words come only from Pat McQuaid. In addion, we have never used the words ‘break-away league’ either. That term also comes from Pat McQuaid.

"As teams we advocate for the governance of the UCI. But we do believe that professional cycling must be a special branch within the UCI. This includes a structure in which the stakeholders (including organizers, teams and riders) actually have a say. Currently that is not happening."

It often seems that every time the sport hits a purple patch, where the racing is the point of conversation and not side issues, McQuaid steps up to re-focus everything on him and his style of governance.

As Bicycling's Joe Lindsay points out in another of his always well argued opinion pieces (if you don't read him you should) this classics season has been an incredible one for the sport, with week upon week of exciting racing the norm, not the exception.

The teams and riders are throwing everything they have on to the table. Goss, Nuyens, Van Summeren, Cancellara, Gilbert and more burying themselves for our entertainment. As a result fan interest is at an all-time high.

It is exactly at this time a wise governor would allow the sport to flow, step out of the limelight, let the stars and teams show the way, engage in quiet compromise and actually listen.

Quoted again in Cyclingnews, McQuaid had this to say: "We had a real good meeting and other than those guys walking out at the end, which I think was quite ignorant on their part, even if it wasn't a surprise to me. Other than that it was a good day's work."

For daily rapid fire comment in 140 characters, follow Phil on Twitter.

Share article: 
top

Comments (15)

Display: 20 | 40 | All comments per page
Previous 10 | Page 1 | 2 | Next 10

27 Apr 2011 17:07 AEST

skippy

From: expat in europe

--

Years ago there was a young fellow in Sth Africa competing with a phoney name but got sprung and missed the Olympics ! Now this same fellow is telling All cycling to march to his tune ! Consensus is required in all sport and it just does not exist at this point in time ! Regardless of the personalities they should all arrive to meet at a venue and before sitting down leave "THEIR EGOS" in the cloakroom . Exciting racing has seen some new stars come to the fore BUT "Sponsors" must be cultivated in order to equip the teams to do the job the public want to see . This is not a "takeover" by the team management BUt it is an effort to ensure that teams do not continue to play "musical chairs" , sometimes every season . Some teams are looking for new sponsors at the end of this year and thus need to be able to convince "prospects" that there will be continuity in the growth of the sport . Meanwhile Mc Queasy is grabbing cash from all avenues and denying growth to areas like the Masters since there is not enough value there , nor is there enough in the Paralympic Area so that is for the "heave Ho "also .

Agree (0 people agree)    Disagree (0 people disagree) Report this
 

20 Apr 2011 15:51 AEST

Rachel

From: Sydney

--

Phil, not sure it even has to go that far re Matt's comments, I'm pretty sure cycling wouldn't die in a ditch in Australia because the sport globally adopts a tennis like model for governance (or whichever one) for pro cycling/cycling- one could even go so far to say that Australia's cycling popularity and success is in spite of, not because of the UCI...this would surely continue....but yeah, do agree with what you say. Not entirely convinced it's a great model either, but isn't bad. As long as the Giro/TDF/major classics,monuments aren't harmed in the new world.... Tennis' lack of recent popularity in Oz is for a number of reasons, probably none to do with the global context....

Agree (2 people agree)    Disagree (1 people disagree) Report this
 

20 Apr 2011 11:59 AEST

Phil (Ed)

From: Sydney

--

Matt, we're clearly not going to agree on Tennis as a model. The sport is globalised, and some markets are growing at the expense of others. In a global context it just doesn't matter if the sport declines in Australia or the US if it's growing quickly elsewhere, like Asia - broader context matters. Australia isn't 'the world'. This is why Australian tennis has refocused its attentions on the region with the Open. With the populations of India and China available to the sport, Tennis will be/is bigger.

Agree (1 people agree)    Disagree (3 people disagree) Report this
 

20 Apr 2011 10:40 AEST

clipperton

From: heidelberg

--

if we're looking to other sports for suitable models for a power balance how about the biggest of 'em all - football's champions league. uefa kowtowed to those who bring in the big bucks by changing the format from a straight knockout competition to a league format. why? to minimise the risk of a surprise loss to a minnow seeing one of the big clubs losing out on expected revenue. apply this thinking to cycling and it makes perfect sense that no sponsor would want to invest millions if they couldn't have some reassurance that their investment wouldn't go down the gurgler because of a poorly-timed, miscommunicated puncture or pee-break.

Agree (0 people agree)    Disagree (0 people disagree) Report this
 

20 Apr 2011 9:31 AEST

Newby

From: Perth

--

To be honest I think the relationship between the UCI and some members of the AIGCP has become toxic. I don't think that there will be any resolution to any disgreement that these two bodies have. It is a matter of personality now and not "losing face". The best scenario is that the personalities involved step down from their respective positions of representation and enable others who can form a better working relationship have go. The whole issue of race radios has become a power play and I think the issues surrounding the use or non use of them have become lost. It is shameful from both sides that leaked emails and conversations are aired in a public forum. This is neither professional behaviour nor conducive to a good working relationship. Cycling is a great sport with professional athletes who deserve better than what they are getting at the moment from both the UCI and the AIGCP.

Agree (3 people agree)    Disagree (0 people disagree) Report this
 

20 Apr 2011 9:28 AEST

Dave

From: Adelaide

--

Good article Philip. I am getting a bit sick of these team owners that see to be on a power trip and demanding control of everything. Their rider safety argument has been met, accepted by the UCI who have proposed alternatives that will meet the safety standards. I agree that Pat McQuaid is a bit of a loudmouth but in this case I back him and hope that he see’s this case through – sport needs effective governance that has the long-term best interests in its control not a bunch of heavyweight team owners with an overinflated opinion of themselves making short-term decisions that only fuel their ego’s. The Classics are currently underway and we have had great racing but rest assured when the longer stage races start again, their will be fresh evidence that the banning race radios will be beneficial to the sport.

Agree (6 people agree)    Disagree (0 people disagree) Report this
 

20 Apr 2011 9:13 AEST

Matt

From: Sydney

--

Phil - Tennis numbers have seen a steady decline in participation from the late 80's when the glam culture of the sport was at it's peak. The sport has and continues to suffer from poor numbers in the junior ranks and if it wasn't for the Australian Open, would wither even more so. The solution would be for TA to drive more programs in schools and clubs. But it can't. Why? It has to set up a range of "money tournaments" because the ATP has driven the notion that Tennis has to pay - period - and there's no money left over for anything else. They have been disenfranchised of the tournaments that would help raise the sufficient funds to help and support junior talent. The ATP is only concerned about itself not the sport of tennis. Do you only honestly think that team bosses give a dam about a junior development? Or participation? Where do you think the next crop of Garmin-Cervelo riders are going to come from if there's no money to help drive the sport at a junior level? Vaughters et al are only concerned for themselves and not the sport. Tennis is an example of what NOT to do Phil.

Agree (5 people agree)    Disagree (1 people disagree) Report this
 

19 Apr 2011 22:11 AEST

Chris

From: NSW

--

The real problem is that the UCI are in the pocket of the IOC. The IOC are the ones who want radios banned, the UCI are just bending over to their every demand. There is nothing the AIGCP et al can do to talk them out of this

Agree (0 people agree)    Disagree (0 people disagree) Report this
 

19 Apr 2011 21:04 AEST

Phil (Ed)

From: Sydney

--

Matt, Tennis is a model, very specifically so. It does have a system of governance as I detailed in the post, one that sees the world governing body relegated to its proper role. We have to take lessons from elsewhere to move forward and as I demonstrated, McQuaid is clearly wrong in his assertion that an alternative model does not exist. Last time I looked Tennis was a wildly successful professional sport. Cycling is not, in a global context. I believe that is because the professional side of the sport is still coupled to the UCI which is a mundane dysfunctional organisation lacking real vision focused on shifting processes and one that only serves to preserve some dreamy mythical 'past' that sees the athletes treated like serfs and sponsors like dirt. I'm not alone in thinking this, many observers in the sport also share this view.

Agree (3 people agree)    Disagree (5 people disagree) Report this
 

19 Apr 2011 20:37 AEST

Matt

From: Sydney

--

Phil - your continued insistence that the UCI is the source of all evil is a dull and boring assertion. And your continuing reference to tennis as a model as "the way forward" is rubbish. McQuaid is right to say that all sports require a leadership structure that acts for the good of the sport as whole. Not for the good of the sponsors, or the good of teams or for whatever suits JV this week. The UCI has a much bigger picture to think about other than the inflated egos of sports directors. And if JV et al could also look at that bigger picture they would see that the actions of the UCI, whilst not suiting them personally, have a positive flow on for them and their teams.

Agree (8 people agree)    Disagree (4 people disagree) Report this
 
Display: 20 | 40 | All comments per page
Previous 10 | Page 1 | 2 | Next 10

Join the discussion

You have characters remaining.
Validation (
) :
This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.

PLEASE NOTE: All submitted comments become the property of SBS. We reserve the right to edit and/or amend submitted comments. HTML tags other than paragraph, line break, bold or italics will be removed from your comment.