German races under pressure

German races under pressure


29.12.2007/ German cycling is in a deep crisis. After 42 years the Tour of Rheinland-Pfalz will dissapear from the German race calendar. The 100 years anniversary of the Cologne Classic seemes to take place but the oldest German race still has no title sponsor. The title sponsor of Frankfurt's Henninger Turm will not extend its contract which expires after the 2008 edition of the race.

Read more at:

http://www.cyclingheroes.info/id1046.html

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

CH : Yeah, I had heard through the grapevine that several German races were under pressure.

I've also been told that a couple of high profile French races are also experiencing problems retaining/gaining sponsorship.

Well done the UCI.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it" - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

Switzerland: after Zürich, the GP Chiasso won't take place in 2008 as well.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

Isn't it a systemic problem? Are you saying that cycling's problems in Europe are solely due to the UCI?

I thought everyone from UCI to ASO, to cyclists, to sponsors, to doctors, to DS's, to WADA, to the labs, and to national involvement in investigations, were partly responsible for the current mess.

Unless you're saying that UCI should have handled doping like they did in the good old days when it was all covered up?

Can someone explain to me how if UCI, alone, did something different, cycling wouldn't be in its current mess?

__________________

The UCI is the governing body, they could have stopped it any time.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

As far as I can see, not without a protracted mess, the likes of which we are currently seeing.

I assume you're talking about stopping doping right...not stopping the anti-doping fight?

How could UCI have stopped doping at "any time" without catching people out publicly for trying to cheat?

I'm not trying to be argumentative here CH so much as trying to learn...because I am missing something.

__________________

The UCI knew very well what was going on, for years! There is a sequence in the movie the Flying Scotsman which says it all. They couldn't stop Graeme O'Bree as he was clean...

Not that they didn't found something else, they disqualified his bike.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

Yeah...but everyone in the game was with the UCI's position of keeping the omerta. It wasn't until Festina and OP that the **** hit the fan and it was no longer possible to keep it under wraps.

My point is everybody really was in on the game of allowing doping. The cyclists, the sponsors, the organizers. It was in the culture. UCI would have had the same problems stopping it back then as they are having now IMO.

__________________

No, they were using the system to ...no I am not going to say that.... But let's say the UCI has something familiar with these guys from Corleone.

That doesn't mean that the other players weren't part of the problem and do not play an active role. But the UCI played a key role, its their job to govern the sport, setting rules is part of that job. Now thats a hard job if you are activley undermining the very same rules.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

I don't think setting the rules was the problem. It's enforcing them that costs money. The UCI was a bureaucracy. It didn't get any extra wealth from spending money on drug testing. The problem is that the money was in the limelight of winners and the event. So that's where the money and drugs went. The IOC can't even get anti-doping right and they have huge funds as owners of the Olympics. The UCI owned very little up until recently.

So obviously you know stuff about corruption with which you can't talk about. But it doesn't surprise me that there was corruption. Because that was the only way UCI could wield its power and get a cut of the winnings. The UCI became the extortionist because they had the power to catch cyclists and ruin an event, but very little other major revenue source from pro cycling. The UCI became what it did because the whole set-up was farked. And still is IMO.

__________________

They played an active a role, a very active role.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

Extorting money from teams in exchange for protecting the team...

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

During EPO era, even without EPO tests, UCI could have warned teams, riders and media about the problem. It was their responsability. They have done nothing but just have favored omerta by threatening against riders who spoke out!
Without acts they gave a clear signal that everyone was allowed to dope, especially when doctors said there is doping only if you are caught, especially when you mask testing results
especially when you protect teams fo satisfy activity growth.

So what I'm hearing is that the UCI didn't just do nothing to combat the growing drug/doping problem, they were actually involved (physically and financially) in the drugs. Did they make money as dealers, or just as extortionists, or both? Was the UCI the beneficiary of corrupt money, or was it just the powerbrokers within the UCI who individually benefitted?

__________________

CH, what control does UCI have over covering up positive tests in grand tours like Tour de France? I mean if they did have some control over even these races, then they could have kept the omerta and avoided the current situation (the fact that it is an unacceptable situation is a different story), right?. Surely, they would have known that if they start busting many riders (even if it is because of lack of payment of the "ransom" by the team), there would be a problem with sponsors leaving the sport?