Support for World Teams



Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tritonrider

Guest
Maybe I have my head up a body cavity but I don't see why:

1. USAC can't identify fairly accurate pool of riders that might be selected for the teams based on
the earlier years result.

2. Put together seperate guideline packets outlining what the athletes need to do, including
medical, passport etc and mail it early in the year. With a checklist.

3. Make someone available by phone or e-mail to help guide potential members through the maze.

4. At selection time ask the athlete if they have completed all items on the checklist, if they
haven't move to the next person.

This really doesn't seem like a big stretch to me, they aren't all that many people who are really
qualified for Worlds. I'd guess a long pool of maybe 300 in all disciplines, not including Masters
stuff. Fire away Bill C
 
"TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Maybe I have my head up a body cavity but I don't see why:
>
> 1. USAC can't identify fairly accurate pool of riders that might be
selected
> for the teams based on the earlier years result.
>
> 2. Put together seperate guideline packets outlining what the athletes
need to
> do, including medical, passport etc and mail it early in the year. With a checklist.
>
> 3. Make someone available by phone or e-mail to help guide potential
members
> through the maze.
>
> 4. At selection time ask the athlete if they have completed all items on
the
> checklist, if they haven't move to the next person.
>
> This really doesn't seem like a big stretch to me, they aren't all that
many
> people who are really qualified for Worlds. I'd guess a long pool of maybe
300
> in all disciplines, not including Masters stuff.

Masters Fattie Worlds are open to all.
 
Selection procedures are posted "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Maybe I have my head up a body cavity but I don't see why:
>
> 1. USAC can't identify fairly accurate pool of riders that might be
selected
> for the teams based on the earlier years result.
>
> 2. Put together seperate guideline packets outlining what the athletes
need to
> do, including medical, passport etc and mail it early in the year. With a checklist.
>
> 3. Make someone available by phone or e-mail to help guide potential
members
> through the maze.
>
> 4. At selection time ask the athlete if they have completed all items on
the
> checklist, if they haven't move to the next person.
>
> This really doesn't seem like a big stretch to me, they aren't all that
many
> people who are really qualified for Worlds. I'd guess a long pool of maybe
300
> in all disciplines, not including Masters stuff. Fire away Bill C
 
>From: "Sam" [email protected]

>Selection procedures are posted

Selection procedures are posted

It's not so much about selection. I would have no problem with the self nomination process either
if someone mailed them a packet and provided guidance. How is what happened fair to Todd and Adam;
The riders who could've replaced them; Or the USAC members who payed for their expenses to go and
be ineligible? Bill C
 
New info: http://www.velonews.com/race/mtn/articles/4933.0.html

This is the quote I like from USAC.

As for USA Cycling's role, it's pointing the finger at the UCI and the riders themselves, saying
that they were never notified by the UCI that there were American riders in jeopardy of missing the
spring testing window.

"It's typical UCI. It was their responsibility to notify us," said USAC spokesman Andy Lee. "But we
also feel that in the end it is the individual riders' responsibility, too."

Just what is USAC doing with the money we send them? Why were they unaware of the requirements on
the riders they were paying to send to Worlds?

It's all someone elses fault.... Bill C
 
"TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >From: "Sam" [email protected]
>
> >Selection procedures are posted
>
> Selection procedures are posted
>
> It's not so much about selection. I would have no problem with the self nomination process either
> if someone mailed them a packet and provided guidance. How is what happened fair to Todd and
> Adam; The riders who could've
replaced
> them; Or the USAC members who payed for their expenses to go and be
ineligible?
> Bill C

Your membership dollars do not pay for these. The Athletics budget comes from USOC money. Part of me
says it was fair to Todd and Adam since they did not follow the rules. It is not a good thing that
they did not. Perhaps this will get UCI teams (in Wells' case) and those in the top 100 to be aware
of the rules.
 
"TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> New info: http://www.velonews.com/race/mtn/articles/4933.0.html
>
>
> This is the quote I like from USAC.
>
> As for USA Cycling's role, it's pointing the finger at the UCI and the
riders
> themselves, saying that they were never notified by the UCI that there
were
> American riders in jeopardy of missing the spring testing window.
>
> "It's typical UCI. It was their responsibility to notify us," said USAC spokesman Andy Lee. "But
> we also feel that in the end it is the individual riders' responsibility, too."
>
> Just what is USAC doing with the money we send them? Why were they
unaware of
> the requirements on the riders they were paying to send to Worlds?
>
> It's all someone elses fault.... Bill C

In this case notification came pretty late. Bad situation. Also the rule has been on the books for 2
years and never enforced with this vigor.

My question is why did the UCI let them race without the documentation all season?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads