Someone explain the structure of the UCI to me please.

Hi,

Since I, like many others, am rather unhappy with how the UCI conducts itself regarding various issues, especially the doping issue I began to wonder what the process is that leads to the UCI coming up with a rule or something. So I began to research. Or atleast tried to. Thing is, I really didn't find anything. Everything about is extremely clouded and information near impossible to obtain...

My point is, what the heck is this thing? Is it democratic? If so how would I get myself in the position to elect something....or be elected. Lets say if I wanted to become the next UCI president what would I have to do? Or is it owned by some rich dude who just picks these UCI officials as he pleases to? I just read committee this, committee that, its extremely confusing. At no point did I find an explanation how one would be determined to join one of these various committees and what exactly these committes are entitled to do etc pp..!

Can someone explain this to me?! I realize that calling this a labyrinth is probably an euphemism. So I would be perfectly fine if someone could outline the basic framework that describes the relationship between various committees and posts within the UCI aswell as how it connects with the national governing bodies and anti doping agencies, Maybe providing some sources with detailed information would be perfect!

Also I really wonder why so many race organizers and athletes support a federation that is this disconnected from its members and is as transparent as a 3meter thick wolfram wall.

 

The UCI is opaque, dictatorial, typically unresponsive and still deeply mired in the past. If the FIA (Formula One) had sex with FIFA (football/soccer) and produced a low-class, brain-damaged child, it would be the UCI.

That said, it's actually somewhat better than it used to be, now that they've gotten rid of Pat McQuaid, who was corrupt to the core and ran the UCI like his own little kingdom. Big fish, small pond, "micro-penis Napoleon complex", you get the picture.

There is no process that I know of for someone outside the organization to submit a proposal or become a candidate. Having been a pro cyclist would seem to help one's chances of getting noticed, but it seems to pretty much be an "old boys club".

As for the structure of the organization, I wonder if even the insiders know how it's supposed to work.

Getting rid of the UCI is probably the best thing that could happen to professional cycling. It should be replaced with a league structure and a rider's union that could begin to build some stability through revenue sharing. That would attract more sponsors and more importantly, long-term sponsors. Currently, the sport is a mess that's controlled by an inept governing body and a handful of big race promoters who are only in it for themselves.

Other than that, things are just peachy!

 

Like Bryan said, the structure and the structures location, are designed to ensure no real accountability.

Access to the UCI is through national cycling federations. One has to be appointed to one's national federation before one can be appointed to the UCI, by the UCI.

 

Thanks for that clarification. Unfortunately, it probably means "don't even bother to try unless you have connections".

 

Bryan - how in the hell did you get marked as a "new member". You've been biting people for so long I would have expected you've worn all of your teeth out by now.

I agree with you about the UCI. They have shown so much bias over the years that it is impossible to tell what they really think and what they are paid to think.

 

I think that you're right, Brian.

I know that even to get elected at national federation level, applicants are required to sing from a given hymn sheet.

My own view has always been that the UCI - like FIFA - is not fit for office. It has been shown to be corrupt, ineffectual and staffed by shysters.