Katusha - WTF !!!!

Talk about competitive road cycling in all its forms
Richmond Racer
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 17:11 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Richmond Racer » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:52 pm

morstar wrote:
nathancom wrote:UCI proves that it has no clue how to run a professional sport. Sure there are plenty of questions for Katusha to answer but how can a sport be run by such arbitrary decisions. This just encourages corruption. Hopefully a better professional structure will be brought in as a result of this...


This^

Thousands of reasons to boot any team you decide you don't like on any given morning. Governing a sport is supposed to be slightly more structured though.



How do you know its arbitrary? How do you know its not on the basis of ethics for example?

mroli
Posts: 3443
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 15:09 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby mroli » Tue Dec 11, 2012 13:02 pm

No-one knows (including Katusha) why they weren't included. They will (as we will) get the reasoned decision in the course of time, as the UCI have indicated (a couple of days to Katusha). Obviously, this is not ideal, but let's not jump to conclusions beforehand?

nathancom
Posts: 1700
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 19:13 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby nathancom » Tue Dec 11, 2012 13:08 pm

Then the UCI website simply says "The request from the team Katusha for registration in first division has been rejected." So the registration to WT has been rejected on some basis as yet unpublished yet is sufficient for them to ride Pro Conti. If it is on ethical grounds then it seems you need to be less ethical for the lower division. That is a great message to send out.

The very fact that the UCI decides on a number of positions in the top division on a basis other than sporting results encourages "lobbying", and is reminiscent of domestic football administration in Argentina and Brasil where the league format has been changed several times over recent years to prevent powerful teams being relegated.

If the UCI believes Katusha has contravened rules then there should be a due process leading to sanctions set out within the code of the sport. If one of those sanctions is exclusion from the top tier then so be it. However, that kind of process has not been followed which leads to the only conclusion that the process followed has been arbitrary and driven by political rather than sporting considerations.

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15947
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby RichN95 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 13:09 pm

My guess is that Igor Makarov was told that he had to choose between cycling administration or team ownership and failed to sufficiently comply.

On one hand he owns Katusha, Rusvelo and the Itera team. On the other he is President of the Russian Federation, a member of the UCI management committee. He was also UEC Chairman, but stepped down last month, getting his puppet Tchmil elected (by becoming their main sponsor).

He's the very definition of conflict of interest, and he probably needed to be curtailed a little bit.
Twitter: @RichN95

User avatar
Jez mon
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 15:07 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Jez mon » Tue Dec 11, 2012 16:39 pm

RichN95 wrote:My guess is that Igor Makarov was told that he had to choose between cycling administration or team ownership and failed to sufficiently comply.

On one hand he owns Katusha, Rusvelo and the Itera team. On the other he is President of the Russian Federation, a member of the UCI management committee. He was also UEC Chairman, but stepped down last month, getting his puppet Tchmil elected (by becoming their main sponsor).

He's the very definition of conflict of interest, and he probably needed to be curtailed a little bit.


Taking out Katusha from the top division of cycling is a rather cack-handed way to achieve this though. If I was in the position of a potential sponsor looking to come into this sport the dismissal of the most successful team from the top tier might make me question the sanity of the governing body.

Fair enough, Katusha might not be a shining bastion of clean cycling. But a fair few teams aren't.
You live and learn. At any rate, you live
Twitter

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15947
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby RichN95 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 16:54 pm

Jez mon wrote:
RichN95 wrote:My guess is that Igor Makarov was told that he had to choose between cycling administration or team ownership and failed to sufficiently comply.

On one hand he owns Katusha, Rusvelo and the Itera team. On the other he is President of the Russian Federation, a member of the UCI management committee. He was also UEC Chairman, but stepped down last month, getting his puppet Tchmil elected (by becoming their main sponsor).

He's the very definition of conflict of interest, and he probably needed to be curtailed a little bit.


Taking out Katusha from the top division of cycling is a rather cack-handed way to achieve this though. If I was in the position of a potential sponsor looking to come into this sport the dismissal of the most successful team from the top tier might make me question the sanity of the governing body.

Fair enough, Katusha might not be a shining bastion of clean cycling. But a fair few teams aren't.

It may be cack handed to you, but it's an effective way of doing it. Makarov has his fingers in to many pies to be healthy and if threatening him with the loss of the licence is a way to force him to drop some, then so he it. Good move.

To use another football analogy, if the owner of Manchester United (and Preston and Oldham) was also Chairman of the FA, a vice President of FIFa and the main sponsor of UEFA, everyone would call foul and expect something to be done.
Last edited by RichN95 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Twitter: @RichN95

Richmond Racer
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 17:11 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Richmond Racer » Tue Dec 11, 2012 16:58 pm

Rich is right. If this was James Murdoch (and if he also headed up BC), people would have been screaming blue murder from the day Team Sky was launched.

User avatar
Jez mon
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 15:07 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Jez mon » Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:18 pm

I'm not disagreeing about whether Makarov had his fingers in too many pies, just about whether this is the best way to go about things.

To go back to our football analogy, if this happened...well it wouldn't happen, surely, the chairman of the FA wouldn't be allowed to own Man U, and vice versa. If it did somehow happen, he would be made to give up one of his positions, Man U wouldn't get relegated.
You live and learn. At any rate, you live
Twitter

Richmond Racer
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 17:11 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Richmond Racer » Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:19 pm

Katusha's statement as handily pasted onto INRNG's site:

http://inrng.tumblr.com/post/37719601412/katusha

With this decision the UCI have caused irreperable moral and psychological damage to their riders apparently*

Man the guns - the Russians are about to march on Aigle


*Menchov has got stuck into a vat of 40% proof vodka and won't come out
Last edited by Richmond Racer on Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15947
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby RichN95 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:22 pm

Jez mon wrote:I'm not disagreeing about whether Makarov had his fingers in too many pies, just about whether this is the best way to go about things.

To go back to our football analogy, if this happened...well it wouldn't happen, surely, the chairman of the FA wouldn't be allowed to own Man U, and vice versa. If it did somehow happen, he would be made to give up one of his positions, Man U wouldn't get relegated.

And when he refuses to give up one of his positions (he's not going to lose an election), then what do you do?
Twitter: @RichN95

User avatar
Jez mon
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 15:07 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Jez mon » Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:30 pm

RichN95 wrote:
Jez mon wrote:I'm not disagreeing about whether Makarov had his fingers in too many pies, just about whether this is the best way to go about things.

To go back to our football analogy, if this happened...well it wouldn't happen, surely, the chairman of the FA wouldn't be allowed to own Man U, and vice versa. If it did somehow happen, he would be made to give up one of his positions, Man U wouldn't get relegated.

And when he refuses to give up one of his positions (he's not going to lose an election), then what do you do?


To be honest, I'm not sure :lol: . But I don't think I'd wait to the end of the season to do it, and when I did whatever it was, I'd publish full reasons for my decision.
You live and learn. At any rate, you live
Twitter

nathancom
Posts: 1700
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 19:13 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby nathancom » Tue Dec 11, 2012 17:41 pm

RichN95 wrote:
Jez mon wrote:
RichN95 wrote:My guess is that Igor Makarov was told that he had to choose between cycling administration or team ownership and failed to sufficiently comply.

On one hand he owns Katusha, Rusvelo and the Itera team. On the other he is President of the Russian Federation, a member of the UCI management committee. He was also UEC Chairman, but stepped down last month, getting his puppet Tchmil elected (by becoming their main sponsor).

He's the very definition of conflict of interest, and he probably needed to be curtailed a little bit.


Taking out Katusha from the top division of cycling is a rather cack-handed way to achieve this though. If I was in the position of a potential sponsor looking to come into this sport the dismissal of the most successful team from the top tier might make me question the sanity of the governing body.

Fair enough, Katusha might not be a shining bastion of clean cycling. But a fair few teams aren't.

It may be cack handed to you, but it's an effective way of doing it. Makarov has his fingers in to many pies to be healthy and if threatening him with the loss of the licence is a way to force him to drop some, then so he it. Good move.

To use another football analogy, if the owner of Manchester United (and Preston and Oldham) was also Chairman of the FA, a vice President of FIFa and the main sponsor of UEFA, everyone would call foul and expect something to be done.

Well to follow the football analogy you wouldn't just relegate Man U without following any regulations. You would make sure rules existed within football gov bodies to regulate ownership with set sanctions for breaking the rules and then act on those sanctions in a transparent manner. All this move does is emphasise the mafia-style nature of cycling politics which can hardly be good for the sport in the long term.

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15947
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby RichN95 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 18:05 pm

Some of you might like to read rules 2.15.052-053 , bearing in mind the common ownership of Katusha and Rusvelo
Twitter: @RichN95

User avatar
iainf72
Posts: 15160
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby iainf72 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 18:39 pm

It appears they didn't comply with the financial requirements
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.

Richmond Racer
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 17:11 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby Richmond Racer » Tue Dec 11, 2012 18:46 pm

iainf72 wrote:It appears they didn't comply with the financial requirements



Did E&Y turn up money-laundering?

User avatar
LangerDan
Posts: 6052
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 13:52 pm

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby LangerDan » Tue Dec 11, 2012 19:14 pm

Astana fell at this hurdle in the past too.
'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'

User avatar
ad_snow
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:51 am

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby ad_snow » Tue Dec 11, 2012 21:18 pm

iainf72 wrote:It appears they didn't comply with the financial requirements


Source?

User avatar
No tA Doctor
Posts: 5483
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 11:37 am
Contact:

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby No tA Doctor » Tue Dec 11, 2012 21:26 pm

While I'm not fan of Katusha and recognise the decision to drop them may well have been right, the announcement does little to enhance the credibility of the UCI. In the days while we wait for a reasoned decision (and Katusha do too) we'll have loads of speculation, at least some of which will involve Machiavelian power games from McQuaid.

If they've got reasons they should have at least made Katusha aware of them and told us at the bare minimum which criterion they failed under. As it is it looks like they're giving themselves a couple of days to manufacture some.

Right or wrong, this isn't how you run a credible organisation.
“Road racing was over and the UCI had banned my riding positions on the track, so it was like ‘Jings, crivvens, help ma Boab, what do I do now? I know, I’ll go away and be depressed for 10 years’.”

@DrHeadgear

Steve Abraham's attempt at the year record

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15947
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby RichN95 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 21:58 pm

No tA Doctor wrote:If they've got reasons they should have at least made Katusha aware of them and told us at the bare minimum which criterion they failed under. As it is it looks like they're giving themselves a couple of days to manufacture some.

I expect the top management at Katusha know exactly what the problem is, and have done for some time.
Twitter: @RichN95

User avatar
No tA Doctor
Posts: 5483
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 11:37 am
Contact:

Re: Katusha - WTF !!!!

Postby No tA Doctor » Tue Dec 11, 2012 22:54 pm

RichN95 wrote:
No tA Doctor wrote:If they've got reasons they should have at least made Katusha aware of them and told us at the bare minimum which criterion they failed under. As it is it looks like they're giving themselves a couple of days to manufacture some.

I expect the top management at Katusha know exactly what the problem is, and have done for some time.


It still needs to be communicated officially. Otherwise it looks like a whim. To admit you haven't even told them why yet is ridiculous - even if they know already. It follows the usual UCI pattern of making a contentious decision without telling anyone how it was made, who made it, when and under what regulations. It's why McQuaid has gotten into all this bother - because we cant actually trust that the correct regulations and procedures are being followed and strongly suspect it's Pat and his cronies making it up as they go along.
“Road racing was over and the UCI had banned my riding positions on the track, so it was like ‘Jings, crivvens, help ma Boab, what do I do now? I know, I’ll go away and be depressed for 10 years’.”

@DrHeadgear

Steve Abraham's attempt at the year record


Return to “Pro Race”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AndyRAC, Englander, Garry H, GrenW, OnYourRight, orraloon, Paulie Walnuts, Pollys Bott, Slowmart, Wheelspinner and 32 guests