- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Brian Cookson press picCookson hits back at "desperate" McQuaid after UCI president insists nominations above board
Brian Cookson has said that a demand from his UCI presidential rival Pat McQuaid for British Cycling to cease a legal challenge to potential changes to the process for next month’s election smacks of desperation on the current UCI president’s part, and has accused him of seeking to engage in “restrospective rule bending.”
Cookson, currently president of British Cycling and the sole challenger to McQuaid, who has been UCI president since 2005, also insists he wants an open and transparent contest ahead of the elections, due to take place at the UCI World Congress in Florence on 27 September.
Last month, the UCI revealed that the Malaysian Cycling Federation had proposed a rule change to be voted on in Florence that would allow candidates for the UCI presidency to be nominated by any two national governing bodies.
McQuaid, whose nomination by Cycling Ireland had been blocked by a vote at an Emergency General Meeting, has been nominated for re-election by Swiss Cycling.
However, the endorsement of his candidacy by the national federation of the country the UCI is based in and in which he lives is subject to a legal challenge.
Controversially, when it announced that proposed rule change in late July, the UCI said that it would allow national governing bodies to make nominations until 30 August and they would be considered valid retrospectively if the amendments were adopted, even though the original deadline was 30 June.
It also announced that besides Swiss Cycling, McQuaid had also been nominated by the Thai and Moroccan federations, which many saw as an attempt by the UCI president to manipulate the electoral process in his favour.
Cookson himself said at the time: “What sort of organisation attempts to rewrite the rules once an election has actually begun – it smacks of attempted dictatorship.”
In a statement released this morning, McQuaid rejected claims by lawyers acting for British Cycling that his nominations from the Thai Cycling Association and the Féderation Royal Marocanine federations were made after the closing date.
There had been no hint that those nominations had been made – or were even possible, under existing rules – prior to 30 June.
“That is an outrageous suggestion,” said McQuaid. “Brian must immediately make a statement on whether he believes that to be true and if he believes otherwise he has duty to ensure that this allegation is publicly withdrawn.”
He went on: “As the President of British Cycling, Brian Cookson must explain his decision to allow his federation - that is funding his campaign - to behave in this way and to use its considerable financial clout to employ lawyers to challenge issues in the election.
“I do not fear an open election and I am not at all concerned by my ability to secure the support and votes that I require to be re-elected as UCI President.
“While it would appear that Brian has lost confidence in his own ability I continue to challenge him to allow the UCI Congress and its voting delegates to decide,” he concluded.
However, Cookson said that the concerns of British Cycling and others about what he termed “retrospective rule bending” and also
“Sadly today we have seen yet another attempt by the existing UCI President, Pat McQuaid, to denigrate the current presidential election process,” said Cookson.
"I want nothing more than an open and properly conducted democratic election and vote for the UCI presidency. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.
"It is also true that I, and many in our sport, have legitimate and growing concerns about the retrospective rule bending and attempted manipulation that is taking place at present.
“In my view it is therefore absolutely correct that British Cycling and others have raised concerns regarding proposed rule changes which have a direct impact on the election process now under way. These concerns need to be addressed.
He added: "Far from ducking these issues, for the good of cycling and the reputation of the UCI, it is critical that openness and transparency guide our procedures and not desperate manoeuvres and outbursts by Mr McQuaid.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 6 min 11 sec ago
How about just putting the 20mph limits in wherever there's been a traffic collision? That could change the nature of motorways though.
- OnYerBike 41 min 39 sec ago
Obviously we only have the snippets of information from the newspaper report, but Mr Brayley might be correct....
- MattKelland 1 hour 5 min ago
Thanks! For some reason it's not showing up here: https://road.cc/show/tags/nmotd/145572
- brooksby 1 hour 6 min ago
But it's OK because our taxes are being used to subsidise those poor hard-done-by motorists by freezing fuel duty
- Surreyrider 1 hour 53 sec ago
Yeah, I saw the Standard headline and thought 1 how many drivers have jumped red lights and been fined (after all they're the ones risking the most...
- PeteZahad 1 hour 23 min ago
I have the same issue and recently switched to hot waxing the chain and keeping the drive train free from conventional grease. On dry days a simple...
- bianchi51 1 hour 49 min ago
The Redshift bar has its potential uses; I've had a Giant Defy for a few years and I'm not as flexible now as when I bought it. I would really like...
- Benthic 2 hours 28 min ago
Highway Code rule 237 If you are dazzled by bright sunlight, slow down and if necessary, stop.
- Secret_squirrel 3 hours 13 min ago
Im betting these come out of the same factory as the SG and the Grip grab gloves. Identical apart from the Silicon overlay....
- stonojnr 3 hours 30 min ago
That "old lane" as you call it, is 1) very much open, some misguided cyclists still use it. I used it once, vowed never to again and I block ride...
Add new comment
21 comments
FWIW, it's likely well within the remit of UCI administrative and legal staff to help members with proposals.
The problem isn't that the UCI Director-General or its counsel helped with the wording, but that none of the UCI executive committee (comprising the president and the 3 vice-presidents of the UCI) saw fit to inform the rest of the UCI management committee about these proposals. Even though the director-general reports to the president, and the letter from the director-general was Cc'ed to a vice-president.
The agenda for the congress has apparently been sent out to UCI member federations without the management committee having seen or approved it, according to at least one management committee member. This runs contrary to the UCI constitution. If this is the case, these proposals can not be voted on at this congress.
One would assume this could not have happened without the President having been aware of it.
I don't know why you lot think Mcquaid will be out, who will vote him out given the level of "vested interest" that goes on in the various cycle federations. Mcquaid knows he'll be voted back in as long has he can secure a nomination. Cookson will not get in and he will bring a ton s..t down on BC and UK riders for going up against him. We under estimate Mcquaid and the other vested interests at the UCI.
Should there be a miracle and Cookson gets the job, the vested interests that don't want him at the UCI headquarters will make his tenure impossible. A bit like the Tony Doyle situation and the BCF thing of a few years ago but worse.
Do tell - how long?
I think this is a very real possibility - ultimately, the vote of a small federation is worth as much as a vote from a European nation where cycling is much more established, and one thing Pat has been doing is pushing into new countries.
It's emerged today that those nice people in Aigle helped the Asian Confederation and Malaysian Federation with the wording of the motions to change the UCI constitution.
I just want it over. Im amazed Pat cant see his time is up. That said, whats he going to do for the rest of his life, sad
Think I might join BC at last. Give them some extra money and support.
Embarrassing, let's return to civility. End this once and for all and bring back the duel!
Alternatively, could the battle for the Presidency be decided by a bike race? If so, I know who my money's on.
To quote the late Mike Reid, "oh Pat - what have you done".
As an aside, did you see how quickly Cookson completed the ride London 100? Well impressed! This alone would get my vote, if I could!
27th Sept... I really hope that is the date we get to stop hearing Pat's diatribe. His words are a waste of pixels on my monitor... Go away quietly Pat - leave cycling alone.
jim burn , aka , phat the rat has farted once again ? Can't you smell the stench of corruption that he has created ?
IOC must be a crock of sh#t to allow a person , they banned from competition in the 1970s , to be not only on their Payroll , BUT , to be involved in London 2012 Olympic Medal Ceremonies !
Jacques Rogge was thought to be an OK guy , but ,with 2 of the candidates for his job , later this year being involved in scandals in their Home Countries , it appears that to be a Member of the IOC , it is necessary to be mired in controversy ? Can't think they are ALL Tall poppies that the Jealous are trying to pull down ?
Right now we are nearly 4 weeks past the END of the 100th Le Tour , and i have yet to see ANY RACER named as having a Sanction for ANY Doping Substance ! Surely , of the 200 or so RACERS , there must have been a FEW , who were greedy enough to want to spend the money to achieve the CAREER Boost that the TDF creates ?
ALL those that claimed they STOPPED Doping in 2006 , then got caught in subsequent years , CANNOT have decided that 2013 Le TOUR , was the ONLY Event , to NOT risk their luck ?
And everyone is sleep walking into more nonsense it seems.
I'm just surprised the proposed rule change wasn't to allow a nomination by an Honorary President and BFF....
So... when did things change?
Last time I remember, if someone said "from what I understand, it didn't happen on that date" the other person would simply show evidence that it did...
I don't ever recall someone being ridiculed for suggesting a difference... even more so when they didn't do it personally!!!
So, Pat, just show everyone the dates & prove them wrong... simple... isn't it?!?!?
Well if you can backdate a prescription.....
ct - are you saying that McQuaid is right here?
No, not me gov, more a general point about McQuaid, no matter what, good or bad, right or wrong, stinks the place up and gives the UCI a very slippery and untrustworthy rep.
It just, sigh, it just beggars belief.
Even if McQ is 'in the right' the sooner he is out of cycling the sooner it can move on and clean its name [McQ is too closely linked to the shambles in the past]
I distinctly smell the whiff of bullshit Mr McQuaid.
Pat's right. It's outrageous that Brian is using his "considerable financial clout" to employ lawyers. Oh, hang on. Come to think of it I think Pat might have used lawyers in the past himself, or am I misremembering?