Does Cookson's call on Astana spell the death of hope?

By Lee Rodgers / Expert

I recognise the legacy I have inherited is an atmosphere of distrust around our sport. You should (and you will) judge me on my actions. – Brian Cookson OBE, June 15, 2014.

The first rule of Twitter is that you should never tweet something you will live to regret.

Not many people follow that rule but it is quite a good one, one that Brian Cookson OBE (Oh! Benevolent Entity?) was never taught, quite obviously.

The decision to award Astana a World Tour license for 2015 has elicited widespread anger from the cycling world and is a decision that even the most hardened doping apologists will have trouble defending.

After the Astana organisation had five riders return positive tests for banned substances, the majority of cycling commentators believed it would be curtains for the Kazakh team, one that has had several other run-ins with the anti-doping authorities over the years.

Surely, went the thinking, there’s no way that a UCI run by Brian Cookson – the man who knocked Pat MacQuaid off his perch as president of the world governing body, the man who had promised to get tough on cheats – would allow Astana to keep its license?

Well… yes, actually. There was a way. He just said yes.

It involved ignoring the anger and general fed-upness of cycling fans and the few outspokenly clean riders out there, it meant that he’d have to face the opprobrium of the social media for a few days, and it would essentially cause anyone who gave a fig about doping to come to the conclusion that the UCI is not to be trusted as the overseer of this beautiful sport.

But apparently that’s all in a day’s work for Brian Cookson OBE.

I am no fan of the UCI. I lost faith in them many years ago. I don’t believe that the UCI has the best interests of the fans nor the vast majority of its members at heart. Yet even I was amazed by the news that Astana would not lose its license.

I’m not alone. Amazingly, ProTour riders are speaking out – well one, at least.

Peter Kennaugh of Sky tweeted:

Kennaugh’s tweet avoided calling out the UCI and Cookson, which may be smart with regards to his job, but there’s no hiding the fact that the decision is what prompted his tweet in the first place.

Cookson for his part has said that Astana will be under probation, which must have Alexandre Vinokourov quaking in his boots.

It could be that the UCI is fearful of banning Astana after the debacle of last season, when they had their decision not to give a WorldTour license to Katusha overturned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

If that’s the case they could at least have made the symbolic gesture. What this move has done is to strip, mangle and burn the last bare shreds of the UCI’s credibility in the eyes of right-thinking fans.

It could be a combination of things, the Katusha factor, the power and wealth of Astana (they are backed by a national government), and one online commentator suggested Vinokourov’s contacts.

In The Telegraph‘s online version, one reader wondered if the MPCC (Movement for Credible Cycling) have been involved.

Thehamst wrote:

I suspect the head of the MPCC has had a major say so in this. Astana management and Roger Legeay go back a long way; all the way back to doping at Credit Agricole in 2008 actually. The same Roger Legeay banned for doping himself now in charge f the Movement For Credible Cycling – you really couldn’t make it up.

Also interesting to note was an interview with Cookson just two days ago in which he stated that cycling was not the only sport with doping trouble, and trotted out the old line about how cycling was doing way more than those ‘other sports’.

“I have always held the view that doping was not a practice solely restricted to the sport of cycling.

“In my view there are two groups of sports: there are those that have a doping problem and are actively trying to do something about it, and I would like to say that we are in a leading position on that.

“And there are those sports that have a doping problem and are still pretty much in denial about it. And sooner or later they are going to have their problems.”

Yawn.

To be honest Brian, yes, we know other sports might have doping on a similar systematic scale as we have in cycling, but that argument doesn’t wash. You’re in charge of cycling, not table tennis.

However it is interesting to wonder what FIFA would do if, say, Barcelona suddenly got busted for a string of massive doping positives.

They’d probably say it was an isolated case, that it didn’t involve the management, was not systematic, that the players were very sorry, and that generally the sport was clean.

Sound familiar?

The truth of the matter is that the sport these guys at the top do is not the same sport I do. It is also not the same sport that 99.99 per cent of cyclists around the world do.

We don’t cheat. We don’t think about doping ourselves. We don’t accidentally fall on syringes of EPO or drink our own blood by the baggie-full.

What we do do however, is love this thing called cycling.

Against our own better sense, we still tune in for the Tour de France, the Giro d’Italia, Paris-Roubaix and the Worlds. We still love the sight of the peloton coming through the clouds to summit Ventoux, riders strewn about hither and tither, seeing the fans – people like us – by the roadside, cheering them on.

We are the guardians of the history of this sport. We are the keepers, the rememberers, the people who make it live and breathe.

We buy the kits, we buy the books and the DVDs. We go to the races. We get up late at night when the family is all sleeping and pay our subscription to get 120 channels even though there’s only one we want to watch.

And yet we are nothing. We are disrespected and barely acknowledged, unless it’s to wring money from our pockets and to thrash the faith from our weary hearts.

This decision and the statements that have followed it from Cookson show that, again, and all too clearly.

The UCI? More like the UCWHY.

The Crowd Says:

2014-12-16T18:41:40+00:00

Klaas Faber

Guest


Usually I advise athletes that have good reason to complain, like Claudia Pechstein, the first ever to be sanctioned for abnormal blood values. No doping but a hereditary blood disorder. I have called it fraud in the media. Fraud on the side of WADA. WADA kept the ABP guidelines provisional for 11 months, until a week after her conviction by the CAS. The UCI corrupt in the past? Convince me by debunking: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cycling/25439304 That being said, Europcar deserved better.

2014-12-15T21:27:06+00:00

Klaas Faber

Guest


The UCI is bound by the Code. The Code is leading but has no provision for this situation. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/the-code/2009-world-anti-doping-code 11.2 Consequences for Team Sports If more than two members of a team in a Team Sport are found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation during an Event Period , the ruling body of the Event shall impose an appropriate sanction on the team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event , or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes Out of competition controls are not even anticipated... Why blame the UCI? Blame WADA instead. Anyway: good piece and some very good comments. I stopped watching sport about 20 years ago to avoid cognityive dissonance...

2014-12-14T03:41:35+00:00

Chris Beeck

Guest


I think that it is extremely naive of us to presume that the UCI would be different from the governing body of any other high profile sport. It is the UCI's role to protect the brand name of professional cycling, not expose it for what it really is. After all, there are significantly more vested interests being upheld in maintaining the status quo than would be served in following an ethical agenda.

2014-12-12T09:27:33+00:00

Ben

Guest


Yep, the horse has bolted. Cycling, soccer, tennis, league, cricket, ARF - drugs in sport is the reality that is here to stay. Like the war on drugs, we can waste taxpayer money fighting it or alternatively make it the choice of the individual.

2014-12-12T04:01:15+00:00

Professor Rosseforp

Guest


"We are the guardians of the history of this sport. We are the keepers, the rememberers, the people who make it live and breathe." -- all sports fans would like to believe this to be true of their sport, but in many cases, we have just not kept up with changing times. We actually are guardians of our personal history of the sport. The big organisations, the gambling syndicates, and the sponsors own and control the sport, and that means they control the history and the rules, too. So we have to decide: is the sport similar enough to our vision that we can still participate? Or do we look at the truth and follow it through to its logical conclusion, and close that chapter on our lives? I am not into cycling but cannot remember a time when it was not tainted ; likewise athletics, horse-racing, swimming, weightlifting, etc. I used to follow rugby league but have accepted that as a commercial form of entertainment, it is not the sport I used to watch, so that sport no longer exists at an elite level. There is something similar, with the same name. In cricket, I push the boundaries (no pun) of cognitive dissonance, because I believe it is still the same game, in spite of the evidence that it is not. Childhood dreams are hard to give up, I suppose. I do not watch any elite sport at all with the view that drugs are not involved, although I remember some sports where drug intake would have had marginal impact, and where the prevailing social views against drug use would have kept them clean. Even "Movement for Credible Cycling" is seeking only "credibility" -- why not "Movement for Clean Cycling"?

AUTHOR

2014-12-12T02:06:49+00:00

Lee Rodgers

Expert


Absolutely agree Kate, and when I had sent this one in I remembered about the lads in green. Unbelievable.

2014-12-11T23:33:07+00:00

Kate

Guest


The decision of the UCI to ratify a decision by the Licencing Commission to deny outright a licence to Europcar - who have quietly gone about their season with not even a whiff of scandal, and with the smallest operating budget in the pro peloton now finds themselves a mere 5% short on the previous year's budget - is a farce. Why no probation for Europcar? Why not a licence with a condition that they are required to demonstrate say 2% savings within 3 months, and the remaining deficit to be found in funding within 6 months? Are you kidding me? It's an 'unacceptable risk' for a team to be a mere few hundred thousand euros short and the team must be kicked out of the WT, but its less of a risk to allow Astana to continue to make a complete fool of us all? Cookson is actually waiting for Astana to test positive again, to justify their eventual expulsion. Let that sink in - he's allowing them to continue until they dope again, and he's hoping they will. Each decision is farcical in isolation, but in concert they're beyond the pale. We've all known the UCI has been corrupt in the past, but this just goes to show how completely corrupt it still is, right at the core.

2014-12-11T22:45:45+00:00

Dean

Guest


I no longer revere winners of grand tours, I just like watching people cycle and assume they're all doped up to the eyeballs. It's a bit like professional wrestling in that it can be still nice to watch people competing despite knowing they're all cheating. I only feel sorry for naturally talented cyclists who refuse to cheat and probably never make any money out of the sport because you can't compete at the top level without it.

Read more at The Roar