Paris Nice

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/..._111813. html

Unibet shafted!!

Dan Gregory wrote:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/..._111813. html


Unibet shafted!!

***************************
18 of the ProTour teams, barring Astana and Unibet.com, are
automatically guaranteeed the right to take part in all the main races
organised by rebel organisers RCS, ASO and Unipublic
***************************

I don't understand what this means.

Are Astana and Unibet banned from rebel-organized races? Or are they
simply not guaranteed entry?

Are Astana and Unibet losing ProTour status?

Are the other 18 ProTour teams REQUIRED to ride the rebel-organized,
non-PT races?

* Dan Gregory a écrit
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/..._111813. html

Unibet shafted!!

****ing disgraceful

They should _never_ guaranteed _any_ squad a start

--
Le vent à Dos
Davey Crockett [No 4Q to reply]
The News CNN and SKY won't show you
http://azurservers.com:9080

Geraard Spergen wrote:
Dan Gregory wrote:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/..._111813. html


Unibet shafted!!

***************************
18 of the ProTour teams, barring Astana and Unibet.com, are
automatically guaranteeed the right to take part in all the main races
organised by rebel organisers RCS, ASO and Unipublic
***************************

I don't understand what this means.

Are Astana and Unibet banned from rebel-organized races? Or are they
simply not guaranteed entry?


They are not guaranteed entry -- the race organizers have the right to exclude
them if including them will expose them to legal consequences.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...toursolution07


Dan

Im pretty new to the pro tour politics, but it seems now
with this ruling that things are no different now than
when the tours could pick whoever they wanted.

It doesnt look like the pro tour does anything to protect the rights
of the riders
(eg. all of the drug scandals), and it hasnt been able to guarantee
anything for teams.

It dont even think the teams are for it. For some teams, it
seems like they are being forced to compete in events they normally
wouldnt
compete in.

What was the whole point of the Pro Tour again?

shane wrote:
Im pretty new to the pro tour politics, but it seems now
with this ruling that things are no different now than
when the tours could pick whoever they wanted.

It doesnt look like the pro tour does anything to protect the rights
of the riders
(eg. all of the drug scandals), and it hasnt been able to guarantee
anything for teams.

It dont even think the teams are for it. For some teams, it
seems like they are being forced to compete in events they normally
wouldnt
compete in.

Bring back National Teams!!!

Unibet.com press conference tomorrow
Tuesday 6th, March 2007
The ProTour cycling team Unibet, managed by Green Cycle Associates AB,
has learned from the agreement between ASO, RCS, Unipublic, the IPCT and
the UCI, that it is still up to the Great Tour organizers to decide if
the team would be granted a « wild card » to participate in races part
of the international (PT?) calendar.

Today we will not further comment on the issue as we, the team
management, investigate our legal and regulatory position and options.

In case you would be interested in additional reflections regarding our
actual position we welcome the press tomorrow afternoon at 2 PM in:

Hotel Drongen
Baarleveldstraat 2
9031 Drongen Belgium

Koen Terryn, Jacques Hanegraaf and Christophe Depretere (legal
counsellor) will attend the press conference.

On Mar 6, 6:46 am, "shane" wrote:

What was the whole point of the Pro Tour again?

About getting paid, what else?
The UCI dreamed up this scheme in which they would charge the teams in
return for guaranteed entries in events. They could get the second-
tier events on board by guaranteeing top team participation. But they
couldn't square the circle with the first tier organizers; after all,
who's going to turn down a TdF invite? TIOOYK...

On 6 Mar 2007 10:32:30 -0800, wrote:

About getting paid, what else?
The UCI dreamed up this scheme in which they would charge the teams in
return for guaranteed entries in events. They could get the second-
tier events on board by guaranteeing top team participation. But they
couldn't square the circle with the first tier organizers; after all,
who's going to turn down a TdF invite? TIOOYK...

Too many people trying to screw too many other people. Its not the
lack of ethics, its the unsightly disorder bordering on chaos that
will give professional bicycle racing a bad name. Afterall, almost
everyone accepts that when there is enough money, someone is being
screwed and someone is letting them do it for the money, so nothing
new there.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

On Mar 6, 6:32 pm, wrote:

The UCI dreamed up this scheme in which they would charge the teams in
return for guaranteed entries in events. They could get the second-
tier events on board by guaranteeing top team participation. But they
couldn't square the circle with the first tier organizers; after all,
who's going to turn down a TdF invite? TIOOYK...

Yes, it might have helped if the UCI had actually come to an agreement
with the big organisers *before* introducing the ProTour.

Dear organiser,

Hello, we're the UCI. You might remember us from races such as the
Eneco Tour. We're going to impose our own qualification system on your
event. We'd also like a cut of all your TV rights for the races that
you've spent 100 years building up. No, these points are not
negotiable.

and,

Dear team manager,

Hello, we're the UCI. We can guarantee you starts in all the major
tours, as long as you pay us a small fee. Although we haven't asked
them yet, the organisers all love the ProTour and will certainly agree
to abide by its rules. They will sign up for it very soon. We are sure
of this.

Dear cycling fan,

Hello, we're the UCI. We have decided to simplify the UCI ranking
system. Instead of being able to follow one ranking throughout the
season, we have split it into six bite-sized rankings spread across
the whole wide world.

etc.

Jeff