BREAKING: UCI Postpones Rule on Unsanctioned Races
The UCI has postponed enforcement of article 1.2.019. On March 28 the UCI wrote a letter to all national federations stating that they would be enforcing article 1.2.019, which stated that licensed riders could not compete in unsanctioned events. This provoked widespread comment and anger from across mountain biking and road biking. Today they released an offical statement stating they will not be strictly enforcing the rule strictly until 2014. Their official statement reads:
USA Cycling has confirmed that they will not be enforcing the rule this season for any discipline. In a recent press release, Steve Johnson, USA Cycling's president and CEO, said, "Notwithstanding the fact that rule 1.2.019 has been enforced in Europe for many years, it is clear strict enforcement in the U.S. and other countries will have unintended and undesirable consequences. USA Cycling listened to the views expressed by the cycling community in America, and these issues were fully represented in discussions with the UCI. We would like to thank the UCI for its willingness to suspend enforcement of the rule globally to allow time for productive dialogue with all stakeholders to find a workable solution for the future."
Initial reactions from race organisers seems to be positive about this decision, but the long-term implications remain to be seen.
 | The UCI listened to the feedback from the various groups involved and who feel affected by a strict and immediate enforcement of rule 1.2.019 and its associated sanctions. The UCI has decided to postpone strict enforcement of rule 1.2.019 in 2013 with the expectation that all stakeholders (National Federations, race directors, teams and riders) will discuss and do what is necessary to prepare for the rule’s full enforcement in 2014. |
USA Cycling has confirmed that they will not be enforcing the rule this season for any discipline. In a recent press release, Steve Johnson, USA Cycling's president and CEO, said, "Notwithstanding the fact that rule 1.2.019 has been enforced in Europe for many years, it is clear strict enforcement in the U.S. and other countries will have unintended and undesirable consequences. USA Cycling listened to the views expressed by the cycling community in America, and these issues were fully represented in discussions with the UCI. We would like to thank the UCI for its willingness to suspend enforcement of the rule globally to allow time for productive dialogue with all stakeholders to find a workable solution for the future."
Initial reactions from race organisers seems to be positive about this decision, but the long-term implications remain to be seen.
Author Info:
Member since May 14, 2008
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Anyone else think this is response is timed fairly well with those teams openly stating that they're defying the rules as a "f*ck you" to the UCI?
Make our own MTB governing body, with blackjack and hookers!
Lets make 2013 the year of enduro racing, since none of them are UCI events. Boycott UCI racing this year, though I will still have to watch World Cup DH.
-----
"yeah because it's just that easy right ? ..."
-----
Once we have the blackjack and hookers, the people will come.
velonews.competitor.com/2013/04/news/uci-postpones-rule-barring-riders-from-unsanctioned-races-and-usa-cycling-follows-suit_281662
All you idiots seem to think mountain biking is much larger than it is. The reality is, MTB couldn't survive on it's own apart from the UCI... you'd lose XC in the olympics and you'd stifle the sport's growth.
And whichever idiot is suggesting not to buy a USAC license... that's f*cking brilliant! Take money out of the pockets of your national federation who works hard to grow the sport locally because of a UCI rule that USAC has no hand in, that's equally enforced by ALL other national federations beside the USAC, all because somehow think this will lead to the 'year of the enduro'.... are actually f*cking retarded or do you just have no clue how shit works in reality?
"So, exactly what's the plan for when you do away with the UCI?"
"All you idiots seem to think mountain biking is much larger than it is. The reality is, MTB couldn't survive on it's own apart from the UCI..."
No, I'm pretty sure my reading comprehension is just fine.... if you're going to be insane, at least have the balls to stand by what you write otherwise you just look foolish/childish.
So... you have two choices.
1. Replace the UCI with an equally controlling governing body pushing the sport towards professionalism and greater profit and exposure... In which case all you pussies will still be crying like girls about rules that don't even pertain to you.
Or...
2. Bail on the governing body idea and let it go back to a grassroots 'hobby' where the best you can hope for is some small time local exposure and maybe a regional series. In which case the whole idea of "pro" goes away.
...But in the end, whatever happens, the reality is NONE of you asswipes are UCI Pros so you've got your balls in a sack over something that has no impact on you whatsoever.
You're insulting our intelligence and yet you cannot convey your thoughts to others... right. You are living proof that being alive longer does not translate into more wisdom. Insulting people by degrading people with disabilities with that short bus comment is pathetic and disgraceful especially if you really are almost 40 as you indicate in your profile that took one click to check out.
Contrary to your absurd assumptions on my intelligence, someone who you have never met or talked to, I know exactly what it takes for a sport to become included into the Olympics seeing how park/pipe skiing was recently included, which has been a massive issue for years now. But guess what?! A fair amount of people (for the size of the freskiing industry which is only a fraction of a fraction of MTBing's) have been making a great living off of skiing as professionals for quite a while now without the OLYMPICS! OMG SHOCKER!!!
If you feel that joining a scumbag organization like the UCI is the only option worth of claiming to be in the Olympics instead of working towards other options, then that's your opinion. XC has been on a decline since the 90s and the UCI and the Olympics has not changed that in any way. All they've achieved was to prolong the descent by, in simple terms, name-brand recognition.
It's honestly pathetic when someone cannot just give their own OPINION but they have to make baseless and useless insults towards others. You care way too much about the internet. You're mature enough to understand that, right? I friggen hope so... now go outside, man-boy... by the sounds, you need some fresh air and to enjoy MTBing for what it is.
2. If you cannot read the posts above and understand them, that is not a problem with my ability to convey my thoughts... it's a problem with your ability to comprehend what you read. Perhaps if mommy had spent more time with you instead of pumping your full of adderall and blaming your teachers you'd be less inclined to rage out against institutions and rules which you clearly do not understand.
3. None of the rest of that rambling paragraph was relevant or worth responding to. It is amusing that after your little rage post full of excessive capitalization and punctuation, rambling about scumbags, manboys, disabilities... after all that, you say it sounds like I need to go outside? LMAO. Reality check... You're the one all worked up about a rule that doesn't impact you.
OK sorry guys, I'm done, haha.
PS - 34 is hardly almost 40... Not sure if you're trying and failing to insult me by calling me old or if you're actually that bad at math too. Fail either way though.
It's simple economics, MTB doesn't generate funds like road does. I'd be that the whole of mountain biking generates less revenue than the Tour de France does on its own.
Please enlighten us though since you seem to know... just how much profit will the UCI generate by USAC sanctioning more events? I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure USAC gets to keep most if not all of the funds from US races they sanction so, at best, the UCI may get a few more drops in the bucket.
@badbadleroybrown...you must work for the UCI...grumpy...supporting the UCI with assumptions vs the facts that have been presented...insulting peoples intelligance on purpose then saying that you didnt...you also seem to like road biking...your featured photo is of such nature...after all is said and done...The only thing I can recommend is that you go ride your bike and live life to the fullest while you still can! Drink a beer, chill with friends, in general...have a good time bro!!
Is this basically not what you're doing right now as well?????
www.pinkbike.com/photo/8823282
@ Garland - How am I hypocritical? Nowhere have I told others not to be insulting and then insulted people? Perhaps you need to google hypocrisy. I made my points... if you all are too stupid to understand them, you're too stupid to understand them. Calling you out for being stupid is neither hypocritical or an 'attack'. It's simply calling a spade a spade...
You are using, as your only examples of deficiency on the part of USAC, the fact that they want to bring Colorado and Oregon cycling under their umbrella...? Are you f*cking dense? Those are pretty much the two most cycling friendly areas in ALL of the US. ANY national cycling body would be acting similarly... so your whole example is proof of exactly jack shit. And that's before we consider, as I mentioned, that the USAC in no way restricts anyone from carrying extra insurance... Now... again, both of those areas may have great insurance. But that's an exception not the rule and, again, we're talking about the two biggest cycling hot spots in the US. When you start talking about other regions it doesn't hold true... and, there's far more to USAC than just their insurance.
But, let's just say that you're right and the UCI and USAC are awful horrible things that should be destroyed... The IOC requires all Olympic movement sports to have an international federation, and that the international federation then supervises or otherwise accredits the national federations that organize the sport in each country... So, exactly what's the plan for when you do away with the UCI and the USAC? Just say f*ck it and let MTB devolve back into the "grassroots" nothing sport it was 20 years ago where not even the top pros could make a living at it? Good plan!!!
And, if you could read, you'd see that I never said the UCI is the only way forward... just that you have to have some governing body. No sport has ever grown by becoming less organized so... The UCI is the bad guy now but let's say you bail the UCI and form some new body... Do you think this new body will be a free-for-all do whatever you want league? If so, I say again... no sport has ever grown through less organization. Now, if the new body is strictly organized and focused on growth they're the new bad guy because they'll be imposing the same types of rules.
As for growth... you're kidding yourself. In 1996, there was not a single rider making the type of money that Hill, Atherton, Peat, Gwin, Minaar, etc all command today. The number of races is a reflection of the lack of national federation support because individual promoters are more concerned with growing their pockets than the sport... If more races were sanctioned, there could be 20 races per year. But instead, let's all throw a fit because Gwin and the gang won't be able to barnstorm the local races and pad their bank accounts at the expense of some local kid trying to climb the ranks??? And I'm the one in need of a karma bitch slap????
It's growing pains but, long term, it's what mountain biking needs to legitimize the competitive equality in its races in the pursuit of mainstream exposure... riders just need to suck it up and learn to deal with it. Get a domestic license if it's that big a deal to you... problem solved as it only applies to international licensees. Encourage your favorite race to get sanctioned with USAC and help grow the sport and then all pros are welcome, problem solved.
Oh, and again, this isn't something the UCI is doing to mountain biking... it's an old rule. Anyone with an international license should've already known about it. Anyone who follows cycling should've remembered the drama back in 2009 when Lance Armstrong wanted to race the Tour of the Gila but couldn't because of this very rule. Just because they made a point of notifying everyone after receiving an inquiry about a pro riding the Whiskey 50 doesn't mean this is something new, it was just a reminder.
And, reality check, it's not about the salaries of the top 10 riders... it's about the reality that EVERY aspect of mountain biking is bigger than it has ever been before. There are more riders making a sustainable living in mountain biking, racing and on the periphery, than ever before... clearly the UCI isn't ruining everything as you haters are trying to claim.
Please tell us... how much has Red Bull spent on cycling advocacy and development programs? Oh... that's right, they don't... they just spend sponsor dollars to put their image out. f*cking morons... it's amazing how hard you guys suck the cock of anything that's generally accepted as awesome while blindly following the herd in hating anything UCI but you're all too damn stupid to actually think for yourselves.
But I digress...
Without all the money poured into a number of sports around the world by red bull, many of them wouldn't have the platform they have today. I don't really care about racing, as I said above, but I do love riding, and im pretty sure i can do that without the help of the UCI or Red Bull for that matter, but I like the opportunities the pros have to push the boundaries in the freeride category so we the people can see what is possible. How much of the pros salaries are paid by the UCI? Give me reruns of follow me, from the inside out, strength in numbers, where the trail ends etc any day over live coverage of a race, especially one in BUTT-F*CK NOWHERE, USA!
Lady's and gentlemen, it's official, may I introduce the new Protour!
...and reality check. Red Bull spends annually about what the USAC spends on cycling. The difference is that Red Bull is promoting themselves while USAC is promoting cycling you jackass. There's a difference. As for who's paying the salary... what the f*ck is your point? Are you retarded or do you seriously think that some leagues pay salaries? The NFL doesn't pay your salary, your team does... the UCI doesn't pay your salary, your team does... that's the way EVERY sport works you stupid shit.
But the absolute best is, not only are you too f*cking slow for this rule to apply to you but you "don't care about racing" yet you've got your panties in a knot over a rule that applies only to racers... f*cking brilliant! You can keep introducing the new Pro Tour all you want but no one is interested in your wannabe league. The current Pro Tour is just fine... and if mtb had the foresight to know what was good for them, they'd happily mirror the conti/pro-conti/pro-tour setup.
Obviously someone has to pay the pros who ride freeride (the style of riding I enjoy, the sort that can survive without the UCI) so they can travel the world doing cool things and generally its their sponsors, one being Red Bull... I think you're missing the point of my argument.
You're not acting your age mate, and no one is enjoying this except me, not because I enjoy a good keyboard mash, but as a professional. As a psychologist, I'm finding your behaviour absolutely astounding and quite frankly that of someone 20 years your junior.
Were you too small to be a school yard bully? Did your younger siblings beat you? Is this your revenge for these issues?
I give up mate, no point bashing my head against a brick wall... Once again the American takes the win not by having a more valid argument, but by making the most noise. Sigh...
It's not my fault you're too stupid to see the long term gains or too short sighted to understand that Red Bull advertising through exhibition isn't healthy for the longevity of the sport. Yeah, obviously the one who has no issue standing up for his own thoughts against a mob of adolescent ignorance is the one who's got issues... sure. I get it, pussies like you have been taught to go with the herd and encouraged to not think for yourselves so you sit here and read 10 other people say the rule sucks so it must suck. Some day, you may grow up and learn to think for yourself and give a shit less what the teenage council of awesome thinks about things... until then, keep sucking the popular dick and telling people you're a psychologist... LMAO! Damn, that was some good shit!!!
We're not all prepubescent 34 year olds with bar work mate. Some of us grew up, went to University and got a good job.
Now, am I a supporter of the UCI or their actions towards DH? F*ck no, I am absolutely not. They're bastards. However, the softening of their stance on this stupid rule because riders and companies spoke up has saved our asses this season. Maybe this is a sign of things to come when the UCI is indeed a federation that respects and works reasonable deals with all of the different disciplines? Then again, maybe not. But the last thing riders and companies need to be doing is boycotting -- sure, threaten to boycott, pull money, etc. But for god's sake, put some skin in the game! Complain somewhere else than PB! Write letters and blogs, make phone calls, pose reasonable and articulate arguments -- THAT is what will win us this game, not ranting on a website. If you truly hate the UCI, change it -- be part of it and change it from within. Become a racer and change the organization from that perspective, or an organizer with a voice. You have to be the change, folks.
a long hard look is needed
In the end, it's about money or who's meat is bigger. And just cuz you have a ton of cash or a huge sausage, it's how you look using what you have, so someone with a pocket full of nickles and a good 6" has frightened the old man...
Someone mentioned in the 90's that MTB was huge and without the Uci... Eurosport and Grundig were sponsors for the UCi back then, and the biggest salary at the time was paid by Specialized to Shaun Palmer (to the best of my knowlege) and to compare that to the pro's of today I think they'd question the amount.
I believe that the UCI needs a change in attitude, not with regard to this rule enforcement but with mtb in general.
We all love to see these guys ripping in the flesh. If you're not competitive and don't wish to be then you won't be racing in the elite/pro class. And if you do want to be competitive, what better than to have someone like sam hill to set a bench mark? So ehats the problem.?
here in aus, we dont get a lot of pros racing our national series, but recently we had Hill, Graves, Hannah, Kovarik and more, and it was awesome.
You're clutching at straws now mate, cool it.
sorry for the language
What? English?
spokemagazine.com/2013/04/12/unsanctioned-events-go-directly-to-jail-do-not-pass-go
From my perspective... this ensures competitive equality. You don't want your "amateur" domestic pros competing against your top international pros from a competitive perspective. It's cool for the guys in the middle to mix it up with either extreme but when you have the opposite extremes battling it's a competitive imbalance that's hard to sell and that encourages injury because you have guys riding over their head trying to match people way out of their league. Now, that's not a big deal when you're selling to freecaster... but if you want to watch UCI World Cup DH in high def live on network tv then you have to realize that you're playing to a different crowd than the grassroots bunch that thought it was so awesome to see Duncan Riffle crack a beer on Heckler's Rock. So... they're basically saying top domestic license holders can mix it with the international guys in national events and 'amateur' domestic pros can mix it up with the top domestic license holders but international guys can't mix it up with the amateur pros. Just like they do with road... This ensures that its a competitive race and not a forgone conclusion.
If where you stood on the podium didn't matter, UCI pros would be racing exhibition classes for love of the sport... the reality however, is that UCI pros are stealing results from young kids who are working 60 hours a week at bike shops to get enough cash to build their rides and driving hours to go to the races hoping for a podium, praying for a win, dreaming of big sponsors... But hey, Gwiny and Gee are bored this weekend so f*ck the young up and commers! How exactly is that good for the sport?