UCI presidency: McQuaid warns Cookson he won't get a walkover

I wish Pat McQuade had a little insight as to how comical this all looks to the public. Not nominated by his home nation, nor the place he lives but wait a minute....thailand and morocco will do. He is making himself look like an absolute idiot, a laughing stock and just not credible at all. Im amazed he has not withdrawen from the process and tried to save some pride. Stunning stuff.

Pat McQuaid offering to pay the Swiss Federation's costs has to be the latest piece of BS. Jaimie Fuller had to put up the money for both sides before the case could be heard. If there was nothing wrong with the nomination wouldn't Chassot have welcomed his day in Court? The money would only have been an issue had he lost.

And now Chassot has resigned, making paranoid ramblings about "a small coup" that would do credit to Pat himself. Wind of change? (Or just another fart in the wind...?)

If UCI reps vote in the rule change it's a foregone conclusion that McQuid will be re- elected. McQuid has spent years building a power base outside cycling a traditional European context - now he's calling in the favours.

I'm curious, does anyone know of any pro-McQuaid blogs or articles?

Quote:

3. A sympathetic interpretation of the rules might just have allowed the Swiss nomination to stand, but clearly there was enough legal doubt about that to cause them to withdraw it for fear of the financial consequences.

Referenced on another forum:
http://gerard.cc/2013/08/21/race-to-the-bottom/

It gets interesting where it talks about Chassot:

"It is clear from their meeting minutes that the Swiss Cycling board did not agree to nominate McQuaid in their meeting, but rather to wait a little and look into it further. The federation president, Richard Chassot, then announced the nomination."

Read on re Chassot's conflict of interests..

@Westy.
On your point 3: The challenge to the Swiss nomination was based on matters of procedure, not solely on whether the Swiss Federation was "the Federation of the Candidate".
On point 4: Law firm Baker and McKenzie, acting for the UCI rather than Pat McQuaid*, say that a nomination made before the deadline by email is valid.

Obviously the validity of Pat's nominations can be disputed. But it looks like this would have to take place outside of the UCI, either in the Courts, or at the CAS.

*Stop that laughing at the back.

"Federations all over the world want me to stand for re-election"

What I can't understand is this: Given I have not heard a single fan, rider, or team official that has come out in support of McQuaid, what possible reason could any of these federations have for wanting to continue the status quo gravy train of corruption and li...

Oh right. Sorry. Carry on.

Trying to have a sensible debate on the election process with Pat McQuaid is like playing chess with a pigeon.

You might be be a chess grandmaster, but the pigeon just knocks over all the pieces, sh*ts on the board and then struts around triumphantly.

oh good grief ..... if this wasn't real life I'd have
put money on it being a docu-drama of some sort created
by a dodgy cable channel company !!!

1. PMQ desperately wanted to be re-elected unopposed, and was clearly pissed off when Brian Cookson was nominated.
2. PMQ was president through his nomination 4 and 8 years ago by his home federation, Ireland. So it clearly should be them that re-nominate. They have spectacularly not agreed to do so.
3. A sympathetic interpretation of the rules might just have allowed the Swiss nomination to stand, but clearly there was enough legal doubt about that to cause them to withdraw it for fear of the financial consequences.
4. It would take a very long stretch of the imagination to consider either of his two new nominations as valid under the present rules, especially as anyway the hard copy nominations were not received by the closing date (emails only, I understand).
5. Therefore his only real remaining option is the proposed retroactive rule change, a bizarre proposal in any circumstances anywhere. Its very doubtful that the retroactive component will be ratified as it requires a two thirds majority.
6. He is such a self centred stupid man, seemingly devoted to using his Swiss lawyers to justify a fart in a strong wind, that he will draw this affair out to its bitter end. It'll probably end up in the courts, again - lets hope that he will have to pay though, not the UCI, as I don't see why the UCI funds should be used for one candidate and not the other - actually they should be used for neither of them, another can of worms to be unravelled.

PMQ has to be the worst thing to have happened to our sport for a generation, equally as bad as LA. He has made the governing body a laughing stock, derided around the world - I guess he would call that globalisation.

Do you guys at Road CC specifically search for the most smarmy looking pictures of Pat that they just make you want to punch him in the face.

Pat Macquaid has gone nuts ... He appears to have a classic narcissistic personality, with major selfish tendencies. If he can't win the game, even by cheating repeatedly, then he's going to throw over the table and stop anyone taking part.

And what's PmQ going to do post election? Try and repair the damage he's done? Or give all the kick-backs to his friends? Does he not realise that he's destroying the credibility of his sport?

Where is the IOC in this? Why aren't they pointing out that this is not democratic, accountable ... or frankly, sane?

Jesus wept.

This guy is, without doubt, on the strongest drugs in sport.

@ontheroad, if I recall correctly (and my memory of this is patchy), there are 42 votes to be had, and a simple majority (as opposed to 2/3rds or whatever) is required to win. BC appears to be assured of approx 16 votes due to support from Europe and Africa. PMcQ has the support of Asia, which is roughly the same number. No-one is sure which way the Americas will vote.

Given the amount of observed skullduggery and corruption though, I would like to know who administers the election and counts the votes, and whether they are truly independent.

Assuming it will be a two-horse race, has anyone assessed how the voting is likely to go?

This isn't so bad: if McQuaid wins then everyone can rightly conclude that the whole shooting match is corrupt and the breakaways can begin.

One question I would have is 'Why, in the first place, would the Thai and Moroccan federations nominate him before the June 30th deadline, if he was already nominated by the Irish and Swiss?' It stinks to high heaven!!
It would also be nice to see a retraction of his statement that the withdrawal of the Swiss nomination was 'utter bullshit'

Get the garlic and silver bullets ready

seems to me that MacQuaid makes up the rules as he goes along. first Ireland, then Switzerland, now Thailand. Perhaps he should go where his overinflated ego demands and organize the first tour de mars. You can do it Pat: prologue round the dark side of the moon , then a quick transfer across the solar system to the red planet. Think of the hills! also, cycling in such atmospheres will be a sure way to confuse those W*****s from WADA and the sunday times. You could even get LA back on the payroll. Go Pat! To infinity and beyond!

Pat does not need the rule change for his nominations from Thailand and Morocco to be valid. He only needs a sympathetic interpretation of the current rules.

Why on Earth would Cookson step aside if elected? Yeah he might not be perfect but he was the only person to step up against the tyranny of McQuaid. Why should someone else get to challenge Cookson after he defeats the incumbent?