UCI and USAC need to establish a system that won't penalize amateur racers. It's just bad business and will hurt the sport.
USA Cycling Sends Out “Clarification of UCI Ruling” on Riders in Unsanctioned Events
Below is the communique that USA Cycling sent to all members this morning, and posted on their website. This applies directly to the cyclocross community. For example, participation in grassroots unsanctioned races like Ice Weasels will no longer be possible for racers with UCI licenses, and the same goes for many unsanctioned gravel races like Southern Cross. It will also directly impact all racers in Oregon, which operates primarily under OBRA as far as their races go, including the incredibly popular Cross Crusades series. It should be underlined that USA Cycling is sending the communique that they received from the UCI’s president, Pat McQuaid.
Let us know in the comments what you think about the ruling.
There has been a tremendous amount of discussion and misinformation recently in articles and forums regarding UCI rule 1.2.019, which prohibits all UCI licensed riders from competing in events that are not sanctioned by a national federation. USA Cycling received the following letter from the International Cycling Union (UCI) on March 26 to all national federations clarifying its expectations in the enforcement of rule 1.2.019. It also explains what the few possible exceptions to its rule are.
The UCI confirmed that Rule 1.2.019 and the related sanctions in 1.2.020 and 1.2.021 must apply to every UCI-recognized national federation in the world. Therefore, as a member of the International Federation, USA Cycling will comply with the direction from the UCI.
It has recently come to our attention that some National Federations are experiencing difficulties in the interpretation and application of the rules relating to “forbidden races”, namely Articles 1.2.019,
1.2.020 and 1.2.021 of the UCI Regulations.
With this in mind, we would like to provide the following clarification which we hope you will find useful. Article 1.2.019 of the UCI Regulations states:
“No license holder may participate in an event that has not been included on a national, continental or world calendar or that has not been recognized by a national federation, a continental confederation or the UCI.
A national federation may grant special exceptions for races or particular events run in its own country.”
The objective of this regulation is to protect the hard work and resources you pour into the development of your events at national level. It allows for a federative structure, something which is inherent in organized sport and which is essential to being a part of the Olympic movement.
Of course the regulation also allows the UCI, in line with its mission as an international federation, to guarantee uniform regulation.
Article 1.2.019 applies to all license holders, without exception. It does not solely concern professional riders or just the members of UCI teams, contrary to certain statements in the press and on some blogs.
The second paragraph of Article 1.2.019 affords each national federation the facility to grant a special exception for specific races or events taking place in its territory.
Special races or events are understood to be cycle events which are not registered on the national calendar of the country’s federation or on the UCI international calendar. This generally concerns events that are occasional and which do not recur, most often organized by persons or entities who do not belong to the world of organized sport. For example, an event may be organized by an association that does not have a link to the National Federation, such as a race specifically for members of the armed forces, fire fighters or students or perhaps as part of a national multisport event.
With the exception of these special cases, the National Federation is not permitted to grant an exemption to a cycle event which is held, deliberately or not, outside the federative movement. For example, in no case should an exception be granted to a cycling event that is organized by a person or entity who regularly organizes cycling events.
CH 1860 Aigle I Switzerland
Q)+41 24 468 58 11 fax +41 24 468 58 12
The objective of Article 1.2.019 is that exemptions should only be granted in exceptional cases.
Licenseholders who participate in a “forbidden race” make themselves liable not only to sanctions by their National Federation, as scheduled by Article 1.2.021 of the UCI regulations, but also run the risk of not having sufficient insurance cover in the event of an accident.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please accept our kindest regards,
Have you subscribed yet? You're missing out if not. Get all-original content and your cyclocross fix throughout the year with a subscription and Issue 23 back copy, with features on Lars van der Haar, Jonathan Page, Elle Anderson and more!
Hay USAC how about you grow a pair stand, up for your members and tell the UCI to pound sand. FYI, like in the past, I'll be racing both sanctioned and "unsanctioned" races in '13.
Just received this via email from OBRA: "Many have you may have received the following letter regarding UCI licensing and non-USA Cycling events. http://www.usacycling.org/clarification-of-uci-rule-12019-and-related-sanctions.htm Please be aware that enforcement of this letter is likely illegal under federal law as it applies to amateurs. According to the UCI "Article 1.2.019 applies to all licence holders, without exception. It does not solely concern professional riders or just the members of UCI teams, contrary to certain statements in the press and on some blogs." The Ted Stevens Act under 36 USC § 220523 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/220523) et al. applies to amateur athletic competitions and competitors. With the blanket statement "all UCI license holders", this policy captures amateur racers as there are amateur racers who carry UCI licenses. Under 36 USC § 220524 - General duties of national governing bodies- (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/220524) "For the sport that it governs, a national governing body shall— (5) allow an amateur athlete to compete in any international amateur athletic competition conducted by any amateur sports organization or person, unless the national governing body establishes that its denial is based on evidence that the organization or person conducting the competition does not meet the requirements stated in section 220525 of this title;" Here is the link to the Section 220525 (which lists out the requirements). (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/220525) The UCI letter and subsequent USA Cycling language are likely unenforceable given that there has been no evidentiary inquiry as to any races per 220525. Given the plain language of the statute the burden lies on the UCI/USA Cycling to establish the evidence for a denial. Sincerely, -- Kenji Sugahara Executive Director Oregon Bicycle Racing Association Phone: 503-278-5550 http://www.obra.org _______________________________________________ OBRA mailing list [email protected] http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra Unsubscribe: [email protected]
Hmm... I was actually going to get a license this year, just for grins, and perhaps save a few bucks on the one days licenses. This is really a dumbass way to run the sport. Independent promoters should be able to run their events and have whoever they want. If you're running a pro level event, then the UCI rules should apply.
That is pure BS. WTF! I believe UCI will run into some serious legal trouble on this one. One way, or the other they will suffer financially if they actually try to revoke licenses for simply participating in a non-sanctioned event. I hate it when lawyers need to get involved, but a good group of them will have a field day against USA Cycling on this one.
@cyclocross ...muuuch better.
I think the UCI is scared of World Series Cycling (or whatever they're calling themselves these days). They will be fighting for territory: the best riders. They're staking out their territory by enforcing the idea now that one rider can't be in both camps. So, if you want to be a 'pro' rider, you have to give up those lucrative side jobs. I suspect they're going to find that many marginal pros decide to opt for not being part of a UCI-sanctioned team, and race those other races. But this really isn't about *these* races; it's about the ones that will come in 2014. They have to stake out the territory, establish precedent, etc., before the meaningful battle starts. It's a pre-emptive strike. On the other had, if WSC is as well-funded as it appears, the riders will be facing a choice between UCI-minimum (€30K) and, well, more than that. It will eventually be a bidding war. At least, that's my speculation. I love speculation!!! :-)
I was going to buy a license to do USAC races next CX season. I will no longer being doing that. I'll be doing only non USAC races and I'll tell promoters to avoid USAC.
It's stupid, not workable, and purely a power grab. Non-sanctioned races are the backbone of both CX and mountain biking. This type of stuff is a good reason to NOT renew a USAC license.
This rule only applies to people who hold a UCI license. You do not need a UCI license to race unless you are pro or if you did a race like Masters Worlds.
USAC/UCI won't dictate which races I do. They may take my license which will only dictate which races I WON'T do.
Whew, glad I never renewed my one day license from CX Nationals in Bend. I can't imagine what my penalties would add up to by now.
Wow, really? What a joke! Can I cancel my license? All of the best races in the PNW are non-sanctioned USAC events! What a bunch of idiots.
Seriously, all this reminds me of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE
Sounds like Drew Edsall and some of the MTB pros will be discussing it here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mountain-bike-radio/2013/04/06/the-dirt-usac-rule
@mollyjhurford sounds unlawful due to restriction of trade.
it's just another way UCI is preventing a licensed rider to potentially ride with Lance. I.e. LT 100.
@mollyjhurford seriously?! It wasn't enough to deter some of the professional level, they decided to go ahead and include us amateurs too?
"*It should be noted that the word ‘license’ was misspelled throughout the entire article and letter."
Pat also misspells "organised." A lot. But he's Irish, and I hear they do things funny over there…
This one is total BS: "Licenseholders who participate in a “forbidden race” make themselves liable not only to sanctions by their National Federation, as scheduled by Article 1.2.021 of the UCI regulations, but also run the risk of not having sufficient insurance cover in the event of an accident."
Bike racing existed before USAC/UCI, exists without them, and will continue to do so. While there is value in national and international federations regulating the sport at the highest level, they've done a real poor job at that the last 20 years or so, and lose credibility in all aspects.
Why does the UCI hate fun? I just read an article in Dirt Rag that the UCI has banned all hand ups outside the pits. So no beer hand ups. No more placing money on run ups. Pretty soon they will ban muddy courses so riders don't soil their jerseys.
Our license fees will go up in order to hire additional USAC staff to handle waiver requests, track who is doing which non-sanctioned vents, dole out sanctions, and attempt to collect fines. Just. Lovely.
I just wonder how USAC is going to handle the massive influx of waiver requests for things like Barry Roubaix.
@cycletard ahh, but USA Cycling wrote the top half...