are british cycling useless?

[racault]

after their recent cave-in to the coppers and the general failure to promote road-races. what do you think?

[Fritz]

I think 10 years ago you could of said that. IMO I think there has been a lot of progression since then and although I think there are still problems in some areas I still think they have done a good job and are heading in the right direction. The charges you speak about were dropped in the end, so I guess it was the right decision by BC.

[Matt Clinton]

You can't just say they're useless in a broad sense; they may not be very good at some stuff, but on the whole I wouldn't say they're useless.
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/MikeVaughanCyc


Avatar by Techno (http://techno.smugmug.com)

[Des]

They are certainly not useless. Like all organisations there are areas they could still do better at, however unlike a lot of similar (sports) organisations they also excel in several areas. So in the main a big pat on the back for all the staff in Manchester and I hope they are enjoying their Christmas.
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk

[Lillywhite]

[TBK]

BC are like women in many ways, they are never completely useless, you can always hurl abuse at them!
_________________
A positive mental attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.

[leghurty]

Agree with most here in that BC seem to be always aspiring to perform as best they can with our lottery money. IMO, relative to a few other sport governing bodies I've worked with - THEY ARE FANTASTIC!

As an alternative to grouting the bathroom again, the only things I'd like to examine closely are their costs and daily expeniture. Also they need to take charge of all the calendars if they are a real govening body and stop blaming organisers for the prem series starting in winter and ending in the middle of summer.

[dockeca]

Overall they do a job about 200% better than 10 years ago. Forget not that the whole edifice nearly collapsed not all that long ago.
The legal thing is getting reviewed so at least lessons are being learned.
Premier Calendar depends on organisers wanting to promote, and the simple fact is that spring/early summer races get better fields than events later in the year. You can only have events when people want to run them.
The staff at BC do a good job on the resources they have, and before anyone starts bleating about "all the lottery money", remember that most of it goes into the WCPP side. Which has been a good investment, because if you look at pure statistics, over the past three Olympics, cycling has got the most medals of ANY sport. The "why no road success" brigade may moan, however look at the number of ex-plan riders now on decent pro team, plying their trade(and talent) at the top levels.
Certainly 8/10 overall, and getting better.
_________________
Doc

"Any views expressed are entirely my own and not representative of any organisation of which I may or may not be a member. Unless I say otherwise."
"A Libertarian Crackpot" H.Peel

[De Rosa]

[Dr Ferrari]

[xixang]

i think BC itself does a reasonable job (could be better, but improving) - it's the local jobsworth divisional administrators that give it a bad name for me. too officious and closed to suggestions on improvement.

slightly off topic but racing is still too expensive IMHO. Membership at 34 quid for silver then a further 30 quid for a licence and additional on top if you want a calendar. £64 before i even get on the bike and then races are £13ish.

waht happened to the "make racing cheaper" after the competition review a couple of years back? race entries increased significantly (30% over previous year for a certain crit series held in NW) even though costs to promoters re event fees, rider levies etc were supposedly reduced by BC. there generally seems to be a significant drop-out of U16 riders once they reach junior level and again junior to U23 - possibly costs (most juniors/U23's are still at college/uni and cannot necessarily afford all the various fees. granted, it may be other factors, but i bet cost is a major one). I'm not one btw so it's not a personal whinge

[_LaUrEn_]

[duderoadracer]

Unfortunately I am old enough to remember when the only attention cycling got was when Hugh Porter reached a World Pursuit final. I looked forward to the five minute highlights this received on World of Sport.
Now we expect to win World titles on the track and in 2007 we will see the largest number of British Professional riders racing abroad since perhaps the early days of TI Raleigh. We also seem to have the finest Academy of young riders that GB has ever seen. I certainly do not think BC are useless but I do think they need professional media and sponsorship help to fully exploit the 2012 opportunities.

[Dr Ferrari]

[kieran]

" there generally seems to be a significant drop-out of U16 riders once they reach junior level and again junior to U23 - possibly costs (most juniors/U23's are still at college/uni and cannot necessarily afford all the various fees"
the step up from youth to junior is a bit hard from 6laps of mallory to 4hour road races!

[coal miner]

[kieran]

[PHHH]

[Vetman]

Road racing is still a secret sport in this country. That's the way the authorities like it. No use in getting too many kids hooked just causes a nuisance on the raods. BC, bless them, are lottery funded. Medals on the track...that's the name of the game!
_________________
At your age I'd have won the Tour by now...

[Thomo]