Single UK Body for Cycling?

[Des]

There has been talk in the past of one body to administer / speack for the whole of cycling as a sport and pastime and replace the myriad of bodies (BC?RTTC?CTC?AUDAX/TLi) that exist at present.

I personally believ that if this was done properly then the benifits would outweigh any perceived disadvantages. The pros include reduced duplication of admin, potenially cheaper insurance, one voice speaking for the whole of the sport, less clashes of events, more crossover between sections of the pastime as you would the information to hand and no more memberships to pay out.

the only con as I can see it is a potential for sections of the sport to feel disenfranchised, however this could be overcome by sub-organistions to look after the various aspects?
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk

[ANDYT]

If you look at motorsport most of it is run by the RACMSA now but has its sub branches...as well as a World Body like the UCI called the FIA.
It seems to work but the sums have to add up and the sport policed and governed properly. Witness the problems that F1 is going through at the moment where the money after 20 years of trying is killing the sport through Ferrari....A similar thing could(and I mean could) have happened through Mapei if about 3 times the budget was spent on 1 team.
An example is USPS on a much smaller scale where they can afford to buy up the major opponents...just like Ferrari buy up the team personnel.
It would be awful if cycling ended up like that
_________________
Always tell it as it is!

[Animal]

I agree Des, it's a good idea.

Sub-organizations could handle the specializations, road races, TTs, MTBs, touring, transport.

I don't think you could pull everyone in though. Audax are a bit of a cult aren't they really? There will always be some bunch of people wanting to go their own way.

There could be some better ranking system so that all these complaints about not getting into the Nat. hillclimb could be avoided. If somehow you could get points/credits/something from TTs and road races, you could enter whichever events you liked, and if you were a good rider, you'd get in.

I've just had a good TT season, but I have done no RRs, and might not get into a road race that I entered. Unification might help this problem, and get more people to try to branch out and try more variety.
_________________
I don't enjoy golf. BAN IT.

[dockeca]

Back on topic.
It would be great if a sinle body could be achieved, with the sub-sections as suggested. It's what I think I suggested ages ago, BUT.
This is England and Wales (the Scots have it sorted out!), and this disparate nation of awkward so and so's being what it is, the day after unification someone would decide that they did not like something/someone and would take their ball away and play on their own (see TLI/LVRC for examples).
And so we go on....even the Belgians have a "rebel" body, hence the so called "free federations world championships".
Oh well......
_________________
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

[Des]

Doc,

There will always be those, like the TLi, who want to play with their own ball, however if we could get the main bodies together with the right sort of democratic constitution then these bodies will either have to work from the inside or find some other justification for their existance as they will become increasing isolated as the new body reduces further their market share and public bodies start to question how well organised in terms of risk assessment their Road events are (I admit I don't know if they do this now or not) .
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk

[Colin Fenwick]

A lot of these posts present the view that having multiple cycling bodies is a bad thing - I'm not fully convinced on this.

90% of my races are BC but I do the odd TLI and the odd RTTC - or whatever they call themselves these days! - events. For me the TLI don't detract at all from BC. In most cases they cater largely (at least in the Cheshire league) for an audience of novices and vets that BC don't cover particularly well. There are also maybe 15 or 20 like me - who primarily race BC and use these events as training races and the chance to race for fun rather than points. I race both and enjoy both for different reasons. We'll see what happens with the BC review but as things currently stand I don't see how the novices and vets (some in their 60's) who enjoy racing TLI would be catered for under BC regs.

The same is true of the LVRC. The CTC are different from BC and get involved in very different aspects of the sport - in this they are a very effective lobby group.

The advantage of having multiple organisations is that each has its *CENSORED* and can concentrate on its own 'customers'. Clearly this dilutes the numbers that any one organisation can muster and I can maybe see an argument that it would be good to have some sort of council of cycling bodies to look at nationally important issues. However, as it currently stands I can see a lot of people would lose out if everything was governed by a single body.

[Gary K]

So, Mr Williams, what is TLI doing for the good of promoting the sport and developing people?

Also, I've asked the question before, and Mr Cookson has highlighted it in his post, where does all the money from TLI membership and entry fees go? Are you non-profit making?

Does your insurance hold up to all forms of cover similar to BC's?

This is the forum to answer these questions, as this is the forum to enter into debate about any cycling related topic.

Convince me that TLI provide more than just racing and tell us all why you are so much cheaper than BC and maybe you'll have a credible case for Mr Cookson to answer to.

[schlapper2]

[quote="Brian Cookson"]What it doesn't do is to pretend that running a modern sport in a modern world is easy or that it can be done on the cheap. It isn't and it can't.[/quote]

So is it true that BC Staff have faced a pay freeze this year?

[Brian Cookson]

Sorry Schlapper 2, I'm not going to answer anonymous questions on matters concerning the salaries of British Cycling's staff. I really don't think you'd expect me to, either. Let's have some dignity......
Brian.

[John Williams]

Gary,
I have sent you and the 'Men in Black' details about the TLI at the begining of the year, also some of your 'Men in Black' have ridden TLI races, so you know what it's all about.
What do you mean 'Profit' do you not know how much it cost for £5,*CENSORED* liability insurance and also we in the North-West pay all helpers expences.
I am not going on about it any longer, so this is my last posting on this subject.

Jon Williams (TLI (North-West) Membership Secretary

[Guest]

One body would be better but which one? Certainly not BC with it's paltry 17k members that only represent sport cycling. This applies to the other cycling groups as well. None of them represent the majority of people that use bikes. (even if all respective members were added together).

In other words - they don't represent the guy or kids in the street. it seems that first you need a strong body that the small groups will benefit from by joining.

British Cycling has the name but is not convincing because as it stands it is too small. It needs to expand the membership and become meaningful to the average person. The place to start looking for members is not some trade show or TDF finish.

Most households only really come into contact with 'cycling knowledge' when they visit a bike shop. This would seem the ideal time to catch a new member(s) at the point of sales. As BC have legal and insurance facilities for cyclists, this would be a big plus to join. Who knows, with more ordinary members you may get more of the public interested. Particularly if you get some 'ordinary' members to participate at some novice event in conjunction with a RR.

As it stands BC may be better off affiliating to British Athlectics or the Automobile Association.

At least the latter has some political clout. Also loads of events and diversions signs:-)

[Gary K]

John

I'm sorry but neither the info you sent me this year or your post above answers my simple questions. I know some Army riders have done TLI events, so have i, I am not attempting to exclude anyone from your events, but for people to make a more informed choice the questions should be answered unless there is something to hide?

So:

Are you non profit making?

Is your insurance to the same level as BC's?

What are you doing (as an organisation) to promote the sport in the UK ad develop potential talent?

The TLI is a PLC and the accounts are published through Company House I believe. It would be easy enough for anyone to find out, so you may as well tell us here!

I'm not trying to be confrontational, but ask me anything at all about the Army CU, as a potential rider for the club or about one of our events, and I'll be open, honest and up front with you or anyone else as I've nothing to hide.

[Brian Cookson]

Why is it that all the daftest comments on here are anonymous. "Guest" response above is nonsense, doesn't address the issue at all. Yes, good idea let's affiliate to the AA.....

And as for TLI response, well, what more can I say....I suppose at least its not anonymous. But it doesn't even attempt to answer Gary's question about where the income from entries to TLI events goes.

Brian.

[Des]

John,

why does the TLi have a proposal to strike off the companies House register and why is sending in accounts as a dormant company I have race in TLi events less than 3 months ago so the TLi must be trading and therefore the information sent to companies house must be incorrect
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk

[Larry Hickmott]

the company (not BC!) I work for produces a program for managing companies (called CoSec Pro)... perhaps the TLI could do with buying a copy! It even has a feature for checking details entered with those at Companies House ...

Larry
_________________
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/
Site Content Editor for British Cycling Website

[Gary K]

So just where is the cash going?

I rode a TLI event last year at Thruxton and there were upwards of 200 people on the day riding in several different races all at £8 a time.

Basic maths here - Entries - £8 x 200 = £1600 (not including EOL extra £2)

Minus Thruxton donation to charity (for circuit use) - approx £300

Prize money - my race had a total of about £70-£100, lets say £100 to be safe, therefore 5 races x £100 = £500

So £1600-(£500+£300) = £800

No BCF levies to pay, take a cut for the insurance contribution, cheaper than BC at £1 a head? (at a guess) = -£200, which still leaves a £600 surplus.

Where does that £600 pounds go to please?

Doesn't inspire confidence in me at least.

[Des]

If the Tli are a dormant company what assurances do I have before renwing my membership / licence for next year that they will last the entire season and that their insurance is still valid?

Open procedures and accounting is merely reassurring those who pay that the organisation is being run properly. I have no bones about anyone making a profit from providing a service.
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk

[Brian Cookson]

TLI.....dormant company.....returns to Companies House.....undisclosed profits from events.......blimey, some serious questions to be answered here by TLI!

C'mon guys, let's hear some explanations......we're all ears!

Brian
(not a TLI member, but interested anyway).

[Richard Kennedy]

Just wondering if the event Gary K mentions was organised by the TLI or just under TLI rules?
Do you check the finances for every event you enter? If so you will find that there are also huge gaps in finances for events run under BCF rules. This does not mean that something dodgy is going on, it's just that we don't know what hidden expenses there may be for any particular event.
There are also organisers out there who do run events to make a profit (often for club funds), whilst i'm not particularly a fan of this if the event is well run and riders aren't getting ripped off I don't see the harm.
This as not intended to defend the TLI against the quite valid questions being asked, it's just that I think you ought to ask the organiser of the race where the money went before you point fingers at the organisation under whose rules it is is being run.

[Guest]