Pat McQuaid is set to stand unopposed as the only candidate in the UCI's presidential election, thus also clearing him for a bid to become a member of the IOC. How will the various people involved in professional cycling feel about this? In Chadwick and Arthur's book 'International Cases in the Business of Sport', Morrow and Idle address some of the governance and power issues that professional cycling faces, in a case entitled: 'The Challenges of Modernising a Professional Sport: A Case Study of Professional Road Cycling':
(http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookdescription.cws_home/713079/description#description)
The following is a synopsis of the case: "Professional road cycling is a sport founded on commercialism. Since the first races of the late 1800s, the sport has maintained a close relationship with commercial companies and sponsors. We examine the challenges faced by a sport trying to restructure and modernise to retain its contemporary relevance. In 2005, the UCI Pro Tour was established. Based on models common in American professional sports, it created a super league of 20 licensed teams, obligated to contest all 27 ProTour races per season. Its creation has been controversial. The case focuses on the power play that has taken place between stakeholders in the sport - the governing body, race organisers, sponsors, teams, riders, the media, the public - and the conflict between stakeholders keen to protect their individual financial interests."
How will McQuaid's prospective re-election impact upon what appears to be a fragile peace in professional cycling? Will the continuity his re-election brings deliver a consensual and more constructive approach to governance of the sport? Or will old problems, old divisions and old conflicts re-emerge? Are we therefore set to witness a period of uncertainty or instability in cycling? Also, might we see the potential for the splintering and fragmentation of professional cycling increasing?
No comments:
Post a Comment