But they arn't giving WVA same/worse treatment that dopers. For one, doping carries a 4-year ban. For two, the UCI take WADA's rules on doping bans so it's WADA who set the ban time guidelines.
For three, the UCI is under no obligation to help WVA who voluntarily walked away from his contract for personal reasons. If Sniper Cycling did not hold their side of the contract i would expect the UCI to help WVA. But Sniper Cycling have done nothing wrong, and are following all the established UCI rules and regulations.
I don't think Veranda's Willems is without blame here, if the story in the press about pressuring other riders to write bad statements about WVA is true, they've created a very hostile working environement. Probably the worst team management in history as well, but I don't think that'll be a legal argument.
That being said, a big part of the blame should still go to WVA and he'll have to pay up. But nobody gains anything from a sidelining him for a season imo.
Ollfardh wrote:
I don't think Veranda's Willems is without blame here, if the story in the press about pressuring other riders to write bad statements about WVA is true, they've created a very hostile working environement. Probably the worst team management in history as well, but I don't think that'll be a legal argument.
That being said, a big part of the blame should still go to WVA and he'll have to pay up. But nobody gains anything from a sidelining him for a season imo.
If, whilst he was at the team, the management was creating an atmosphere of isolation and bullying, then WVA would actually have a legal argument to be allowed to end his contact.
If Sniper Cycling got people to bad mouth WVA after he walked out, tough luck. There's no argument there for WVA to end his contract, he's already put himself on the wrong side. It's bad from Sniper but hardly the first occasion of someone in cycling bad mouthing another, and nothing will come of it ultimately.
Sniper stand to gain 500k (i think that's the compensation figure they are after), so making sure WVA sits out or pays up works out well either way for them. He's already not riding for them, and this way he cannot ride against them either.
The only loser here is WVA. He's costing himself (or his own management/sponsors) money in the compensation and potential earnings from Lotto and he's definitely harming his future earning potential beyond that by showing the cycling world he's happy to walk out on a contract.
Well i guess Lotto could also be losers in not getting WVA for a year, but equally they don't have to pay him for that year either.
Ollfardh wrote:
I don't think Veranda's Willems is without blame here, if the story in the press about pressuring other riders to write bad statements about WVA is true, they've created a very hostile working environement. Probably the worst team management in history as well, but I don't think that'll be a legal argument.
That being said, a big part of the blame should still go to WVA and he'll have to pay up. But nobody gains anything from a sidelining him for a season imo.
If, whilst he was at the team, the management was creating an atmosphere of isolation and bullying, then WVA would actually have a legal argument to be allowed to end his contact.
If Sniper Cycling got people to bad mouth WVA after he walked out, tough luck. There's no argument there for WVA to end his contract, he's already put himself on the wrong side. It's bad from Sniper but hardly the first occasion of someone in cycling bad mouthing another, and nothing will come of it ultimately.
Sniper stand to gain 500k (i think that's the compensation figure they are after), so making sure WVA sits out or pays up works out well either way for them. He's already not riding for them, and this way he cannot ride against them either.
The only loser here is WVA. He's costing himself (or his own management/sponsors) money in the compensation and potential earnings from Lotto and he's definitely harming his future earning potential beyond that by showing the cycling world he's happy to walk out on a contract.
Well i guess Lotto could also be losers in not getting WVA for a year, but equally they don't have to pay him for that year either.
The story I read is that after WVA had to read the takeover by first Aqua Blue and then Roompot in the press, he was very unhappy with the team management (and there were problems already) and said in the press he didn't want to ride with Roompot. Nuyens feared he might break his contract, and secretly pressured other riders to write statements about WVA's disloyalty. One or more riders didn't like this and told WVA about what was happening. He then broke his contract.
If this is the case, there's blame on both parties. WVA will have to pay something at least, maybe not the full sum, but something. I don't think UCI will forbid him to race though, EU citizens are well protected for stuff like this. He kinda has the right to do his job if he's going to have to pay that compensation to Sniper Cycling.
TheManxMissile wrote:
But they arn't giving WVA same/worse treatment that dopers. For one, doping carries a 4-year ban. For two, the UCI take WADA's rules on doping bans so it's WADA who set the ban time guidelines.
For three, the UCI is under no obligation to help WVA who voluntarily walked away from his contract for personal reasons. If Sniper Cycling did not hold their side of the contract i would expect the UCI to help WVA. But Sniper Cycling have done nothing wrong, and are following all the established UCI rules and regulations.
4 years ban is not for all dopers, in Froome case for example we was talking about a 6 month ban, and I don't care if the ban is from UCI or WADA, if you are banned you don't race and that's the same in any case. Anyway team's position isn't candid.
Thinking about it, I agree that a ban should be a good way to counteract this problem, but WVA is a kind of n°0 case, afaik there is no a rule that provide a ban for this, he wouldn't have acted in this way probably knowing that he risk a suspension. UCI have to learn from this case and avoid future similar problems.
That case got dragged for too long. Four years is fair enough considering similar cases of the same substance use, but I don't remember anything that took this long to solve.
Curious now about Di Gregório and Roson's closure.
It was inconclusive cause it didn't match the results of the A-sample, but thats really all that had been known.. even here in Portugal nobody had any idea of what was happening.
That's a really weird situation, B-sample it's just that, for the rider to demonstrate that A-Sample is in someway wrong, what's utility of analyze a B-Sample if not compare it to A?
Very confusing case.. And honestly I dont understand if anything happened recently to make that decision or if UCI was just "tired" of prolonging the case.
Well, the UCI have cleared WVA to sign for another team! He has to sign before Dec 31st (honestly not got a damn clue why this date as it has no relation to any UCI regulations, maybe trying to get in before a certain legal deadline not made public?), but as long as he does (and seeing he has a 2020 contract with Lotto making that into 2019 shouldn't take that long) he's good to ride events next year.
However this doesn't end the case, Sniper Cycling still seeming to want to take it all the way to court for their compensation. But if Lotto do sign WVA up in time don't be surprised to see this get settled out of court quite quickly.
I am happy to see the UCI clear WVA to race, but it does make me wonder A) if they'll make some regulation changes around contracts, and B) if any other unhappy riders will start using this as a precedent to leave teams early.
And with the Sosa case still rumbling on you'll see some impact there.
And to end on a negative note () courts can still over rule the UCI and enforce the Sniper contract unless compensation is agreed. But as this won't get to court until some point in 2019 we should see WVA through he Flanders Classics.
D*ckheads from Sniper Cycling also released a statement after the verdict where they warned other teams about the risks of signing WVA. That's just"if we can't have him, no one can" pettiness.
Ollfardh wrote:
D*ckheads from Sniper Cycling also released a statement after the verdict where they warned other teams about the risks of signing WVA. That's just"if we can't have him, no one can" pettiness.
WVA brought this upon himself - 1-2 decent finishes and now he thinks he's Peter Sagan and can do whatever he wants? He'll learn the hard way that it's easy to fall from grace. Many riders like him came as "the next big thing", but became massive flops. I'm not saying Sniper are right, but they are simply defending their business interests and WVA decided to terminate the contract without their consent.
WVA is still (de jure) under contract with Sniper Pro Cyling (who holds the Verandas Willems - Crelan PCT and CX licenses) which makes his (temporary) stint with Cibel in CX illegal according to the sporting rules which prevents riders under contract with one team to race for another unless an agreement is settled. And AFAIK no agreement between both parties has been reached yet and quite frankly it may not at all - Sniper may drag the case until 31 December 2019 when WVA's contract would expire anyway and he'll be free agent. The CX case on the other hand is different as VWA should not (technically) compete for another team, but can compete as independent rider (as he did for a while)
And IMO this case along with the sudden signing of Eddie Dunbar to Team Sky after Aqua Blue went bust shows that UCI needs to implement no-compete clause should rider tries to terminate existing contract unless it's mutually agreed by all involving parties. (i.e. Rohan Dennis moving from Garmin to BMC in 2014)
Ollfardh wrote:
D*ckheads from Sniper Cycling also released a statement after the verdict where they warned other teams about the risks of signing WVA. That's just"if we can't have him, no one can" pettiness.
WVA brought this upon himself - 1-2 decent finishes and now he thinks he's Peter Sagan and can do whatever he wants? He'll learn the hard way that it's easy to fall from grace. Many riders like him came as "the next big thing", but became massive flops. I'm not saying Sniper are right, but they are simply defending their business interests and WVA decided to terminate the contract without their consent.
WVA is still (de jure) under contract with Sniper Pro Cyling (who holds the Verandas Willems - Crelan PCT and CX licenses) which makes his (temporary) stint with Cibel in CX illegal according to the sporting rules which prevents riders under contract with one team to race for another unless an agreement is settled. And AFAIK no agreement between both parties has been reached yet and quite frankly it may not at all - Sniper may drag the case until 31 December 2019 when WVA's contract would expire anyway and he'll be free agent. The CX case on the other hand is different as VWA should not (technically) compete for another team, but can compete as independent rider (as he did for a while)
And IMO this case along with the sudden signing of Eddie Dunbar to Team Sky after Aqua Blue went bust shows that UCI needs to implement no-compete clause should rider tries to terminate existing contract unless it's mutually agreed by all involving parties. (i.e. Rohan Dennis moving from Garmin to BMC in 2014)
The decent answer from Sniper would've been something like: "We take note of this verdict and remain confident we will win this case in court". Instead they went "Hey other teams, look at all these risks you get for signing him. UCI will punish you if we're right". That isn't about who's right anymore, that's pure pettiness.
PS: Both Sagan and WVA are 3x World Champions, so I do think you can compare them
Ollfardh wrote:
D*ckheads from Sniper Cycling also released a statement after the verdict where they warned other teams about the risks of signing WVA. That's just"if we can't have him, no one can" pettiness.
WVA brought this upon himself - 1-2 decent finishes and now he thinks he's Peter Sagan and can do whatever he wants? He'll learn the hard way that it's easy to fall from grace. Many riders like him came as "the next big thing", but became massive flops. I'm not saying Sniper are right, but they are simply defending their business interests and WVA decided to terminate the contract without their consent.
WVA is still (de jure) under contract with Sniper Pro Cyling (who holds the Verandas Willems - Crelan PCT and CX licenses) which makes his (temporary) stint with Cibel in CX illegal according to the sporting rules which prevents riders under contract with one team to race for another unless an agreement is settled. And AFAIK no agreement between both parties has been reached yet and quite frankly it may not at all - Sniper may drag the case until 31 December 2019 when WVA's contract would expire anyway and he'll be free agent. The CX case on the other hand is different as VWA should not (technically) compete for another team, but can compete as independent rider (as he did for a while)
And IMO this case along with the sudden signing of Eddie Dunbar to Team Sky after Aqua Blue went bust shows that UCI needs to implement no-compete clause should rider tries to terminate existing contract unless it's mutually agreed by all involving parties. (i.e. Rohan Dennis moving from Garmin to BMC in 2014)
The decent answer from Sniper would've been something like: "We take note of this verdict and remain confident we will win this case in court". Instead they went "Hey other teams, look at all these risks you get for signing him. UCI will punish you if we're right". That isn't about who's right anymore, that's pure pettiness.
PS: Both Sagan and WVA are 3x World Champions, so I do think you can compare them
CX results don't matter - WVA is still nobody in road cycling compared to Sagan. And Sagan has the following palmares:
3X World Road Race Champion
1X European Road Race Champion
6X Maillot Vert winner TdF
1X Paris-Roubaix winner
3X Gent - Wevelgem winner
1X Ronde van Vlaanderen / Tour des Flandres winner
And these are just the most important races in the cycling calendar - Sagan has wins elsewhere like AToC, TdPologne the Canadian Classics etc. Whereas WVA has not reached the same level of prominence as Sagan, Gilbert, Van Avermaet etc.
Also UCI's decision was made while the court case was still ongoing. If Belgian court decides in favour of Sniper, who would look more stupid in the process - WVA or UCI? Now, WVA can bring the case to the CAS should he lose in Belgian court, but what if CAS also calls in favour of Sniper as well?
Also as I've stated contract disputes need to be resolved better and implementing 30-60 days no-compete clause to prevent riders riding elsewhere immediately
I just want to add that UCI stands for International Cyclists Union, not International Road Cyclists Union.. van Aert is 3x reigning cyclocross world champion and is one of the current figures of cycling as a whole.
Assuming Sagan can do what he wants is a flaw already cause even tho I see your point he got kicked from the Tour (if rightly or not it doesnt matter cause he wasnt the one in control, thats what matters). Sagan is not a God, he is a professional cyclist, like van Aert, and both would in this case be treated equal, because yeah van Aert didn't turn pro this year.
I'm not very into the details of Sniper's latest announcement so I won't comment on that, I just felt the need to add these little informations as this discussion seems very rough around the edges.
@Ivan - WVA was able to compete legally in CX races, as Cibel basically operates as an individual entry without association. Cibel-Cebon is a CT road team but the two entities run separately with differences in management and sponsors. Basically WVA has been riding CX as an individual without a team, taking the Cibel name from personal sponsor agreements and not through being contracted to the CT level team.
That is a 100% legal thing to do, and a rather clever work around using the rules available in CX.
Eddie Dunbar, nothing illegal or dodgy there at all, not sure why you've mentioned it. Aqua Blue collapsed, their racing lisence terminated. This makes their contracts invalid/expired. And under UCI regulations he was perfectly fine to sign for a second team mid-season. (I wrote a better comment on his transfer a few News threads ago which better explained things). Aqua Blue did not have to agree to anything, they didn't exist...
Onto the court case, i don't know how the court can force WVA to ride for Sniper Cycling against his will. I'm no expert on Belgian law or EU law, but i doubt there are laws that force you to work for someone against your will.
What the court case is more about is the compensation. Sniper have gone on record to say WVA can leave the team if acceptable compensation is paid, this figure being 500k Euros. Unsurprisingly WVA doens't want to pay that much. The court case is going to look into Sniper's valuation of that number, coming eventually to a decision on what has to paid by WVA.
Let's say the courts agree with the 500k fee, WVA will have to pay it to keep racing for another team (Lotto). Himself, his sponsors and his new team i'm sure would then come together to find that money to allow him to keep racing (heck, he could crowdfund some it i'm sure).
It's all just a question of what the compensation figure will be. And the court could rule WVA owes no money if Sniper are found in violation of their duties as an employer.
Tl;dr
WVA broke no rules riding CX races, he did so as an individual and not contracted to another team entity.
Eddie Dunbar joining Sky was completely legal and has no relation to the WVA case at all.
Courts will rule upon compensation fees, they cannot force WVA to stay at Sniper.
If WVA still doesn't want to pay that legally confirmed fee, he won't be able to race but that's a personal choice.
____
@ollfardh - Call Sniper petty (and they are), but WVA has also been petty in his response to rumors and management decisions (i don't like this so will just run away). Solid 50/50 on the petty scale.
If Sniper had pressured other riders to make life unpleasant for WVA, that's not petty that's actual bullying.
Ollfardh wrote:
D*ckheads from Sniper Cycling also released a statement after the verdict where they warned other teams about the risks of signing WVA. That's just"if we can't have him, no one can" pettiness.
WVA brought this upon himself - 1-2 decent finishes and now he thinks he's Peter Sagan and can do whatever he wants? He'll learn the hard way that it's easy to fall from grace. Many riders like him came as "the next big thing", but became massive flops. I'm not saying Sniper are right, but they are simply defending their business interests and WVA decided to terminate the contract without their consent.
WVA is still (de jure) under contract with Sniper Pro Cyling (who holds the Verandas Willems - Crelan PCT and CX licenses) which makes his (temporary) stint with Cibel in CX illegal according to the sporting rules which prevents riders under contract with one team to race for another unless an agreement is settled. And AFAIK no agreement between both parties has been reached yet and quite frankly it may not at all - Sniper may drag the case until 31 December 2019 when WVA's contract would expire anyway and he'll be free agent. The CX case on the other hand is different as VWA should not (technically) compete for another team, but can compete as independent rider (as he did for a while)
And IMO this case along with the sudden signing of Eddie Dunbar to Team Sky after Aqua Blue went bust shows that UCI needs to implement no-compete clause should rider tries to terminate existing contract unless it's mutually agreed by all involving parties. (i.e. Rohan Dennis moving from Garmin to BMC in 2014)
The decent answer from Sniper would've been something like: "We take note of this verdict and remain confident we will win this case in court". Instead they went "Hey other teams, look at all these risks you get for signing him. UCI will punish you if we're right". That isn't about who's right anymore, that's pure pettiness.
PS: Both Sagan and WVA are 3x World Champions, so I do think you can compare them
CX results don't matter - WVA is still nobody in road cycling compared to Sagan. And Sagan has the following palmares:
3X World Road Race Champion
1X European Road Race Champion
6X Maillot Vert winner TdF
1X Paris-Roubaix winner
3X Gent - Wevelgem winner
1X Ronde van Vlaanderen / Tour des Flandres winner
And these are just the most important races in the cycling calendar - Sagan has wins elsewhere like AToC, TdPologne the Canadian Classics etc. Whereas WVA has not reached the same level of prominence as Sagan, Gilbert, Van Avermaet etc.
WVA has the following palmares:
3x world champion
2x world cup
1x superprestige
3x DVV
Wins in pretty much every big race: Koksijde, Gieten, Zonhoven, Loenhout, Baal, Zolder, Namen, Ronse, Francorchamps, Gavere, Ardooie, Bredene.
WVA's palmares is superior to Sagan's, who despite being a few years older still has more big races to win.
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
) courts can still over rule the UCI and enforce the Sniper contract unless compensation is agreed. But as this won't get to court until some point in 2019 we should see WVA through he Flanders Classics.
