Conor McGrane, who works as a doctor for Cycling Ireland, has said begrudgery was not part of his motivation when opposing Pat McQuaid's efforts to run for a third term as UCI president (Photo: Toby Watson)
By Shane Stokes
Cycling Ireland doctor Conor McGrane has said the continued doping problem facing young Irish riders abroad was the biggest reason he opposed the Irish federation nominating Pat McQuaid to run for a third term as UCI president.
Responding to McQuaid’s assertion that Irish begrudgery was the motivation of many who opposed his re-election, McGrane he said he has no regrets about being one of his most vocal opponents.
“My main motivation was knowing that underage lads going over to the continent were being exposed to doping,” he said.
Asked to clarify that point, McGrane declined to name the riders concerned.
Advertisement
But he said he had personal knowledge of amateur competitors seeing evidence of drug use when they went abroad.
“From what guys told me, it was blatantly obvious that there were guys doping to their teeth with the knowledge of teams and with the knowledge of race organisers.”
While the UCI under McQuaid was suggesting the battle against doping was being won, McGrane said he felt the world governing body needed to go much further to tackle the problem.
And he also said if he was hearing stories of continued doping in Europe from his base in Dublin, a culture of doping must remain.
He believed the UCI and McQuaid needed to acknowledge that, and act against the culture to a much great extent.
McGrane runs his own practice in north Dublin but also works as a doctor for Cycling Ireland; seen here on the left tending to Rás yellow jersey Mark Cassidy after a bad crash.
At the 2012 Cycling Ireland AGM McGrane spoke out on the issue, calling for McQuaid to be replaced at the top of the UCI.
That statement was followed by contact from McQuaid, who asked to meet McGrane and to explain his position. The duo subsequently sat down and discussed matters.
“He talks a good talk and he sounds very passionate about it,” McGrane said.
However, he did not feel his words were matched by the actions the world of cycling needed to see at that time.
“He told me that there would be an independent commission and everything was going to be covered by it,” said McGrane.
“Because of that commission, I was on the verge on saying publically that I was withdrawing any objection I had, that I was happy to go forward with that.”
However, when that commission “fell apart” within weeks, McGrane became convinced much more decisive action was called for, reinforcing his belief that McQuaid must go.
“It wasn’t that I personally thought he was a bad man. It was really because he just wasn’t taking it anywhere near the direction that was needed.”
"I genuinely have respect for the guy"
McGrane said the decision wasn’t an easy one to make.
“I genuinely have respect for the guy in terms of what he has done for Irish cycling,” he said.
“A lot of people argue that he has done chunks of it for his own benefit, but he has driven cars and been a mechanic on his teams.
“And he has promoted races and done a hell of a lot more than some people have.
“But at the end of the day the CEO of an organisation needs to take responsibility for the actions of an organisation and it wasn’t happening.”
McGrane read the recent interview with McQuaid on stickybottle.
In it the former UCI president questioned the motives of those who opposed his re-election.
“I’ve always known about Irish begrudgery and the family have as well,” McQuaid said then.
“The amount of work we did, not just me but other members of my family; the amount of work we’ve done going back over the years, my father and my uncle included, to promote and develop Irish cycling is enormous.
“And what galls me is a lot of the people who were so critical are people who have never as much as stood on the corner with a red flag on a Tuesday night for a club race.”
Pat McQuaid said he believes some of those who opposed him were motivated by begrudgery. But McGrane says he and others he worked with acted for what they believed were the right reasons.
McGrane told stickybottle he wouldn’t have commented again on the issue had the begrudgery comments not been made.
However he felt it was important to explain why he called for change at the time.
McGrane accepts that McQuaid likely feels hurt that a third presidential stint was opposed by people within Irish cycling, but believes that ascribing that position to begrudgery is, by and large, not accurate.
“I was upset by that comment,” he said.
“That said, I can see where he is coming from in thinking that. The guy felt that he was shafted by his own federation and wasn’t supported when he felt that he was doing plenty.
“I was annoyed and angry when I read it, but when you sit back and think about it you can see where he is coming from.”
Related News
However, asked if he believed there was an element to truth to McQuaid’s remarks, he said he didn’t think that was the case.
“When I say I can see where he is coming from, I mean it in terms of his own perspective and how it might look to him,” he clarified.
“I don't think there as any truth in it. Certainly not in the people I know who were actively campaigning against him.
“In fact, there were far more people actively campaigning for him.”
After the board of Cycling Ireland made a procedural error in voting for McQuaid’s nomination, the federation decided to put it to its members to make the decision.
An extraordinary general meeting was held in June 2013 in order for the vote to be held. The outcome was that Cycling Ireland’s members voted 91-74 against backing his nomination.
McGrane said McQuaid's contribution to Irish cycling over many years was more than most. But he believes the time for change at the top of the UCI had definitely come.
McQuaid later secured a nomination elsewhere but went on to lose the UCI presidential election to Brian Cookson.
McGrane said that had voting been equal between both sides, the margin would actually have been bigger.
“The only reason the vote was so close was that some people had three votes at the EGM. It would have been a hell of a lot wider otherwise.
“None of the people voting against him had more than one vote, and yet a good chunk of those voting for him had two or three votes.
“It was because they had a vote in a personal capacity, a vote as a board member and a vote as a head of a regional commission. It really does beggar belief.
“Also, I know personally a few club reps that were mandated to vote against him went but actually went to the EGM and voted for him.”
Asked if he encountered a backlash for his support for change, McGrane said that he did come under some pressure.
“I got a few nasty emails and a few snide comments,” he said.
“But I got a fair few supportive emails from around the world, and so that balanced it out.
“The nasty emails were all anonymous, the supportive ones all had names.”
"Cookson disappointing; change was still needed"
At the time some of those who wanted change were criticised because the sole rival candidate to McQuaid was the Briton Brian Cookson; on the bike above.
At the EGM, a pro-McQuaid speaker questioned the patriotism of anyone who would back an Englishman over an Irishman, thus effectively inferring that nationality should be of prime importance in deciding voting stance.
Since the election, Cookson has been in power for over a year. Thus far McGrane feels his tenure has been disappointing.
“To be perfectly honest, I don’t think he has been much of an improvement,” he said.
“But at the same time, the very fact that there is a change sends the message out.
“I suppose it is early days still, but I would hope if he doesn’t show some more improvement over the next while, come the next UCI congress he will be put under the same pressure that McQuaid was.
“At the end of the day, if you don’t do it, you need to answer for that. He was effectively elected on a largely anti-doping ticket and he has to deliver on that.”
Still, McGrane feels the right choice was made due to the unanswered questions facing the UCI after the Lance Armstrong affair, the allegations of collusion and the abandoned Independent Commission.
“I don’t want to be seen to be slagging off Pat but everything that went right he claims credit for,” he said.
“And everything that went wrong is explained away by the fact that he was a member of the road commission in the past, and therefore didn’t have any executive power; that it wasn’t really him.
McGrane believes Tracey Gaudry would have made a better replacement for McQuaid than Cookson. Now a vice president at the UCI, Gaudry is a former Australian road international and won the road race and time trial national titles in her pomp.
“Personally I am not convinced the bio passport works particularly well. That is his main claim to fame.
“It is a bit like the early days of blood testing. Maybe they will refine it as it goes on.
“But certainly I don’t think it is delivering anywhere as much as being claimed. Bear in mind that Armstrong passed his.”
As for Cookson, McGrane’s position is that the Briton might not necessarily have been the ideal candidate, but that change was still necessary due to the lingering and unanswered questions about the Armstrong era.
“I wasn’t by any stretch of the imagination a Cookson man. I asked around what people thought of him, people in British Cycling who I know, and I was told that they didn’t rate him very highly,” he said.
“I personally would have preferred somebody like Tracey Gaudry to go for it,” he said of the Australian vice president of the UCI.
“I know that approaches were made to her to ask her to stand but she felt that she didn’t have enough experience as yet.
“But I still feel that the president needed to change. The message that sends out is important and, as I said, if
Cookson doesn’t deliver before the next Congress, then I hope someone else is voted in instead.”
Topics
