21 au 23 janvier 2002

La décision de l'Association cycliste canadienne de ne pas permettre à Lyne Bessette de représenter le Canada au Championnat mondial de cyclo-cross à Zolder en Belgique le 2 février 2002, (malgré que Velonews l'ait nommée Cyclo-Cross Woman of the Year en Amérique du nord pour 2001 et que les internautes fréquentant CyclingNews l'aient désignée meilleure coureuse de cyclo-cross au monde en 2001) a fait couler beaucoup d'encre sur le forum de discussion du site The Canadian Cyclist.

Was I right? Sure she would have a chance to medal. But there was a huge bitch session when she did'nt race the road worlds, which I supported her decision. But then she wants to represent Canada at the cross world, but where was she representing Canada in Canada? Of course she is still cute and very fast
January 21, 2002 at 19:41. by redline

The CCA should get their collective heads out of their asses and give the girl a shot. It's not like her going will deprive anyone else a chance.
January 21, 2002 at 20:27 by dogshagger

I agree with the CCA in that they have to been impartial to all athletes, even the professional ones. True, she is definetely a very strong rider and our best chance for a medal but it's only fair to the other riders. If she is really serious about 'cross then she will do it properly next year and show the CCA what she can do.
January 21, 2002 at 20:32 by chipper

it really sucks to not see Bessette going to the World's.. she could do really good, but its not the CCA's fault she isn't going, it's hers. Every high performance cyclist knows that Nationals is vital to be on any worlds or olympics team. If the CCA didn't enforce this rule our Nationals would go to crap... hell Rollie missed a World Cup race to do Nationals when he was leading the overall... he did win it back in the end, but say he flatted at mt ste anne like he does alot and miguel had a good ride....GONE hope she's learned her lesson
January 21, 2002 at 22:08

Referendum
Quebec is gonna separate now for sure
January 21, 2002 at 22:18 by Lucian Bouwank

The CCA doesn't care about cyclocross racing. Back a couple years ago when no one had stepped forward to run the nationals by October it seemed as though the CCA would rather do without the hassle of a cyclocross championships. So why now do they care? Let her race this year and maybe next year more women will be inspired to give the sport a try.
January 21, 2002 at 23:12

Thinks small attitude of Canadians
If CCA wants all National team athletes to be at Nationals, why don't they pay for the airfares and other expenses of the "carded" athletes then? It makes no sense to force everyone to fly there, especially those like Lyne (or Gord Fraser for instance) who had nothing to prove there and better race on their agenda, but to expect them to pay 1000$ to go to Alberta for a weekend??? Canada really has the think small attitude. Better be good Nationaly that try to be good internationally.
January 22, 2002 at 0:09:44 by Paul

I do not know Lyne and am in no way trying to represent that I do or speak for her.

Who is this decision good for?

Sure the CCA does not want to set the precedent for other programs and disciplines and if this was R/T/or Mtn I would agree. Cross is different and should be treated as such. Lyne would receive no funding from the CCA and is not taking a spot away from someone else.

Who does this decision really affect? It hurts Lyne and cyclocross. I can't speak for her but I have the impression that she had no idea that she would be the international threat she is back in November. Not doing Nat's was not a snub in my mind. As for cross this really hurts. The numbers are already lacking. Having her at World's would bring out more female and Quebecois riders to cross. (Both are in short supply in cross as it is) There would also be media attention and the CCA is missing an opportunity to take advantage of it. I'm sure Timmy's wouldn't mind having some pictures in the cycling "off-season" in La Presse (I know there isn't a lot of Tim's in PQ, but there isn't a lot of cycling coverage to begin with - remember this extra return won't cost the CCA)

I do agree that riders should be at the Nat's. This is a special set of circumstances. No one else is going. She didn't realize her talent at the time. She would greatly benefit from going this year. Medal Potential. The only negative is the precedent. It shouldn't be seen as such. It should be looked upon as the exception. Given the right set of circumstances and that no one who completed the criteria would be pushed off the team, who does this decision hurt?

The argument that she should have been representing Canada in Canada is being used. Sure Nat's would have benefitted from her presence but aren't we hurting cross (and Cdn cycling) more by not letting her go as compared to the benefits if she had attended. From what I have read about the efforts of her preparation she might agree to do the next 5 Nationals if we let her go to Zolder.

Why can't a fair decision be worked out? rather than one that is made to prevent future (potential but unrealistic - like this would happen again) problems. The impression I get from the story is that the CCA is saying "What is the least problematic decision?" instead of "What's best for cycling?" I can understand the first mentality given the constraints of IOC&COA standards and public funding. Cross does not have these constraints.

I've rambled enough (too much as usual probably). I think I'm just scared that it won't be the Canadian Lyne Bessette winning gold in Monopoli(?) in 2003 but American Lyne Johnson. Wouldn't that make this look like the right decision?
January 22, 2002 at 0:49 by R. Duggan, rayduggan@DamIhatespamhotmail.com

I have just read on the cyclocrossworld.com website (unconfirmed) that some COA committee members may have been on the selection panel. Why is that? There is no public funding involved. It is not an Olympic sport (yet :-) ). I apologize to the CCA if the decision was out of their hands. Then again, why would it be? COA standards and methods should not apply. Why are they on a selection panel of a sport that is not an Olympic sport? Why doesn't the CCA have complete autonomy over a sport that they should have it over? Once again I am shooting off about a process I know nothing about but is the CCA just saying it was out of their hands when they could easily override the decision if they wanted to?

Then again, this info could be wrong. Given the connection between Cxworld.com and Lyne, wrong info seems unlikely.
January 22, 2002 at 1:13 by R. Duggan

Now you know why Peter Mazur rides for Poland!!!!!!
January 22, 2002 at 9:21

Just a small point against ray's fear. If! lynne was a us citizen and had missed her nationals down there she would also not be on their worlds team. alison dunlap does one national race a year - the nat champs. She does not go to cx worlds every year, but goes to nationals (5x winner in a row I think) to keep the door open if she wants to go. I saw in cc news lynne was in france for a local race and wonder why she did not go stomp on hanka at the recent world cup race? she was 4th at the final super cup race (after the others had raced the day before). She got beat there by riders who have never been on the cx worlds podium. why assume she would be big favourite in Belgium? Regarding the CCA their mandate is to be 'fair and impartial' in applying rules. But I think here there is perhaps some human feelings coming into play (and I don't blame them). Does anyone think that if lynne had bravely lead the team at road worlds they would not have found a way to let her 'cash in her chips' and go to cx worlds. it's totally hypothetical, but i think this would have happened. What comes around goes around???
January 22, 2002 at 12:11

There is a lot more prestige and recognition for winning US 'cross nationals. Also a much deeper field. I'll bet that if Alison Dunlop had skipped her nationals, she'd have gotten the chance to go.
January 22, 2002 at 13:51

It means alot to youth and development to be able to see their stars in action. It's one race a year that ya she could run backwards and win. I'm sure she spent that much travelling to some other dirt wat backhole american town, following that....that.....tim johnson around.
January 22, 2002 at 14:17 by redline

CCA are MORONS!
Canada has lost a great chance at a top performance at the Worlds... enough said... people whine and complain about our athletes not representing well at the international level, well this is the shit they have to put up with from moronic Canadian sports federations!

Peter Mazur, Steve Hegg, and others have raced for other countries, and no wonder, who wants all the beauracratic bull that comes with the Maple leaf. The CCA are concerned more, it seems, with protecting their cushy government jobs and budget than with supporting and promoting our athletes. Showing up in Alberta to race with 10-20 other women would not have proven anything!
January 22, 2002 at 14:49

Can you say lawsuit?? If Bessette had a leg to stand on, she or Saturn could go to the CCA and say speak to my lawyer.....

If the CCA makes an exception for Bessette, they set a precedent and open themselves up for having to make all kinds of exceptions in the future. The RULES are the rules.

Also, I believe the UCI holds them to a certain standard for selections for riders going to worlds and requires they (CCA) select athletes accordingly - by not following the UCI guidelines, future selections may be affected - to Canada's detriment.. I seem to remember when GJ wanted to skirt the qualifying for Olympics the CCA had to abide by the COA rules.
January 22, 2002 at 14:59

Screw the CCA, race for the US.
Message to Lynn. Screw racing for those morons in Ottawa. Get married to Tim J. and race for the USA. Follow the lead of Peter Mazur, Kirk Molday and Owen Hargreaves.
January 22, 2002 at 16:45

Where is the class
This whining on the internet after the fact is not very classy from such a great rider. Why not admit 'I was wrong not to make the effort to go to Nationals I understand their decision, watch out for me next year!'. There would be no appeals, lawyers, committee meetings, conference calls, etc, etc. if one athlete had followed the rules that every rider in almost every country in almost every discipline has to follow she would have saved herself and a lot of others a lot of hassle. all she had to do was get on a plane and I am sure the organizer would have bent over backwards to accomodate her and have her on a flight home right after the race. It's not like she is an aussie or kiwi and had to fly 24h to get home (like the athletes from down under are doing right now). Lynne is a big name in Canadian cycling and her presence would have created enhanced interest in the cx nats, how much who knows? Also her presence would have made the nats for the women official and assuming lynne had won the 2nd and 3rd place riders would be proudly holding their legit medals. If lynne ever races in the stars and stripes there will be no fewer hoops to jump through south of the border than she faces in the great white north. If you think otherwise you are wrong. I am not a crazed supporter of the CCA, but in this case I think they are the victims if there is one. The volunteer committe members and staff have wasted plenty of time on this issue. What do they get for trying to do their best not to let a prima donna skirt the rules for her conveinience. Just a lot of crap from the media and the cycling community.
January 22, 2002 at 17:34 by 2cents

Duggan's right
Ray Duggan's post hits the nail on the head in stating that the prime motivator for the CCA's decision does not appear to be the best interests of Canadian cycling. If allowing Bessette to represent Canada at the Worlds would have denied that opportunity for someone else, there would clearly be an issue. However, the CCA could have granted her the right to go (at no cost to them apparently) and made it clear that the exercise of their discretion was based upon that factor (not unfairly denying another) combined with the clear potential that Lynne has displayed, while stating that it would always be within the discretion of the CCA to not allow someone else to go in future circumstances where Nationals were missed. Sounds as though Bessette would've competed at Nats had she known then what she knows now, and to hold that against her doesn't seem appropriate -- especially compared to the upside of allowing her to compete.

Tough call for sure, but I disagree that the CCA would've set a dangerous precedent -- in fact, 5 years from now we may have another situation exactly along these lines, guess where the precedent stands as of today? In that scenario, Canada would be screwed again on the international stage due to the CCA's inability to make the right decision for cycling in Canada. Instead of rigidly adhering to rules which don't apply particularly well in the circumstances (anyone remember Vaughters' bee sting TdF incident?), the CCA should suck up any ill will they have from the Road Worlds and let our best cross-cyclist, a real contender, compete for Canada.

As for those of you saying that this was the right decision, does anyone feel that not allowing Lynne to go when no one else could really helps cycling in Canada? There is no unfairness to anyone else and thus, the "precedent" would only be helpful for the future.
January 22, 2002 at 18:34 by Interested Observer

Love the CCA's attitude. Hey, we'll show you. We'll lose!
January 23, 2002 at 9:43

page mise en ligne le 23 janvier 2002 par SVP