You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Wonder what exactly has gone on? [url= http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/36117976 ]Here[/url]
Sutton's not exactly known for his tact
hasn't improved her times in 4 years, in Suttons opinion not likely to improve so bye bye 🙁
Perfectly fair decision to drop her. Whether BC's program was right or wrong in the squads they used at qualifying events is not material now, you don't get an Olympic spot to say 'sorry', and they felt she wasn't a contender.
Equally as her other half is also on BC, it's fair to have a discussion with them about it to explain the decision and make it impersonal. You don't want 'marital discontent' boiling over into work.
As for these comments here. He's a blunt aussie for sure but I'd make the point there is no context and only one side without which I don't think you can judge.
Whataboutery - let's just imagine for instance that she had put on her career plan that she wanted to be around for the Olympics in 2016 and then retire and start a family. Would it be therefore unreasonable in that context to tell her she isn't in the team so she was now free to 'go have a baby'.
As for the 'ass' comment. Factual doesn't mean sexist. Shane Sutton would probably say the same about my ass. And my legs, gut, lungs.....
looks like they haven't qualified, and they are looking to attribute a reason for this to an external source, rather than themselves, which is common in people when they fail. It's called locus of control.
Not sure BC are firing on all cylinders at the moment, their selection policies for qualifying for events have been erratic showing a lack of understanding of how the systems work, and then there is the lack of understanding of how some events work.
They have a blinkered podium view which removes opportunities for people to compete at the highest level and removes role models for junior riders. Female cyclists seem to have suffered the most from this. Other nations will max out there quotas for events. Watch the Aussies this summer....
As for what has come out in recent years with biographies etc, any business would have investigated Sutton a long time ago and brought him out of the limelight.
But for a split second mistake in the 2012 team sprint, she could well have been an Olympic champion. Must be very frustrating to have missed that once in a lifetime opportunity.
squealingbrakes - Member
But for a split second mistake in the 2012 team sprint, she could well have been an Olympic champion. Must be very frustrating to have missed that once in a lifetime opportunity.
Especially when your colleague who made the mistake was so blasé about it that they clearly only cared about their own chances for a medal.
Elite level sport is tough. They missed qualification for Rio and she'll be 29 at the following Olympics so she's out.
As above a very fine margin between home Olympic glory and frustration. IIRC Nicole Cook took up cycling after she failed to win a gold (?) medal at rowing due to team mates
I smell massive "toys out of pram" strop here.
If only she had recording of this meeting where stuff like "go and have a baby" was said.
How have BC messed her Olympic ambitions up in recent years?
How have BC messed her Olympic ambitions up in recent years?
Always somebody else's fault ?
BC and Olympic programme are well funded, its your income, your job, your lifestyle. Getting fired is very painful. I know one Olympic Gold medalist (not cycling) who found life quite tough atfter the lottery money stopped and they had to pay their own bills for things out of post tax income after actually having found work. I'm sure Varnish is very upset and her future looks very uncertain. Leaving that elite sport bubble and being back in the "real world" is tough
Firing someone on performance grounds is totally justifiable. Done fairly, making them aware of their performance expectations and their actual achievements at all times.
From what I've heard from various inside sources, BC aren't very professional at all in this regard!
It's all a bit six of one and half a dozen of the other, but BC have a reputation for their sexist attitudes and not letting athletes know where they stand at all times... With that in mind, I do feel a bit sorry for her.
Nicole Cook talks about BC in her book, most definitely not complimentary.
Nicole Cook is meant to be really difficult to work with though?
read the book and you'll see there's plenty of reasons for believing NC rather than BC version
Nicole is a pain to deal with, i know a few people who've worked with her. Other than her work ethic and performance, there isn't much nice they have to say about her. She might be fine off the bike and away from the racing. But when she's got her bike head on. It's a different matter.
And rowing? Where the hell did you get that from?
She's been at the pointy end of cycling since she was about 13 and world champ at something like 18. Doubt she would have had time to qualify for rowing too.
Rebecca Romero is the one successful ex rower who became a successful cyclist who immediately springs to mind.
world class cyclist a bit difficult?? well that's a surprise 🙄
read the book and you'll see there's plenty of reasons for believing NC rather than BC version
+ 1. If a male was difficult to work with then he would have been tolerated. It was sexism, pure and simple.
TBH until very recently BC/BCF was run like an old boys club. It was all down to who you knew and who you hadn't pissed off. Lots of very good riders have been sidelined due to internal chips on shoulders. (It wasn't politics or policies, because for the most part, they didn't have any)Nicole Cook talks about BC in her book, most definitely not complimentary
So Nicole being critical of them isn't surprising any pro of the last 40 (?) years would probably have something critical to say of them. Unless they were on the inside looking out!
At least now they have policies and written procedures (or the funding dries up).
They might not be fair, or very nice, but they at least exist.
Nicole is a pain to deal with, i know a few people who've worked with her. Other than her work ethic and performance, there isn't much nice they have to say about her. She might be fine off the bike and away from the racing. But when she's got her bike head on. It's a different matter.
Would those same words have been said if she wasn't female? Bike head? Is that a female only thing? Shakes head.
<insert name here> is a pain to deal with, i know a few people who've worked with them. Other than their work ethic and performance, there isn't much nice they have to say about them. <insert name here> might be fine away from <insert sport here>. But when they've got her <insert sport here> head on. It's a different matter.
I thought this was the norm for elite level sport in general. It's what makes exceptions like Hoy so remarkable.
Their policies and procedures appear to harm the sport they support, look how they have stuffed mtb xc this Olympic cycle, they are now compromising success in BMX with not taking their full allowance of riders to the worlds, and actually stopping the riders to self fund which they have allowed in the past. Tre Whyte came back with a W3 two years ago, had a bad semi final in the recent SX (welcome to BMX) and has been dropped along with Quillian.
The is a significant short sightedness to the podium programme, not taking your best riders to the highest level of competition means they are not exposed to it until the are deemed podium contenders...
Lastly Victoria Pendleton doesn't paint a rosy picture of Sutton either.
Are you just seeing sexism everywhere for fun?Would those same words have been said if she wasn't female? Bike head? Is that a female only thing? Shakes head.
It's nothing to do with her sex, it's because she's been one of the hardest to deal with in the last ~20 years. A lot of the other riders were difficult too. As elite sportspeople can be. It's just that she's at one extreme.
Are you just seeing sexism everywhere for fun?
No of course I'm not. But what stands out for me is that despite BC having Lottery funding and her being World and Olympic Champion they couldn't even provide her with team kit for the World Championships. Do you think that would happen to Wiggo/Froome/Hoy etc ?
"It's nothing to do with her sex"
Telling someone to 'go and have a baby' has everything to do with her sex.
[i]"Varnish claimed in the Daily Mail interview that when she questioned the decision to drop her she was told that she was "too old". She also alleges that she had to listen to a "long list" of comments about her figure.
"I was told that 'with an ass like mine I couldn't change position within the team sprint'," Varnish said."[/i]
None of those things would have been applied to a male athlete. End of. Sexism pure and simple, if the allegations are true. That Sutton hasn't come out and denied making them, suggests Varnish has a case.
Personally, I'm surprised more stuff hasn't come out about British Cycling; a ruthless machine wedded to corporate interests, with the sole intention of getting the best results at all costs, in order to promote those corporate interests.
"TBH until very recently BC/BCF was run like an old boys club. It was all down to who you knew and who you hadn't pissed off."
I concur. My own experience of this didn't suggest it was a particularly open or egalitarian organisation. Seems the BC have taken those negative elements and added more.
Clodhopper, you've confused comments about Nicole Cook with comments about Jess Varnish.
*Holds up hand, am guilty of derailing thread. 😳
Reading Tyler Hamiltons book I think the ass comments probably aren't sexist, he and others were told they were too fat often. The 'go have a baby' thing though, you can't say that, even if it is a valid life choice. I started a family when I was her age.
I'm not a huge fan of Sutton, but I think Jess is coming across as a bit of a sour grapes whinger IMO. They've got to make the lottery money go as far as it can, there's no point paying contracts for people who aren't going to help future funding. There's no room for mates in track cycling, there's just not enough money in it.
I'm sure Sutton's a good coach but to me he always comes across as being a bit of a dick.
This part of the article from the Telegraph a couple of days ago made him sound patronising and a bit sexist to boot
Sutton said he had spoken with Varnish’s boyfriend Liam Phillips – the 2013 BMX world champion who is in excellent form and has high hopes for Rio this summer – in an effort to defuse any tension. “I had a long chat with him,” Sutton said, “to try to make him understand that we don’t take these decisions lightly. It wasn’t as though we ‘got rid’ of Jess. It’s just that [her contract] was up for renewal and we didn’t renew it.”
TBH, every single successful national track program (and I bet athletics etc) seems to have treated a lot of athletes as interchangeable parts. Not good enough in our opinion and off you go, irrespective of whether you ARE good enough or not; see what Scott Mcgrory said about the Australian system for example.
That said if he told her to go and have kids, he needs sorting out. She may want kids or she may not but it's patronising in the extreme to suggest all she has to offer is cycling or babies.
As I said at the top of the thread, that quote must be seen in context before it can be judged. I've given one possible / theoretical context that would be different to the comment in isolation, for example. You could think up others that would be extremely damning and I'd be the first to condemn.
I'm not saying Sutton's choice of words may not have been ill-advised, even if it was in the right context I'd be extremely cautious of that sort of comment. Just that it can't automatically be seen as a sexist* comment.
* technicality; of course suggesting someone is now free to have a child has to be by definition a comment directed at a woman and therefore differentiates by sex, but you know what I mean, let's not split hairs. Sensible folks will know what a sexist comment really is.
It's certainly taken the shine off Varnish's career
Displays a distinct lacquer commitment.
She was probably hoping for a smoother finish
There's 2 parts to this IMO.
1. Is not renewing her contract unfair? Jess was deemed to be not good enough, this IMO is not unfair, she's never quite been at the very top of the sport and if they didn't feel she was a medal hope and they don't see her improving over the next 4 years then not renewing her contract is reasonable. BC is a medal machine and they are, and indeed have to be, brutal about how they manage the athletes.
2. Was it well handled? No, seems to be the easy answer but I don't think it quite as bad as Jess has made it sound. She got dropped, that understandably annoyed her. Sutton talked to her boyfriend, given he too is part of the BC team and someone who is a genuine medal hope I can understand that conversation happening. The "go and have a baby" comment is not good but we don't know the context and as has been mentioned above, if her plan was to do Rio and then have a family then saying to her "you're not going to Rio so go and have a baby" is not that unreasonable, not overly tactful but not as bad as it could be.
So my view is that a hugely competitive and driven athlete is very annoyed by a coaching team with very high standards who don't think she meets them. I also think Shane Sutton is as subtle as a sledgehammer but again, that is no surprise to anyone.
Nicole cookE was a 100% focused born winner,i'd imagine lots of that type are hard work,maybe they need a certain amount of bloody mindedness and not suffer fools to make the most of themselves,and at the end of the day I,m sure the people who said they didn't like her would have half of the career she had in a heartbeat.
BC will no doubt hope to gloss over the whole business.
Or sweep it under the matt
I like Shane Sutton a lot - but I can totally imagine him saying that. And possibly in a well-meaning way.
He's a bit like Ronseal when you think about it: Does what it says on the tin.
the whole episode does leave BC with a nasty stain.
Sounds like his people skills could do with a bit of a polish.
No Plane to Rio for her!
Wonder who Shane will Chisel out next...?
She'll just be satin watching it on the telly like the rest of us
Nicole was a pain to those dismissive of women's cycling. If she'd sat back and went along with how BC wanted to do things she would never have got anywhere.
I guess Sutton's suggesting that, in the end, shellacced something ?
The "go and have a baby" comment is not good but we don't know the context and as has been mentioned above, if her plan was to do Rio and then have a family then saying to her "you're not going to Rio so go and have a baby" is not that unreasonable, not overly tactful but not as bad as it could be.
How could it have been worse? I'm intrigued.
Nicole was a pain to those dismissive of women's cycling.
And team-mates, by all accounts.
How could it have been worse? I'm intrigued
Like I say - context. It's whataboutery but if she'd always suggested she'd work towards Rio and then retire and start a family, to tell her she wasn't going so she should 'go and have a baby' like she'd planned might be tactless but no more.
Say she'd for example said "Well, I think you're wrong and I'm going to go away, work extra hard and prove you wrong" and his retort to that was 'I don't think so love, be a good little girl and go and have a baby'
Might that be worse?
UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT WAS SAID AND IN WHAT CONTEXT, WE ONLY HAVE ONE SIDE AND NO CONTEXT SO WHILE IT MIGHT APPEAR BAD, WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
To be honest BC's whole selection 'strategy' seems to be a bit of a shambles in so many areas.
And as for women's cycling... it really does feel as though the initiatives outside BC are better and more effective for getting women racing. MTB and CX just seem easier to do as a woman than road. The best scheme for getting women to road race is run by a woman who just thought she'd do it because no one else was - she has been filling up race start lines in the north west (to the incredulity of BC staff).
They've got form so I'm afraid I find someone saying they cocked up the strategy to get riders selected and they're sexist pretty credible.
Given the known performance benefits of early stage pregnancy in elite athletes, then perhaps it was a training tip 😉
If he'd said to a male cyclist " look it's over your not quite good enough. Time to get on with your life maybe marry that girl your with, start a family" would that be sexist, would we be having this debate, I very much doubt it.
ratherbeintobago, have you read NCs' autobiography?
Looks to me like Varnish is trying to get Sutton sacked, by going to the press with a sexism charge on Sutton. Which he has denied, according to CN, and we don't have any proof of (that I've seen).
From the Cycling News:
“I wholeheartedly deny that I said or did anything other than act with complete professionalism in my dealings with Jess,” said Sutton.
Whether or not Sutton did say something is, currently, unprovable. What is clear however is that Varnish is going after Sutton in the press, and I can only assume that would be to get him sacked. Not a good thing to do Jess, I suggest.
ratherbeintobago, have you read NCs' autobiography?
No, is it any good?
@ghostely, right you are of course I remembered the wrong athlete
Re Nicole top level sport isnt't a personality contest, if she had the work ethic and produced the goods then that's what counts. If the coaches found her difficult then its up to them to sort themselves out. Unkess she's disrupting a team ornthe whole project who cares if she's difficult to work with.
No, is it any good?
@ ratherbeintobago - yes but you'll probably end up with a sense of anger at the injustice she endured. Here you go and free delivery too:
https://wordery.com/the-breakaway-nicole-cooke-9781471130359
C_G
agreed 🙂
Yes it is good
Whether or not Sutton did say something is, currently, unprovable. What is clear however is that Varnish is going after Sutton in the press, and I can only assume that would be to get him sacked. Not a good thing to do Jess, I suggest.
Unprovable by us but who knows, perhaps not unprovable by Varnish and/or Sutton.
As for her trying to get him sacked, it's a tough one. If you genuinely feel that someone is damaging your workplace and have tried the correct lines of complaint, sometimes an alternative route is your only option. We can debate the morality of that but it tends to be based on your perspective at that time.
I find the fact that Sutton has not directly denied making the statements Varnish is accusing him of, very telling. All he is doing, is expressing his own opinion of how he conducted himself, claiming he 'acted professionally'. It's this definition that is under scrutiny here. Having seen Sutton in action at events, it wouldn't surprise me if the claims are true. Sutton was an average pro without any globally significant major wins, now surrounded by athletes who are the very best in the world, so it is highly possible his ego needs an outlet for his frustrations and insecurities at times. A bit like the frustrated dad projecting his insecurities through his kids. I suspect BC is full of men like him.
The fact that some commentators on here don't seem to recognise or appreciate the depth of sexism that women in all fields have to endure, shows the extent of the issue. Saying 'oh it's not that bad' or 'it's not really sexist is it' seems to be a way of dismissing what to many men, is a very uncomfortable issue that they are unwilling/unable to engage with. You don't get to decide what sexism is or isn't. That's why it's the subject of debate and discussion. If you aren't able to engage with that discourse , then that speaks about you as an individual, not the issue itself.
The fact that some commentators on here don't seem to recognise or appreciate the depth of sexism that women in all fields have to endure, shows the extent of the issue
What I'm trying to do is separate the 2 issues. Is there sexism in sport and indeed in the world at large? Well sadly, yes, yes there is.
But, what I said above is that we have no idea of the context of some of the remarks made to Jess, the "go and have babies" comment on the surface is pretty ropey, but with context it may not have been made in the way a lot of people are suggesting. My view in the surface is that you have an athlete who is raging that she is not been taken forward and is airing her dirty washing in public and the odd person here is questioning the wisdom of that. They're not doing that because she's female, they're doing that because they don't like how she's handling it.
And in the subject if Sutton being an failed pro, well that may be true but then most coaches are, in fact very few elite athletes make great coaches as they have little sympathy with how to motive people who are less good than they were. In fact, much go the BC and Sky tpmanagement team are failed athletes, Tim Kerrison for one.
"My view in the surface is that you have an athlete who is raging that she is not been taken forward and is airing her dirty washing in public and the odd person here is questioning the wisdom of that."
Or you could take the alternative view, that Sutton has indeed been sexist, Varnish has been treated unfairly, and some commentators are either failing to recognise that, or acting as apologists for sexism.
I think it's pretty fair to say that female athletes are generally victims of sexism; we only have to look at rates of pay and media treatment of athletes to see just how deeply entrenched this is. And to immediately suggest that an athlete is only making statements because they're 'pissed off', is taking a pretty narrow-minded view, in my opinion.
Or you could take the alternative view, that Sutton has indeed been sexist, Varnish has been treated unfairly, and some commentators are either failing to recognise that, or acting as apologists for sexism.
You could also take a middle view that while she's been treated badly by a sexist coaching team, not renewing her contract was a reasonable decision on performance grounds?
Succesful elite level athletes are almost by definition single minded and as such don't make good coaches. They also feel they've been there done that. Team sportspeople tend to be a bit different but imho by and large they are the same. "Giving something back" via talks or individual sessions is a bit different than the full time grind of coaching
putting the sexism issue aside just for a bit, I think there is just as big questions people have to ask about how BC and have handled the whole thing.
1, If Jess was not getting better times quicker, why wasn't she told before hand and review her training etc.
2, (I might be wrong) As Jess is on BC program surely BC is coaching her and setting her training etc, so you could say BC are the ones who failed by not setting the right training/program?
3, after been told, Jess tried to get her training data etc but was told no "They couldn’t give it to her" Which to me if that what they using to not renewing her contract, then why can't she have it, look at it and see where she is not performing and for them to back up what they are saying?
All very odd. I'm surprised that people are rushing to take sides based on one side of a story and their own preconceived ideas of the people involved.
I'd say Victoria Pendleton can hardly be a case of 'sour grapes':[url= http://http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/04/25/jess-varnish-is-right--there-is-sexism-at-the-top-of-british-cyc/?utm_campaign=Contact+SNS+For+More+Referrer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=snsanalytics ]Here[/url]
And the BC comment on Nicole Cooke's [url= http://http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/apr/25/nicole-cooke-cycling-sexism-jess-varnish-shane-sutton?CMP=share_btn_tw ]piece[/url] sums up the problem. In summary 'yes we like it when the women win medals but they can hop in the back of the team car for the really big races'.
And the BC comment on Nicole Cooke's piece sums up the problem. In summary 'yes we like it when the women win medals but they can hop in the back of the team car for the really big races'.
No, the summary was that the fact that there was Womens race to compete in was down to the IOC & local organisers, nothing to do with BC, which seems entirely fair. I don't think BC are coming across very well in this whole thing generally, but you're twisting their comments in this case.
Wait what?
So they wear the BC jersey but aren't funded by the same bodies?
BC's treatment of women having read Nicole Cooke's biography does not look good. It doesn't look good if even half of what she's saying is true. Some examples:
- Men with DNFs in the road race given kit and funding while women don't even get to field a full team.
- Not being allowed to race in the juniors with the men's field. The plot about her having to hide in a van so a certain race organiser wouldn't take umbrage at her being involved in a race was particularly frustrating. Where do these people come from?
- Sutton's attitude towards training the women didn't seem great either according to the biography.
@clodhopper makes a great argument about sexism. Good to read that.
Cooke is very scathing of Cookson's broken promise re women's racing as well. It will be interesting to see what he makes of it. I'd firmly discourage any women I know from racing bikes for a living, or setting it as a dream. Far better to be a triathlete/duathlete where women and men seem to get equal billing.
"These people" are where most of the problem lies. They are the old guys who run most grass roots races, the old guys who run BC's [i]volunteer[/i] structure, they are the old guys who run for elected and quite often unpaid posts in BC.Where do these people come from?
I'd reckon that of the entire "BC" structure in the UK, from go ride/schools stuff, all the way up to the Olympic plan. Less than 1% are actually employed by BC.
It's the same across europe, probably not quite as bad as the UK as some (few) of the guys involved until recently are still upset about the old BLRC/RTTC/NCU/BCF shit storm.
So from the sounds of it, as per the article, Jess having been dropped from the program went back to the Velodrome to pick up her BF's kit and saw Shane where they then had a 'discussion' during which Shane told her to move on and have a baby...
so basically two people who used to work together met outside of work and had an argument, some bad things were said.
Two different issues here surely is Sutton sexist, almost certainly. Is Jess Varnish good enough, no.
I wouldn't listen to much Nicole Cooke says as she has a massive axe to grind. She better than anyone should know a road race isn't comparable to a marathon, so the analogy in her article is duff from the outset. Then later she has a go at Brian Cookson, failing to realise he isn't some dictator at the top of the UCI, he can't push through everything he wants, that's not how it works.
he can't push through everything he wants, that's not how it works.
Well, if the UCI could participate in an industry wide cover up of certain "issues", then surely championing equal pay and coverage for women is just a question of putting their minds to it? 😛
if the UCI could participate in an industry wide cover up of certain "issues"
You what?
Armstrong, Verbruggen, McQuaid.
And TBH, with Verbruggen and McQuaid in charge, it pretty much was a dictatorship.
Nicole is a pain to deal with, i know a few people who've worked with her. Other than her work ethic and performance, there isn't much nice they have to say about her. She might be fine off the bike and away from the racing. But when she's got her bike head on. It's a different matter.
I've read similar comments about Wiggins, including from his wife. So what?
Two different issues here surely is Sutton sexist, almost certainly. Is Jess Varnish good enough, no.
The third issue is should someone who is sexist be making decisions about the women's track team?
I'm no fan of Cookson, but to blame him for what went on before is a bit much.
I don't think Sutton makes the sole decision on the womens track team, I'm sure it is discussed with others.
Give a has-been a blazer and a clipboard and shit happens.
[quote="ransos"]I've read similar comments about Wiggins, including from his wife. So what?I don't think i know anyone who has worked with both Wiggins and Cooke, so it wouldn't really be a worthwhile comparison to make.