Verbruggen and McQuaid - WTF!?

Just spotted on cyclingnews that they are claiming damages from Paul Kimmage. Do you think they had one too many wine spritzers when they decided that one?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-and-verbruggen-seek-damages-from-kimmage

The 2 stooges! 8000 swiss francs won't keep them in cigars for long though.

I was thinking that 8000 swiss francs was a fairly lowly sum, but maybe that's all they think their reputations and that of the UCI are worth. Speaks volumes when the people doing the claiming aim so low...

I think they need new Hernia girdles.

I'll willingly donate to Kimmage's fighting fund.

They say the best defence is a good offence... perhaps they're feeling a little warm at the moment. We can only but hope.

"Annoyance" ???
I have not got a clue what the legal concept of annoyance is. They are not claiming libel or slander, it sounds as if they accept the truth of what he says but don't like the fact that it makes them look bad ?

Weird innit? Like trying to sue someone for being an irritating little twat. As appealing a concept as that might be for some, it's just what all journalists need to be sometimes.

Kimmage's agenda is clear and he's tenacious pursuing it. That makes him a valuable asset in my book, and a pain in the backside for the omerta.

With them in charge, the UCI is just an embarassment... can we collectively sue them for damaging the reputation of cycling?

Yeah ! I could make myself a rich man just from some of the people on the cycle chat forums

There's something I don't understand about this story. Mcquaid and the UCI are claiming annoyance from Kimmage. Apparently it stems from an interview Kimmage gave to L'Equipe last year in which he repeated his argument that the UCI is not doing enough to kerb doping in the sport. Now someone may chose to correct me, but in a normal libel or defamation case, wouldn't it be the publishers who would be sued. In this case L'Equipe. I guess it doesn't really matter as papers have been filed anyway, but it seems odd. The good news is that Kimmage has reportedly said that "hell will freeze over before I apologise to them" so it looks like Uncle Pat will be given plenty of opportunity to make himself look like a complete arse before this is put to rest

The UCI have a long history of defending high profile riders who dope. What amazes me is that we the public, WADA, the media know it yet still they persist. 18 months on and still no verdict ref Contador - disgusting. I despair and hold them solely responsible for dragging this great sport down to never seen before levels. Go get 'em Paul, I suspect you have more supporters than you realise.

Careful there tf, McQuaid is getting used to phoning his lawyers of late!

Whilst I agree with the general thrust of your post, I couldn't possibly comment on the detail

Re Contador, and to be fair to UCI, I don't think the delay is UCI's fault. Not now anyway. That they messed around in the beginning, I'd agree with that, but I reckon they arsed it up thereafter (no change there!) and now CAS has to unravel it and sort it out.

FWIW, I reckon Contador will walk scot free. I don't think CAS will be able to decide and it'll go down as 'unproven'.

Ha! someone's lawyers would be overworked if they responded to everyone who voiced similar thoughts. I didn't mention a name

I wonder how McQuaid & the UCI (he never stated quite under whose name the claim was going to be made) is getting on with suing Floyd. He assured us he was going to do it to preserve the image of the organisation and President from the foul utterances from a convicted doper. Funnily enough Floyd was asking where the court orders were as well, sometime back. Com'on Pat let's see some action, the UCI should not have to put up with it.

I thought that had just fizzled out or was an empty threat in the first place?

Pretty uninformed about the Contador case, aren't you? UCI started the case, which was referred to Spanish Fed. (correct process), who surprise, surprise, found no case to answer. So UCI AND WADA appealed to CAS, who have now been procrastinating for over a year and only last week delayed a decision AGAIN. Hardly the UCI Or WADA fault. Look to Iberia for the problem!
And take care what you believe of what Dick Pound at WADA used to spout, he has always had a downer on cycling, whilst certain other high profile sports seem to be ignored, where money is absolute king and expensive lawyers rule.

Uninformed? Hardly, the UCI are supposed to have teeth being the titular head irrespective of the country involved. WADA have very little political clout and ought to be supported by every sport's governing body. I agree that certain sports [football springs immediately to mind] are ring fenced by lawyers but one could equally say that about individuals in cycling [Armstrong springs to mind].
If you don't already participate/read this forum that has pros contributing, have a look.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15417