Jonathan Vaughters,CEO of EF Education-EasyPost,has publicly criticized the UCI’s interactions with teams,particularly at the Female Romandie Tour,expressing concerns about the governing body’s approach to riders and teams.

Last Friday,five teams-Canyon-SRAM Zondacrypto,Lidl -Trek,Team Picnic PostNL,Team Visma Lease a Bike,and EF Education – Oatly-where barred from participating in the Romandie Tour due to a dispute over GPS trackers.

According to a UCI statement, these teams “refused to comply with the rules for the race related to the implementation of GPS trackers as a test for a new safety system.”

The UCI required each team to nominate one rider to use a tracking device during the race.

The excluded teams declined to comply. Vaughters explained to *Velo* that the teams were surprised by the outcome and frustrated with the UCI’s broader approach.

“This is a bit of a case of ‘hey guys, can you ask us first about what might be a good place to start before just imposing this upon us?'” he told *Velo*. “‘And could you allow us to have a little bit more of a voice in what are the real core problems with safety in the sport?'”

“So then it comes down to this. We didn’t actually refuse. We didn’t refuse these devices. To be really clear, not one of these teams refused the devices.”

“What we said is, is, ‘this is your idea. This is not our idea. This is your mandate. This is not our collaborative effort. So if you want to do the devices, you got to choose which rider you’re going to put it on, and you got to tell us, and you got to put it on the bike.'”

‘Its a line in the sand’

The use of GPS trackers gained prominence following the death of Swiss rider Muriel Furrer at last year’s world road race championships. Furrer crashed in the junior women’s road race and was found after an hour in a woodland. She later died from her injuries.

The UCI stated that the introduction of trackers was intended to enhance safety. vaughters acknowledged this but questioned the implementation process.

“This is a bit of a case of ‘hey guys,can you ask us first about what might be a good place to start before just imposing this upon us?'”

According to the UCI,the Velon association owns its data transmission system and is developing its GPS tracking system. The system was tested at the men’s and women’s Tour de Suisse in June, with positive feedback from riders.

The question remains whether rider data rights are a factor in this dispute.

‘Is the UCI trying to commercialize tracking?’

Vaughters’ team is a member of the Velon venture,established in 2014 to help teams achieve greater stability. Velon previously ran the Hammer Series of races, which were blocked by the UCI, leading to a lawsuit.

Velon has also featured live broadcasts of rider data for several years, starting at the 2016 Tour de Suisse.

The UCI stated that “broader implementation of this technology is envisaged for coming seasons.” Vaughters questions whether this overlaps with Velon’s activities or the licensing of rider data rights.

“Well, I mean it very well could,” he answered. “And then you get into a whole different thing where it’s like,well,is this another one of the entrepreneurial rights of the teams being stripped away? Or the better way to put it,is the UCI trying to commercialize tracking for its own financial benefit?”

“I don’t know whether the UCI is trying to commercialize tracking for its own benefit. Obviously, right now the PR shtick is that it’s for safety only. What the long term aims of it are, only they are going to be able to tell you that. I don’t know that.”

“But what I do know is that there are very few things that teams have any sort of rights to. Any other professional sport in the world, teams have media rights, revenue, blah, blah, blah, right? Well, in cycling, we don’t. We just don’t have any of that. We’re forced into a business model where you have to sustain yourself on sponsorship. And that is just the way it is.”

Vaughters insists that the Romandie dispute was about how the teams were treated, particularly after previous tensions.

“Of course it would be great if we could find something that we have just a steady revenue source coming in from,” he said.”But I don’t think that’s the major issue here. I mean,Velon has never made me any money. It’s a nice self-sustaining platform, and it adds to our media platform for the teams.”

“But the number of dollars that have come my way from Velon starts with a zero and ends with a zero.So it’s theoretical as to whether or not that that ever would be a possibility.”

*Velo* reached out to Velon representatives but has not yet received an official response.

UCI ‘not taking core duty for safety’

GPS trackers are likely to become a standard feature in future races. The deaths of Furrer and others highlight the need for enhanced rider safety measures.

Questions remain for the UCI and the teams. Why is the UCI implementing its own system and imposing it on riders? Will it profit commercially from this? Could teams benefit commercially if the system is managed through ventures like Velon? Are teams entitled to license their data, especially if it improves financial stability?

Is a compromise possible?

Vaughters believes the UCI and organizers need to take responsibility for race safety rather than relying on riders and their equipment.

“To me, the major part of my decision making on being a part of this group had more to do with just this consistent drum roll of what I would call regulations that are aimed at the teams and the riders, and not really taking the core responsibility for what I believe the bigger problems are in safety. That’s my core reason for taking this moment to stand up.”

“This is not a protest. This is not a rebellion,” he said,referring to the tracker standoff.

“This is just like, ‘well, it’s your idea. It’s your mandate. We don’t agree with it, but you’re the boss, so put it on the bikes.’ And that was refused.”