MY VIEW VERN PITT

CW news and features editor

It was, she says, six months ago that Emily Bridges began dialogue with the UCI to get all her papers in order to race in the omnium National Championships.

So why was it that it was merely three days before the race that she and the public were informed that that wouldn’t be possible? It wasn’t allowed, the UCI said. Exactly why we’re still not sure but it appears that despite months of dialogue the UCI hadn’t been able to convene its expert panel in time.

It’s impossible to avoid the conclusion that the media storm of the last week had bumped the issue up the agenda at the UCI’S headquarters in Aigle, Switzerland, and it got scared. It had blown up remarkably quickly but even those with cursory knowledge will know that as soon as a trans competitor of note comes along it attracts huge attention with strong feelings on both sides.

Yet here we are with the UCI completely missing in action and unwilling to speak about it.

The fact of the matter is that, assuming Bridges’ test results are correct (British Cycling was happy enough for her to race), she meets the criteria as laid down in the UCI’S own regulations. To debate whether those regulations are stringent, or indeed lenient, enough is a separate conversation.

As it stands she has been denied her chance to compete based on shoddy administration by the organisation that wrote those rules, ratified them two years ago and trumpeted them in a letter to the International Olympic Committee just before Christmas.

Wherever you stand on what the rules themselves should be, that doesn’t do Bridges, other women or the sport of cycling any good.