Luxembourg's cycling federation has formally complained to the European Cycling Union (UEC) about the jury decision that took the European cyclocross title from Marie Schreiber (SD Worx-Protime) and gave it to Lucinda Brand (Baloise Verzekeringen-Het Poetsbureau Lions).
The FSCL announced on Instagram on November 8 that it had filed the complaint, and is "calling for the race standings to be determined based on the order in which the riders crossed the finish line". The final podium saw Brand take the win ahead of Schreiber, with Ceylin del Carmen Alvarado (Fenix-Premier Tech) third.
Schreiber repeatedly gained time on the course's rebuilt staircase, which has 99 steps. The three leaders started the final lap together, and Alvarado then crashed in a right-hand bend. Schreiber opened the sprint on the long finishing straight. Brand tried to pass on her left, between Schreiber and the barriers, and Schreiber briefly moved left.
European cyclocross title, Zeddam
A complaint is not an appeal
Luxembourg wants the finishing order restored. The UCI rules hold two narrow ways to reopen a jury decision. Asking opens neither.
The request
Rank them as they crossed the line
The FSCL asks the UEC to undo the relegation for an irregular sprint. That would make Schreiber champion.
Art. 1.2.132
Formal appeal
No appeal against the commissaires’
Art. 12.4.001
Exception for race-incident sanctions
A fine over a set threshold. The sanction here was relegation.
Art. 12.5.004
Disciplinary review
Can open for certain race incidents if
or
Disagreeing with the jury’s call does not, by itself, meet either test.
Source: UCI regulations, as cited in the article. Rule wording abridged.
She crossed the line first and was announced as the winner, but the jury reviewed the footage, heard both riders and relegated her for an irregular sprint. The jury acted on its own initiative: neither Brand nor her team manager, Sven Nys, asked for a review, and Nys asked whether the move off her line was enough to relegate someone.
"It is a sprint after 50 minutes of racing and with a heart rate of 190," Schreiber told Sporza. "Okay, I change gear and consequently move a little to the left, but everyone who races knows that it is normal to move at a moment like that. I did not deliberately close the door; Lucinda knows that too and has said so herself. It is disrespectful to steal the biggest moment of my career like this."
Brand said she had not lodged an objection herself and believed she had been "beaten on merit", adding: "Of course she comes a little towards me. I think we touch each other, but it happens so quickly that I no longer consciously know whether she touched me or not."
Photo: Massimo Fulgenzi/SprintCyclingAgency©2026Schreiber skipped the podium on the instruction of her coach, Sanne Cant. "You should not accept a medal that does not belong to you," Cant said. Asked about a possible suspension, she said: "That is possible, but we are not going to leave it at this."
Can the result be overturned?
The offence was an "irregular sprint": the jury penalised Schreiber’s movement to the left as Brand tried to pass between her and the barriers. Under the cyclocross race-incident table in Part 5 of the UCI regulations, an irregular sprint is punished by relegation to the last place in the rider’s group – second, in a two-rider sprint – or disqualification, depending on the severity of the infringement. It does not specify how much sideways movement constitutes an irregular sprint, leaving that assessment to the commissaires.
The FSCL is challenging that assessment by asking the UEC to classify the riders in finishing order. The UEC runs the European Championships under UCI regulations, so the UCI rulebook governs any challenge. But submitting a complaint is not the same as having a right to appeal: disagreement with the commissaires’ judgement does not, by itself, entitle a rider or federation to have the decision reconsidered.
There’s also little room for formal appeals in the rulebook with Article 1.2.132 of the UCI's general regulations barring appeals against commissaires' "observations of fact, assessments of the situation in races and application of the competition regulations". Under Article 12.4.001 of Part 12, race-incident decisions can only be appealed where they involve a fine above a set threshold – CHF 200 or CHF 100 in cyclocross, depending on the event. Relegation is not a fine.
Article 12.5.004 allows the UCI Disciplinary Commission to review certain race incidents if the commissaires did not observe the facts, or if not all relevant facts were available before the panel disbanded. In the latter case, its decision replaces the panel’s ruling. Here, the commissaires reviewed the footage and heard both riders, so disagreement with their assessment alone would not establish grounds for that review.
Zeddam is the second disputed European title finish in five weeks, and both have the world of cycling social media alight. Giulio Ciccone (Lidl-Trek) questioned his photo-finish defeat by Remco Evenepoel (Red Bull-Bora-Hansgrohe) at the road championships in Slovenia.
