By David
I am sure every reader of this blog will have been waiting with baited breath for the publication of Swimming New Zealand’s Whole of Sport Plan. Around every corner it has been pushed and promoted. Moller extolled its importance in his Review. Swimming New Zealand pointed out its significance in the new Constitution. Only the seventh and final novel in the Harry Potter series can have been more anticipated.
Finally this week our nervous expectations were sated; Swimming’s Whole of Sport Plan was published. What a disappointment. This sure isn’t a J.K. Rowling masterpiece. Most of it is just bureaucratic nonsense; “full of sound and fury signifying nothing.”
I wonder if Christian Renford, the current CEO, drives to work in his Mazda listening to those self-improvement audio tapes. One of his first instructions was to order SNZ staff to include “Excellence, Integrity, Accountability” at the conclusion of all correspondence. Renford must be settling into the job. In the Whole of Sport Plan he has gone one better. The number of values has doubled to six and they are now located are at the beginning of the plan – Excellence, Innovation, Integrity, Service, Accountability, Safety.
Excellence must mean failing to include open water swimmers in the original publication of the national team. SNZ did apologize for that stunning bit of management; too little, too late.
Integrity; I suppose includes recommending to a New Zealand Court, the character and performance of a senior employee convicted of multiple drink driving offences
Safety; that must mean ferrying two dozen coaches in small rubber dinghies out to the feeding boat on Lake Taupo without a life jacket in sight – sorry there was one; mine.
Service; I guess that means I can expect a call from SNZ anytime. I’ve been back here four years. Our swim team includes two National Representatives and four Open National medallists and I’ve had no service at all. Only one SNZ employee has ever spoken to me, Donna Bouzaid on three occasions.
Innovation; I have no idea what that could possibly mean – unless Renford thinks that providing Lauren Boyle with five coaches in three years is an international coaching innovation. I’m sure the rest of the swimming world is fascinated.
Accountability; is possibly a reference to the SNZ’s ability to spend $1.6 million on getting two Millennium swimmers to better the Commonwealth Games individual qualifying times. I can help. That’s $800,000 per annum per swimmer.
Much of the report is banal generalities. For example who could possibly disagree with, “strengthen swimming at a grassroots level” or “promote opportunities for swimmers and coaches to access the expertise and opportunities they need to develop their full potential” or “create a culture of continuous improvement” or “maintain open and honest dialogue with all stakeholders”. I’m sure you get the idea; a whole pile of words that keep Miskimmin’s masters happy. No one is going to disagree with any of that of course. I can’t imagine the organization setting out to weaken swimming, even if that is the reality of its performance in recent years.
I did love the last one: an “open and honest dialogue” with stakeholders. That must mean Wellington is going to try its best to avoid altering approved minutes without first obtaining formal Board sanction. I imagine the Sport’s Editor of the Dom Post, Jonathan Millmow will be pleased to hear about the new “open and honest” vision. Remember the spin and misinformation Millmow was given about New Zealand swimming’s World Championship results. Simon Plumb will be no less delighted to hear that the next time he’s told everything is lovely at a SNZ altitude camp, a world swimming champion won’t be spending time in an Arizona Hospital, waiting to fly home. Best of all, I suppose “open and honest” means the swimming people of Wairarapa will be able to sleep at night knowing that there is no police investigation into their telephone behaviour. The plan is right though – an “open and honest dialogue” is seriously overdue.
I found two specifics interesting. The first referred to SNZ’s learn to swim ambitions. It said:
Every 10 year old to swim 200. By 2025 every New Zealand child should be able to swim 200m by 10 years of age. (The “200 by 10” target).
Admirable as that may be, it is as unrealistic as me wanting to buy a majority share in Google. For many reasons it’s just not going to happen. Two immediately come to mind – religion and health.
The New Zealand of 2014 is a pretty multicultural place. In her paper on “Muslim Women in Sport”, Sister Hikmat Beiruty had this to say:
In most female-only schools, there are always male teachers around. Hence wearing even body suits is not sufficient; therefore to remove yourself from this activity is the only solution.
And Muslims are not alone. In Orthodox Judaism many believe that men and women should not swim together. USA Swimming came across this problem when the new swim suit rules were introduced. In that case, USA Swimming had to include the following clarification clause in their rules (doc download link):
While the rule was never intended to discriminate, it could certainly be viewed as having a discriminatory effect on swimmers whose religious beliefs require them to cover more of their bodies than is permitted by the newly amended rule. It has also come to our attention that there may be some athletes whose medical conditions require them to avoid direct sunlight exposure to their skin. The amended rule was also not intended to prohibit these athletes from competing because they cannot adequately cover their skin as a result of the amended rule.
And so unless SNZ are planning to have their corps of swim police empty every mosque, temple and hospital of ten year olds who don’t want to, or are unable to swim, the idea of having every ten year old in the country swim 200 meters is ludicrous and should never be included in a document of this type. Ten year olds who are able and want to swim 200 meters – fine; nothing wrong with that. But “every” ten year old just makes the organization look stupid.
SNZ’s high performance goals will be a real test of their plan.
In Glasgow, they say they want 12 finalists, 5 to place 4th to 8th and 7 to win a medal. On a good day with a fair wind that is achievable. Boyle should oblige in the 400 and 800 and possibly in the 200. Snyder should be successful in the 50 and 100 breaststroke. That leaves Stanley, Main and the relay swimmers to find two or three medals between them. In a Commonwealth Games if swimming can’t do that it would be a poor result. The table below shows New Zealand medal tally in past Commonwealth Games
|
GAMES |
NO. SWIMMING MEDALS |
|
2010 Delhi |
6 |
|
2006 Melbourne |
6 |
|
2002 Manchester |
2 |
|
1998 Kuala Lumpur |
2 |
|
1994 Victoria |
8 |
|
1990 Auckland |
7 |
|
1986 Edinburgh |
6 |
|
1982 Brisbane |
1 |
|
1978 Edmonton |
6 |
And so the goal of seven medals is a good normal – about the same as Edinburgh 1986, Auckland 1990 and Victoria 1994. Ah, but them were the days before Millennium Institutes, before Miskimmin’s $1.6 million and before Whole of Sport Plans.
Time will tell what the “Whole of Sport Plan” is worth. At least they end the document with the acknowledgement that it is Swimming New Zealand who is “Responsible for delivery of the whole of sport plan.” Let’s hold them to that, shall we?
