By David
I have just read Simon Plumb’s review of Swimming New Zealand (“NZ Team Swims Against Tide of Change”) posted on the Stuff website. He’s correct of course; every last word is right on the button. But I think there is more.
It was always ridiculously naïve to think that the wholesale replacement of the old Swimming New Zealand staff; that’s High Performance Director Jan Cameron, Head Coach Mark Regan and CEO Mike Byrne was going to revolutionize Swimming New Zealand. It is a common Miskimmin tactic; preferring to blame the personnel for poor performance rather than the deficiencies of his policy. But, the lowly performance of Swimming New Zealand was never about personalities. Many Swimwatch readers assumed I disliked Jan Cameron, Mark Regan and Mike Byrne. That was never true.
What I disliked and totally opposed was their centralized system of elite sport delivery; the folly of the Millennium Institute. The idea that one coach can fit all, the self-seeking allocation of millions to one privileged group, the socialist involvement of the government in an Auckland swim school and the devaluing, lack of trust directed at every club coach in the country has always been repulsive.
And under the new regime that hasn’t changed. If anything I think Regan was a far better coach than Lyles. Regan was clearly better for Boyle. Certainly Jan Cameron was light years better than Luis Villanueva. She expressed herself better and was clearly a more decisive and superior manager. Renford and Byrne are as different as chalk and cheese but the end result is about the same: so much of what they do is flat out wrong. For example their website trumpets that Swimming New Zealand is, “The start of something extraordinary” and yet when I go to their “Find a Club” page I notice that my club, West Auckland Aquatics, isn’t there. I wonder why? Swimwatch perhaps? Renford’s Swimming New Zealand can’t even get our name on their website list of New Zealand clubs; the club that was the home of National Coaches Ross Anderson and Donna Bouzaid that was the nursery of Lauren Boyle and gave New Zealand national representatives, John Steel, Johnny Munro. Ross Anderson Junior, Paul Kent, Jane Ip, Daniel Bell, Nick Sanders, Mark Herring, Brad Herring and a few that I’ve missed. Renford is right; this clearly is, “The start of something extraordinary.”
Overall the new management gang of Renford, Lyles and Villanueva is weaker than the team they replaced. Which means, of course, that if Jan Cameron couldn’t make her centralized policy of elite sport delivery work, the current gang have no chance. And that’s the way it’s turning out.
I know Miskimmin, at Sport New Zealand, is obsessed with what he calls “podium finishes”. However progress in a sport like swimming is more accurately measured by personal best times. The government’s Millennium swim school in Glasgow performed poorly, not only because Lauren Boyle was the sole medallist. The real disaster was the 11% personal best ratio. Only two swimmers, Boyle and Main, swam personal best times. Any normal team looks for a personal best ratio well over 50%. That was the tragedy of Glasgow. And the fact it was a whole team that failed tells me the fault lies fair and square with those who prepared the swimmers. Individual swimmers can let themselves and the team down occasionally, but when a whole team disintegrates, that’s a coaching and administration problem. Renford, Lyles and Villanueva take a bow.
So what happened in Brisbane? Villanueva threatened career decapitation if the swimmers did not improve; a threat I always thought was disingenuous and should have been directed at him and his fellow Mazda gang members. The table below lists the New Zealand performances at the 2014 Pan Pacific Games.
NAME |
EVENT |
TIME |
PB |
PODIUM PLACE |
S. Lucie-Smith |
200 Free |
2.00.52 |
No |
– |
S. Lucie-Smith |
200 Free |
2.00.75 |
No |
– |
E Robson |
200 Free |
2.04.51 |
No |
– |
M Stanley |
200 Free |
1.48.74 |
No |
– |
M Stanley |
200 Free |
1.47.33 |
No |
– |
S Kent |
200 Free |
1.49.00 |
Yes |
– |
S Kent |
200 Free |
1.49.71 |
No |
– |
D Dunlop Barrett |
200 Free |
1.50.01 |
No |
– |
D Dunlop Barrett |
200 Free |
1.49.30 |
No |
– |
M Donaldson |
200 Free |
1.50.37 |
No |
– |
E Jackson |
200 Free |
1.51.39 |
No |
– |
C Main |
100 Back |
55.16 |
No |
– |
C Main |
100 Back |
54.70 |
No |
– |
E Robson |
800 Free |
8.49.80 |
No |
– |
S Lee |
200 Fly |
2.13.85 |
No |
– |
S Lee |
200 Fly |
2.13.08 |
No |
– |
L Boyle |
800 Free |
8.18.87 |
No |
2nd |
G Snyders |
100 Breast |
1.00.41 |
No |
– |
G Snyders |
100 Breast |
1.00.18 |
No |
3rd |
L Quilter |
100 Free |
55.87 |
No |
– |
L Quilter |
100 Free |
56.00 |
No |
– |
S Lucie Smith |
100 Free |
56.25 |
No |
– |
S Lucie Smith |
100 Free |
55.97 |
No |
– |
S Lee |
100 Free |
57.52 |
No |
– |
S Kent |
100 Free |
50.92 |
No |
– |
E Jackson |
100 Free |
51.24 |
No |
– |
Relay |
4×200 Free W |
8.04.58 |
No |
– |
Relay |
4×200 Free M |
7.13.83 |
Yes |
– |
S Lee |
100 Fly |
1.00.81 |
No |
– |
S Lee |
100 Fly |
1.00.44 |
No |
– |
L Quilter |
100 Fly |
1.01.00 |
No |
– |
L Boyle |
400 Free |
4.08.64 |
No |
– |
L Boyle |
400 Free |
4.05.33 |
No |
3rd |
E Robson |
400 Free |
4.16.63 |
No |
– |
E Robson |
400 Free |
4.15.92 |
No |
– |
S Lucie Smith |
400 Free |
4.18.49 |
No |
– |
S Lucie Smith |
400 Free |
4.15.19 |
No |
– |
M Stanley |
400 Free |
3.53.33 |
No |
– |
M Stanley |
400 Free |
3.50.75 |
No |
– |
D Dunlop Barrett |
400 Free |
3.54.05 |
No |
– |
D Dunlop Barrett |
400 Free |
3.53.96 |
No |
– |
E Jackson |
400 Free |
3.55.34 |
Yes |
– |
E Jackson |
400 Free |
3.52.32 |
Yes |
– |
C Main |
200 Back |
1.59.85 |
No |
– |
C Main |
200 Back |
1.59.63 |
No |
– |
Relay |
4×100 Free W |
3.47.51 |
No |
– |
M Donaldson |
200 IM |
2.01.45 |
No |
– |
M Donaldson |
200 IM |
2.01.34 |
No |
– |
L Quilter |
50 Free |
26.01 |
Yes |
– |
G Snyders |
200 Breast |
2.13.77 |
No |
– |
L Boyle |
1500 Free |
15.55.69 |
No |
2nd |
E Robinson |
1500 Free |
16.44.88 |
No |
– |
L Quilter |
50 Free |
26.10 |
No |
– |
Relay |
4×100 M M |
3.38.46 |
No |
– |
Summary |
54 Swims |
– |
5 PBs |
9% |
Summary |
0 Gold |
2 Silver |
2 Bronze |
As far as I know there is not a swimming observer on the planet that would call an 9% personal best ratio, “the start of something extraordinary”. It is terrible. Every club coach in New Zealand would hide in shame at that result. When the Millennium swim school spends $2,000,000 preparing a women’s relay team that finishes 15 seconds, that’s the length of a 25m pool, behind the Australians, that’s the start of something pretty bloody abysmal.
Out of the 12 Pan Pacific Games held since 1985 the 2014 performance ranks 5th. New Zealand swimmers performed better in 1993, 1995, 1991 and 1985; before the days of $2,000,000 per year government grants, Mazda cars, Whole of Sport Plans and Millennium Institutes; before Miskimmin, Layton, Renford, Lyles and Villanueva. But give Villanueva credit, he is right about one thing; those responsible should pack their bags and leave New Zealand sport immediately. Miskimmin, Renford, Lyles, Villanueva and Layton, hasta la vista baby – Villanueva has told us, it’s time for you to go. The damage has been too great.
PS I see Swimming New Zealand have taken to publishing rubbish on their new website. Besides leaving our club off altogether, this week they announced the following stunning bit of news; “New Zealand has only won multiple individual medals four times previously at the Pan Pacific Championships.” That’s simply not true. I hope it is not a deliberate effort to misinform. SNZ has done that before. Multiple medals were won by New Zealand teams at the 1993 (5), 1995 (4), 1991 (3), 1989 (3) and 1997 (3). That’s five times. Really SNZ couldn’t – lie straight in bed that is.
Year |
Gold |
Silver |
Bronze |
Rank |
1993 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
1995 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1991 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1985 |
1 |
– |
– |
4 |
2014 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
|
1989 |
– |
1 |
2 |
6 |
1997 |
– |
– |
3 |
7 |
1987, 2010 |
– |
– |
1 |
8= |
1999, 2002,2006 |
– |
– |
– |
10= |
PPS Swimwatch sources tell me rumours are rife in Spain that Villanueva is on his way back to Spain after the Presidential election in 2015. If that’s true Villanueva needs to come clean immediately and let the sport in New Zealand know. A person in his position is able to make many important decisions. It is not a position that should be occupied by a lame duck member of Miskimmin’s Mazda gang for another twelve months.
If it is true, Swimwatch will not be sad to see him go. However the critical decision is who will replace Villanueva? And will that replacement move the sport away from the failed policy of centralization and breathe life back into New Zealand’s domestic coaching talent. For that is where the future lies.