I hear that Swimming New Zealand’s Annual General Meeting has been significant in a number of ways. Head Coach, Jerry Olszewski has resigned and a forum of Swimming New Zealand CEO Steve Johns, Board member Simon Perry and four representatives from the Regions has been formed to discuss a regional coaching structure to replace the current centralised National Training Centre.

The departure of Jerry comes as no surprise. Seven coaches in as many years have come and gone through Swimming New Zealand’s revolving coaching door. Any shortcomings in Jerry’s performance have had far more to do with the organisation and the job than the individual. Years ago Arthur Lydiard told me the Swimming New Zealand position was an impossible brief; a poisoned chalice. I said so a year ago when Jerry was appointed. I guess he now knows why.

It is amazing how the simple fact that seven coaches have come and gone in as many years hasn’t alerted someone in Swimming New Zealand to the fact that the problem might not be the coach but them and their job. Surely that has occurred to them. One coach leaving is normal. Two is bad luck. Three is really bad luck. Four and there is something wrong with you. Seven is beyond belief.

The whole saga is making the Chairman of Swimming New Zealand, Bruce Cotterill look like a pathetic joke. Remember on the 18 December 2016 he told the NZ Herald, “I think we’ve got the right coaching in place.” The “right coaching” was Gary Hurring, Donna Bouzaid and Jerry Olszewski. And then on the 9 March 2017 Cotterill sacked Hurring and Bouzaid. And finally on 5 September 2017 Jerry called Uber asking for a ride to Auckland Airport. Nine months and Cotterill’s “right coaching” has disappeared. A million dollars a year coaching program has been left in the hands of an apprentice – well done Bruce.       

The opening of discussion on an alternative to the centralized High Performance Program is very important. Decisions made on that subject have the potential to affect the performance and future of several generations of New Zealand’s swimmers. Get it wrong and, as we have seen, the effect is ruinous. Get it right and the sport and its members can prosper and be successful.

At this stage the discussions seem to be about introducing a regional management and coaching structure similar to that being trialled in Waikato. Applied nationwide that program could either be a very good or a very bad fix.

I am aware that three features have been suggested in relation to the regional structure.

1. That the centralised National High Performance Centre be abandoned.
2. That swimming introduces individual “campaign” based support.
3. That management support is provided through a regional structure based on geographical zones.

I have no problem with the first two features. Abandoning the High Performance Centre and individual “campaign” support are good and will improve the delivery of quality swimming. I have some reservations about the regional zone structure. Competing as a zone seems to be fine as long as club coaches stay responsible for their swimmers. My concerns surround the zone’s contribution to swimmer’s training and preparation. The remainder of this post will address these concerns.      

A Regional Program that simply imposes a local High Performance Centre in each of the Regions will achieve nothing. In fact four or five centres of that sort will be four or five times worse than what we have now. The current centralised High Performance Centre problem has always been that an ineffective superstructure has been placed on top of a crumbling and neglected base. Having four or five mini superstructures doing the same job as the single structure, on top of the same crumbling and neglected base, achieves nothing. Arguably it makes it four or five times worse.

Whatever solution is put forward has to recognise and take into account some fundamental truths about the sport of swimming in New Zealand.

The basic building blocks of the sport are the clubs. Right now New Zealand has many potential Danyon Loaders, Toni Jeffs, Paul Kingsmans, and Lauren Boyles. Where are they? They are members of clubs in Invercargill or Dunedin or Christchurch or Nelson or Westport or New Plymouth or Napier or Wellington or Hamilton or Auckland or Whangarei. Every potential champion is a member of a local club coached by a local coach. Sadly that base has been neglected for twenty years beginning with Jan Cameron’s period in power. Coaching in the clubs was considered to be not quite as good as the Gods that taught swimming in Antares Place. Psychologically it was devastating to the nation’s club coaches. As the resources and the attention of the sport’s administrators were poured into the Millennium Institute the club structure and club coaches withered and died. The base crumbled. And that is where we are at today.

That is the putrid legacy left to us by Cameron, Baumann and Miskimmin. The policy was set by them. They are responsible for the failure of the sport in New Zealand. The fact that hired hands like Layton, Cotterill, Renford and Johns either did not know enough or lacked the courage to do anything about it is sad beyond belief.    

Therefore a Regional structure is a step forward as long as, and only if, it repairs and strengthens the base of the sport. That means the clubs and the club coaches. They are the sport’s primary schools, secondary schools and universities. They need resources, attention and help.  

The centre of attention needs to be focused with laser precision on the performance and role of the clubs and their coaches. All around New Zealand there are potential champions wanting their chance. Just remember Jeffs came from Whakatane, Simcic was from Christchurch, Loader was from Dunedin and Hurring was from Auckland. There are champions everywhere. We need a structure that provides them with champion local coaches and coaching.

Local coaches have been shockingly neglected. As recently as today the CEO of Swimming New Zealand, Steve Johns, is quoted in Stuff as saying “the reality was there were “far more” experienced international coaches from offshore”. Once again New Zealand coaches are being told from the top they are not good enough. In my opinion corporate vandalism such as this is not acceptable. How domestic coaches have any confidence left is beyond belief. However they do and there is a core of very good local club coaches in New Zealand quite capable of coaching world class swimmers. It is wrong to mention names but just consider a few – Cooper, Paul Kent, Polanski, Judith Wright, Winter, Swanwick, Power, Southgate, Hurring, Mahan, Duncan, Miehe, Prattley and a dozen others – are all capable of Olympic success. But they do need help. They need help with their plans and they need help with money. And they need to be formally held accountable.

If resources and benefits are going to start flowing into the base then the base has to deliver. The question is, “What resources does your club need and what result will come as a result?” Then once the backing is provided the coach and the club must be held to account. It is simple management really. Just go to Swimming New Zealand’s operating units (the clubs and their coaches) and ask what resources are required to produce what result and then hold them to that plan. There is no reason why New Zealand cannot have twenty or thirty club high performance centres. A million multi-site companies around the world operate exactly that way all the time. And of course the price of under-achievement is less resources next time around.

But the real message is do not expect a regional superstructure on its own to give you a result. The regional superstructure is only there to resource and support the real generators of swimming wealth – the clubs and their coaches.

The panel considering this important question is the CEO of Swimming New Zealand, one Board member and four representatives from the regions. I think that composition is good with two serious qualifications.  

Why on God’s good earth has Mark Berge, “the quintessential consultant in jeans,” been put on the panel considering this stuff? He is on record as opposing decentralisation and for years has rubbished the decentralisation ideas promoted in this blog. I can’t think of anyone worse. It’s like putting the fox in charge of the hen house. The panel is not off to a good start.

And two – the committee really does need a “coal face” representative; someone who has spent a lot of time standing on the side of a swimming pool. There should be an intelligent, practical input. There is a list of some names in this post. Any one of them would do. Either that or the panel needs to consult those sorts of people in depth.

The wheels of progress appear to be turning. It is a relief and a joy to see that happening. Congratulations to whoever it is that has set the sport on a path that could lead to a much better place.