I was told today that a regular Swimwatch reader had recently made the comment, “Oh, why is he always so negative?” The implied criticism hurts; probably because it is true. And, as the expression goes, “The truth hurts”. But before apologizing I decided to check the past 100 posts and label each story as negative (meaning critical), neutral or positive. I did try to be ruthlessly honest and here is what I discovered.

It seems the Swimwatch reader is right. The largest number of stories, (45%), are negative. However a majority (55%) are either neutral or positive. So perhaps the balance is not as slanted as the criticism might suggest.

Positive stories do not attract as much attention. But critics need to remember the praise given to the extremely well-run swim learn to swim program at the Millennium Pool, the positive stories about the Quality Homes North Shore swim meet, the Comet Swim Club, Kate Ledecky, Dick Quax, Waitakere Hospital and many other causes.

But above all critics must realize, in swimming, there is much to be critical about. Someone has to recognize that falling membership numbers, one bronze medal at the Commonwealth Games, five Olympics with no medals and falling income are not good news. The delegates to the Annual Meetings do not hold those responsible to account – so we do it instead.

I wonder what our critic wants. Is it best to let the sport slowly decline into oblivion or is it best to draw attention to the problems in the hope they will be addressed? Exactly the same freedom that makes it important for critics to question Swimwatch needs to be afforded to those who criticize Swimming New Zealand (SNZ). The Swimwatch critic and the Swimwatch website are exercising the same freedom to criticize and long may that last, for both of them. An extremely wise Mohandas Gandhi put the same thought best.

Swimwatch critics are no doubt aware that recent posts have questioned worrying aspects of the Cycling New Zealand “Anthony Peden affair”. Reports on this subject are most certainly recorded in the “negative” column. But I see Swimwatch may not be alone. Newstalk ZB’s Andrew Dickens has decided that there are worrying aspects to this story.

Dickens describes the rumors that have been promoted and encouraged by some main stream media – especially TV One. The gossip is well known and does not need to be repeated here. However Dickens’ conclusions are very revealing and do bear repetition.

So, is the main stream media joining “negative” Swimwatch? Do any of those concerns apply to SNZ? I think we can safely say Andrew Dickens’ first point fits SNZ perfectly. He says there is a “nagging worry that Cycling New Zealand is another sporting organisation where the management is a little out of their depth.” It would be quite wrong to make that assertion without evidence. Take for example the employment of Gary Francis as the SNZ Talent Identification Manager. He was employed at the end of January 2018 and promised an early series of meetings to explain the function and purpose of the new position. The first meeting has finally been scheduled in Wellington for the 12 June 2018. That’s 3,216 hours of employment to arrange one meeting. At that rate, I expect, we will know what Gary Francis does in time for swimmers born early in 2020 to benefit. Some Swimwatch readers may be critical of our negative stories, but really can anyone justify 3,216 hours to organize a meeting in Wellington that, so far, only eleven people say they are going to attend?

Andrew Dickens goes on to make the point. “So many under-qualified people are being put in positions where they fail.   Weekend Warrior administrators do not become high quality professional managers when their sport suddenly receives a wad of cash.” Isn’t that the truth?

Look at the way SNZ handled Lauren Boyle’s illness during a SNZ Arizona high altitude camp. SNZ announced that the camp was a blazing success. All the swimmers were doing fine. But they weren’t. New Zealand’s best swimmer, Lauren Boyle, was sick in hospital and about to be sent home. SNZ lied to cover up her sickness. They lied to HPSNZ, they lied to Sport NZ, they lied to the press and they lied to the membership. They proved again that the cover up is worse than the crime. And for what? For money. Once you have gone into that gutter, selecting swimmers who have not qualified and all the rest of it becomes easy. Even by weekend warrior standards that blatant dishonesty demonstrated terrible judgement.

And finally Andrew Dickens has a word for the Boards of national sports federations. He says “We have an awful lot of enthusiastic amateurs running big budget enterprises and their boards of control need to keep a much closer eye on them or it all falls apart.” Dickens is right. The Board is responsible and, in the case of swimming, it has failed to exercise the duty of care we have a right to expect. Declining income, declining membership, poor competitive results, stunning delays in arranging meetings, lies to the membership have all proceeded unchecked and uncensored. The Board has not done its job. The organization is falling apart.