The title of this post is a quote from a Stuff website report on the medal prospects of New Zealand swimmers at the Commonwealth Games. Stuff interviewed Swimming New Zealand CEO, Steve Johns. There are some fascinating quotes; an insight into what, in my opinion, is a delusional alternative swimming universe. The table below copies the best of the Steve Johns’ wisdom. It will be fun to remind him of them in our end of Games’ report.
But while Johns was reluctant to put a number on the medal target, he was “pretty optimistic” about what the young group can deliver.
“We think we can come back with some silverware, absolutely,” Johns told Stuff. Johns believes the relay teams could cause a few surprises. “They’ve got great talent and speed and I think you could see some good results out of that,” Johns said. I think closer to the time we’ll get a better feel of how it’s going to go but we are optimistic.” |
Of course my pessimism excludes the para swimmers. They are there on genuine merit and should perform very well.
But Steve Johns’ optimism for able-bodied success is, I fear, sadly misplaced. Where he gets the idea that the relays are a likely source of success I have no idea. The table below shows how far New Zealand’s fastest four swimmers are behind the Commonwealth’s first and third best teams.
Relay | NZ % Behind Fastest | NZ % Behind Third Fastest |
Women’s 4×100 Freestyle | 5.5 | 3.1 |
Men’s 4×100 Freestyle | 2.8 | 1.1 |
Women’s 4×100 Medley | 4.8 | 3.4 |
Men’s 4×100 Medley | 4.3 | 2.6 |
Women’s 4×200 Free | 3.6 | 2.5 |
Men’s 4×200 Freestyle | 2.7 | 2.0 |
Stuff tells us that those numbers could “cause a few surprises.” In Johns’ world they are a source of optimism and hope. Well, I have to confess. Steve Johns clearly knows something about swimming that I’ve missed. With the exception of one relay (1.1%) the New Zealand relay teams are more than 2% behind the third placed time. The average is 2.5% behind third. New Zealand relay teams are an average of 4% behind the fastest Commonwealth relay teams. I think that’s too big a gap. I’ve certainly never seen someone start that far behind and get up to win. But perhaps Steve Johns knows something we don’t.
The previous Swimwatch post on this subject made two key points. First the message being sent by the selection of non-qualified relay teams was bad for the sport and second that the new Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager should withdraw New Zealand’s relay entries from the Commonwealth Games. I am aware that many may view those claims as coming from the sport’s lunatic fringe. And so I will attempt to justify both assertions.
The selection of non-competitive relay teams sends a message to the swimming community that near enough is good enough; try hard, suck up to the establishment and the bureaucrats will bend over backwards to fit you into a relay team. The thought is not without merit. Without doubt Johns and his office mates are desperate to have as many swimmers as they can on the team. They are acutely aware that a team of two (Main and Ashby) make them look pathetic. Padding the numbers is in their self-interest. Their jobs depend on it.
They seem to be unaware that a thousand eleven and twelve year olds around the country watch the decisions they make and learn. Young New Zealand swimmers are being taught that you can get on a New Zealand relay team even when the team is thirteen seconds over 400 meters behind an Australian team. You can fly to a Commonwealth Games and swim in individual events even when you are nowhere near the qualifying standard. By selecting this team, in the way they have, Swimming New Zealand is promoting a culture of losing.
And the culture of a sport is so important to winning. The All Blacks normally win because they expect to win. Rugby in New Zealand had promoted a culture of success. And they have done it by not making ridiculous mistakes like swimming has this week. New Zealand swimming has been in a losing trough for a decade. The smell of defeat is everywhere. And this week the smell turned putrid. But, back to the point, the disaster is that a thousand young swimmers now accept that putrid stench as normal.
Examples of the fallout from a losing culture are easy to find. Just listen to the interviews with members of the Commonwealth Games team. They sound like something out of the emergency ward of a large city hospital. “Things are a bit tough because my ankle’s been injured.” “I’m not training well because of a sore back.” “Swimmers who go overseas are treated badly.” Moaning, groaning and complaining – not the best way to beat the world.
So what should be done? Swimming can continue along a path to oblivion or it can realise its mistake and take this opportunity to make a statement; to change the culture; to put in place a policy where a genuine prospect of success is the minimum standard expected of those who represent the country. How better to do that than have the new Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager withdraw New Zealand’s relay entries. Swimming should go to the Games with Main and Ashby and the para swimmers – period. The lesson that would send would be right, it would be powerful and it would be a message to us all, including the dropped swimmers, that representing New Zealand in swimming involves clearing a very high bar.
We will see what the new Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager is made of. Is his or her tenure going to be characterised by doing what is needed and what is right? Or is the appointee going to make easy choices because they are popular and don’t cause trouble? We will soon see. It would be educational for the person appointed to remember that Federations like Great Britain, Australia and the United States moved forward most when men like Sweetenham, Talbot and Schubert were calling the shots. Certainly none of them would have dreamed of sending a relay team to a Games that was thirteen seconds behind the opposition. We should judge the Targeted Athlete & Coach Manager by the same standard.
Swimwatch
Today
Be the first to leave a comment!