Thousands of words have been written describing the carnage wrought on New Zealand sport by Sport New Zealand’s autocratic rule. Imagine the words written about the death of Olivia Podmore. That disaster was caused by Sport New Zealand’s money and the corruption it spawned. Imagine the pages spent discussing Lauren Boyle’s decision to abandon Swimming New Zealand’s (SNZ) high performance chaos in favour of training in Australia. Can you remember the outrage written about Canoe Racing New Zealand’s decision to ban Aimee Fisher from the Olympic Games because she wanted to coach herself?

A thousand words would swiftly go by listing examples of the harm Sport New Zealand has caused. But their most recent atrocity involves tennis player, Cameron Norrie. You may remember, Norrie was raised in New Zealand but left to play for the United Kingdom. He recently reached the semi-finals of Wimbledon. Mark Belcher, a full-time tennis coach in Taranaki and former All-American player from the University of Texas Tyler, has written an article, published on the Stuff website, that explains why Norrie no longer plays for New Zealand.

Here is the link to Belcher’s report.

I recommend you read it. Of all the millions of words written about the despair felt by Podmore, Boyle, Norrie, Thompson, Fisher and me, Belcher describes it best. His measured prose accentuates the destruction Sport New Zealand has caused. The only qualification I would add to Belcher’s report is his view that responsibility, in the Norrie case, stops with Tennis New Zealand. Not at all, responsibility goes higher than that. Miskimmin and Castle wrought this chaos.

Below is a sample of what Belcher has to say.

“Instead, I found myself somewhat muted, pleased to see Norrie progress while at the same time sad and frustrated to know that here was yet another fumbled ball by Tennis New Zealand. If we don’t do a whole lot better job in supporting our talented players, I’ll continue to be relegated to quietly listening in the early hours to Norrie’s name being chanted by a ravenous British crowd.”

I know exactly what Belcher means. For twenty years I too felt sadness and frustration as I watched Jan Cameron and successive Boards tear my sport apart. When Jane Copland left New Zealand to swim for Washington State University, she was a double open national champion, a double open record holder and had just swum in the Pan Pacific Games. And yet for the next four years she received not one communication from SNZ. Not a note asking how things were going – nothing. Jane had left and was banished. That’s the way it was in centralised swimming. Remember when Jan Cameron had “team” meetings at the Commonwealth Games that only swimmers in the centralised programme could go to? Their mismanagement and arrogant superiority contrasts starkly with progress at SNZ today.

Tongue, Johns and Francis and their staff are good people, and they care. That is all it takes. Of course, financial support is important. But so is a welcome: how are you today?; can I help your swimmer’s training in Budapest?; would you like a cup of coffee and a chat? A feeling that your swimmer’s career is important.   

Here is an extract from my first book on swimming, “Swim to the Top”. It was published in 2002. The duty of care is not new.   

“The care needed to prepare and administer competitive swimmers has been the primary focus of this book. The aim is to avoid what the head Canadian coach once described to me as “eggs against the wall” coaching and administration. Hundreds of swimming “eggs” are thrown against the sport’s wall; eventually one hits, falls to the ground and does not break. This egg is the Olympic champion. The thousands who broke in the process of finding him/her are forgotten.

Maybe it works in the USA, Germany and China, which have millions of eggs to throw; but in smaller countries, such as New Zealand, where swimmers are numbered only in their thousands, the chance of finding one that does not break is small. The premium has to be on the care of and the importance of every egg because smaller countries cannot afford the casualties.  To take the risk because “that’s what they do in the USA or Australia” is inviting disaster.

The simple fact is that a diversified club-based system looks after and prepares limited resources better than any other. It puts in, it builds, it takes care of before it uses. No other system obeys this rule so completely.

Those who don’t care about how many young people become the sport’s casualties continue to follow Sport New Zealand’s orders. Massive casualties are an accepted part of their trade. And, hey, your swimmer might just be the lucky one that makes it through. If all that sounds a bit risky, change your programme to a diversified club structure.”