The 2012 Olympics in London is about to wrap up with only mountain biking left in the cycling program at the time of writing.
There has been a lot of debate in the media about Australia’s success at these Olympic games in all sports.
Australia does not seem to be punching above its weight any longer. Inevitably, the talk always comes back to the level of funding.
To date, Australia has won six cycling medals across all disciplines (one gold, two silver and three bronze). I expect that medal tally to remain at six as we are unlikely to be successful at either the men’s or women’s mountain biking events.
Australian taxpayers have funded the cycling program to the tune of $31 million. Did we get value for all that money?
Compared to the Beijing Olympics where Australia won a single solitary silver medal, there has been a vast improvement in these Olympics.
The social media has pointed to London being a successful Olympics for our cyclists. I do not agree. If it was not for the stellar performance by Anna Meares on the last night of the track cycling program, Australia may not have won a gold medal for the second Olympics in a row.
I would argue that London has been an unsuccessful hunting ground for the Australians.
I agree that there was a marked improvement in Australia’s performance compared to Beijing. We are sitting third on the cycling medal table, after Great Britain and Germany. But our success is a long way down on Great Britain that won eight gold medals.
Benchmarking Australia’s performance against the 2011 and 2012 UCI Track World Championships, you would say that there would have been an expectation that Australia would have performed better.
At the 2011 UCI Track World Championship in the Netherlands, Australia finished on top of the medal table with eight gold, two silver and two bronze. While we were less successful in Melbourne, we still finished on top with six gold, six silver and three bronze.
Where did it all go wrong in London? Did we peak to early?
It appears that the Great British team was able to peak at the right time. As Brailsford, Team GB’s supremo, said, “The one thing about British cycling is that over the years we’ve got the experience on how to peak at the right time and we know how to manage an Olympic cycle.”
The Australians peaked too early. 12 months too early at the 2011 Track World Championships.
Brailsford went on to say, “A human being cannot stay at the same intensity for four years, it’s impossible. It’s difficult to peak on a given day at a given time once every four years. What really matters at the Games is that you’re at your absolute peak of performance.”
Australia has a lot to learn from Brailsford’s comments. Only a full and transparent review will identify why our athletes did not peak at the right time, and more importantly put in place processes and procedures to achieve better outcomes at the end of the Olympic cycle.
Australian taxpayers have spent a lot of money to gt our athletes to London. Fairfax papers ran an analysis of the cost of Australia’s Olympics medals. With funding of $31 million, the average cost of each medal for Australia was around $5.2 million. Whereas for Great Britain, the average cost of each medal was $3.2 million.
This is a crude method of measuring success. However, it also suggests that the Brits are gets better outcomes from their funding. As John Coates is quoted as saying, “Wlite sport authorities will need to reassess their spending, more money is not necessarily the answer.”
That including assessing why the British have been so successful in Beijing and now in London.
Something went wrong with Australia’s Olympic campaign. The problem may rest with the administrators in Cycling Australia. They swept under the carpet the Bobridge and Hepburn drink driving incident in Spain either this year.
While the pair were found guilty of misconduct, there were no sanctions. The bid for gold was too great. Cycling Australia’s message to the athletes was misbehaviour would be tolerated if there was a potential gold medal at stake. There is also a selection policy that attaches a romantic sentiment for established names.
Cadel Evans should not have been selected of the road race or the time trial. Australia’s best time trialist was and still is Luke Durbridge. Yet he was not selected. I ask why?
Australia has some of the world’s best athletes and some of the world’s best coaches. Yet this has not translated into success at the velodrome or on the road at the London Olympics.
Swimming Australia announced a full review their London performance, including Swimming Australia’s high performance programs and administration, after a poor performance by their recent standards.
Swimming Australia should be congratulated on announcing the review so quickly after the conclusion of swimming events at the London Olympics.
Cycling Australia should take a leaf out of Swimming Australia’s book and review its high performance program, their administration, their talent selection program. This should be a roots and all review.
In fact, the Crawford Report recommended that “all national sporting organisations that are highly dependent on public funding should have rolling five year national plans that set the targets and measures by which the national sporting organisations should be judged”.
What is Cycling Australia’s national plan? This review must be transparent. The findings should be transparent, not kept for internal consumption only.
I am hoping that Cycling Australia will not be dragged kicking and screaming into their how funds are expended.
Anything less from a full review could see Australia fall further down the international pecking order.
cg26
Guest
do you understand the point of the Olympics?
lee twizell
Guest
I am british all our funding for sports is done on medals from the olympics so we only care about events in the olympics same with all sports
Bones506
Roar Guru
I think that Matt White should not be allowed duel roles with OGE and Olympics/worlds.
Bones506
Roar Guru
I think you idea on towns with >30,000 is excellent. Track and Crit is the best way for younger kids to develop the skills they need as opposed to open Road Racing which is very straight forward. Agree on general public v Cycling community. The general public (ie - mainstream media) have not hammered our cyclists - they really cut loose on the swimmers underperforming expectations.
Alistair Nitz
Roar Rookie
The Olympic cycling program was cut back this year compared to the World's track programmes. Nevertheless, I understands that if the Olympic programme was used at the 2011 Worlds in Melbourne, Australia would have only won three gold medals compared to Team GB 6 golds. Yes, it is difficult to make direct comparisons, but I would argue that it is now time to fully review the elite cycling program and selection policies.
Alistair Nitz
Roar Rookie
Yes, I agree that the use of statistics in the article was simplistic. While the $31m was not spent solely on the Olympics program, the end of the day the Government spends money on elite sports programs with the objective of Olympic glory. To put it into perspective, Great Britain only spent marginally more than Australia, yet have secured greater success at both the Beijing and London Olympics. The aim of the article was to highlight the need for a urgent review of Cycling Australia's program.
Alistair Nitz
Roar Rookie
Hi Gra, I agree that government funding for elite athletes should be subject to a HECs type arrangement. Unfortunately the Crawford Report recommended against this type of arrangement. Therefore, it will be unlikely that the Government will introduce the scheme anytime soon.
Maria Szczerba
Guest
Hi Hardsy, I would have to agree with the program as it clashed with the other sports so you saw very little of some of the cycling, I think the programming of the road race at the beginning of this olympics should have been moved to towards the end and the time trial moved to the front of the program. By moving the road race to the end, it would have not only enabled the marathon being watched along with the walks taking place but it would have given the cyclists a bit of a break to let them enjoy the games also before competing! I experienced this when competing in the masters the last four years, and cyclists deserve to have a break when competing also, it enabled them to enjoy the festivities also. Programming at any event needs to be carefully maintained and programme to not only cater for the individuals taking part but also for those who come out to enjoy as well as the officials and the programming of the events needs to be worked into those broadcasting the event or any other event across the globe! Broadcasting and programming of such an event or any other events should be shared amongst stations and not just one station so that if one station is showing something and you want to see more of say cycling or gymnastics or even weightlifting or even for that matter various events equestrian etc., the people involved in those events need to take into consideration the spectators involved and also those watching the broadcast on tv or listening to it on radio or wherever in the world they might be! Better organisation of an event will bring out not only the best of the event but it will be enjoyed by all and always have feedback on these games as this will help in planning the next event olympics!
hardsy
Roar Pro
The cycling program at the Olympics is significantly smaller than a world champs so therefore any comparisons are tough to make. It was always going to be tough taking on the Brits at their best discipline on their home soil. Whilst I agree our were results we're down on what was budgeted, the programming is the biggest factor here.
Maria Szczerba
Guest
It takes commitment and a whole lot of sacrifice in the sport of cycling or for that matter in any sport to reach the pinnacle of success and the success comes from competing, meeting others and just being part of this wonderful event - the Olympics! So with the next lot of olympics coming up I see it only fit that Cycling Australia does not only value those that medalled or placed but values everyone in the sport of cycling and really opens their eyes up in their selection process for the next ones and really don't overlook anyone next time whether they are a master or an elite or a mountain bike, you have to go into the selection process with your eyes open to all possibilities and all avenues open to the rest of the world and really look at every country and what each country has to offer! With commitment there comes disappointment but just being at the Olympics is an achievement in its own and the camaraderie and atmosphere of the whole event! Well done to each and everyone that was there and part of the olympics medalled or not medalled! True sportsmen and sportswomen are triumphed in victory and valiant and humble in defeat but do not forget the true meaning of courage and determination and perseverance in reaching their dreams and goals! or anything in life! Its how hard you fight to bring out the best you want to achieve for yourself not others!
Maria Szczerba
Guest
There was commitment but was there enough commitment from others or were others relying solely on Anna to get the gold and the others that medalled, thats the sort of pressure I am talking about!
Maria Szczerba
Guest
Hi all, I would have to agree to some extent and as I watched the medal tally, I also thought to myself why weren't certain cyclists picked to represent Australia! The likes of Luke Durbridge is a Yes! and I think Values, and people achieving what they have achieved doesn't cater for what others see in choosing them at an olympics represents. I think having Anna was a very good choice as she is an icon in the sport and also why did Cycling Australia not choose us Masters who have been wonderful in the sport of cycling and some of us masters have received gold, silver and bronze but never get chosen to represent the country, its fine that we are represented at the Worlds but these were the olympics and yet you choose younger inexperienced riders such as Nettie and Alex Edmondson to go, its good for the experience but when it is our nation being represented I think you should not only include these people but give others a fair go to represent their country in their chosen sport and some us are just as good as they are from all over the world and how do you expect others to get the experience if the selection process is always choosing the same people. if you are going to choose the same people, mix it up a bit so that you have a better representation in the sport of cycling and all age groups, abilities and capabilities are represented in the next olympics! Some masters riders from all age groups are wonderful riders also that have competed in the State Titles and won their age group also at the Worlds, some riders from all over should be represented. I think the likes of Durbridge with Meares is a wise choice with the others that were represented. I think that Cycling Austraia really needs to look at the likes say Tomic also! I think people have to remember, you can't put too much pressure on Anna and the same people all the time, its unfair to them and they have enough to worry about with their own races that they are competing in. A fair go for all cyclists.
liquorbox_
Roar Rookie
"If you asked most people if they had to pick between Track Gold and having an Aussie Pro-team then I think the Pro team would be a clear winner." I think this is certainly the case with cycling fans, but the general public would see this year as a failure. GreenEDGE and Cadel both lost the TDF and we lost the Olympics. To most people these were the only two races all year! "At the end of the day – more Govt funding for cycling needs to be provided." Totally agree, but we need to think seriously about where the funding is aimed. I for one would concentrate the funding on Building velodromes, but not high end wood velodromes, just tar/cement courses around cricket grounds for a start. This is what I rode on as a kid. I had stopped racing before we got a proper velodrome which was made from cement. A cement track is adequate and this is what Anna Mears used in Rockhampton. If I was able to have a cycling dream come true I would like to see every town with more than 30000 people have a decent steep velodrome for use by local cyclists with plenty of "hire/borrow" bikes in kids sizes where someone under 14 can go and race and just supply their own shoes/pedals and helmet. Talent needs to be identified and invited to the track at a young age- poach little athletics sprinter or swimming clubs for fit fast kids and offer them a chance. I also think that when the Federal government wants to boost the economy instead of giving out money for pokies or plasma screens they should give out vouchers for all sports, especially cycling- why not give out free bikes to kids? I would direct funding to Track and Criterium racing as it is off the road and seen as safer by mums and dads, and once the riding skills are honed, using the public roads becomes a bit safer
Bones506
Roar Guru
I am in complete agreement. The numbers have been simplified and are not for one event. Australia did exceptionally well at the UCI Track World's in Melbourne earlier in the year. A lot of our track riders are now signed to Orica-GreenEDGE so the likes of Meyer did not compete at the Olympics so we did not send a 'mature' full strenght squad so to speak. Luke Durbridge was not selected as you needed a rider to be able to compete in both Road Race and the ITT. Durbo has very little high level RR experience. Hindsight is a wonderful thing - I would have taken him over Cadel but hard to leave out a yellow jersey winner who is still one of the best single road racers in the world. I also don't agree with us being down the pecking order. If you are purely talking Track and using the Olympics as the barometer that is a little narrow in scope. Our efforts at the Worlds was very strong. We also now have the first fully fledged Australian Pro team. Much of the team are ex track riders. If you asked most people if they had to pick between Track Gold and having an Aussie Pro-team then I think the Pro team would be a clear winner. At the end of the day - more Govt funding for cycling needs to be provided.
Kate Smart
Expert
Hi Alistair, Some great points but I also think we need define just what 'success' is at the Olympics is. I don't think success is purely based on counting how many gold medals are won. Having said that, I think all of our sporting bodies should be reviewing their spending patterns each year and these should be made public. I think we've been quite negative about our Olympics campaign and we need to get the debate on more positive ground. Knee-jerk reactions and the blame game don't benefit anyone.
Omega10
Roar Rookie
I think it's worth mentioning that the points race, madison and individual pursuit were all omitted from the Olympic program this year. These are events where Australia is very strong and it's not inconceivable that three gold medals could have come from these events had they been retained. That being said, I don't think a review of how things are being done is ever a bad idea after an Olympic campaign. I think track cycling is unfortunately getting too specialized and road riders who use to cross over to the velodrome just for the games are being marginilized in favour of younger riders who will stay with the program as required. I think this is an area which needs to be looked at and a solution found if possible. Also, domestic track cycling needs to be promoted with more vigour. Australian track cycling was once very strong on the local scene but has been pushed into a corner by the explosion of criteriums and summer road racing. Who knows how many young champions could be found if only we encourage promoters to stage bigger events on the track and put our domestic wheelraces back in the spotlight where they use to be. There is plenty of talent out there it simply needs to be harnessed. Overall, considering what a juggernaut British cycling is at the moment I think we did the best we could at the track and it wasn't a bad effort.
liquorbox_
Roar Rookie
I dont know how you can say $31m was for the Olympics. This is a massive simplification of statistics. $31m went to cycling, this was used to fund our talent as a whole! We may not have won many medals, but in this 4 year cycle we have funded a TDF champion, many stage victories in different races and won world titles in BMX and on the track. I think $31m was pretty good over the last 4 years when you look at what Australian cycling has achieved. There is no way you can allocate the $31m to just one event, it is used to build careers. Look at Cameron Meyer, he used this money to qualify for the Olympics, and then pulled out, if he places in the top few positions at the Vuelta then the money was well spent by cycling Australia.
Gra
Guest
All government funds should be handed out on a HECs type basis. Once a sportsperson starts earning more than $500,000/annum then they should be required to repay the costs of that training provided by the taxpayer. This would allow continued high levels of funding and, dare I say it, allow more taxpayer's money to be poured into grass roots sports, our children, our future sportspersons.