Australia’s cycling program at the 2016 Rio Olympics is winding down, with only mountain bikes and BMX remaining, and with just a silver and a bronze, it’s been disappointing.
Caroline Buchanan is one of our last remaining hopes for gold, in the BMX.
The Australian media have put Swimming Australia under the blowtorch, with calls for the board to resign given the lack of success.
As yet, the board and CEO of Cycling Australia have not come under the same scrutiny. Why not?
As Britain’ cycling boss said, countries like Australia “simply did not show up”.
The lack of success could have ramifications for cycling’s future funding levels.
With this in mind, an urgent and independent review of Cycling Australia, including its operations, personnel, governance frameworks, selection policies and funding (how it is allocated, from grassroots to state bodies), is necessary.
This review cannot be left to Cycling Australia and its high-performance coaches. A review that must be broader than required by the Australian Sports Commission.
The Australian Government, via the Australian Sports Commission, allocates funding to cycling through the ‘Winning Edge program’.
Cycling Australia receives one of the highest funding allocations. In 2015-16, it received around $7.4 million, which dwarfs the $600,000 that archery received in 2015-16, where one of its athletes won a bronze medal.
It is arguable that Australia did not get much of a return on its taxpayer-funded investment.
Sports funding is not just limited to the performance at one event, whether it is the Olympics, World Championships or the World Cup.
Under the Winning Edge funding model, the Australian Sports Commission looks at the historical performance as well as future potential to determine investment.
This will be a worry for Cycling Australia. At the 2015 World Track Cycling Championships, Australia won 11 medals, including four gold, with six of the medals being Olympic events.
Fast forward 12 months and the medal haul at the world champs had fallen to five, including two gold. The trajectory of success at international track events was trending downwards. The medal haul at the Rio Olympics confirms this trend.
There has not been much better performances at the UCI Road World Championships. In 2014, Australia won eight medals, including two gold. However this may have been an aberration, as in 2015 only a silver and bronze were secured.
Australia’s cycling programs are struggling, particularly against Team GB, which is setting the performance benchmark.
Failure to address this issue may not only damage Australia’s future international sporting achievements, but also grassroot participation – that is, our future Olympic champions.
delbeato
Roar Guru
Firstly, you've got to split road and track. On the road at senior level, it's a competition between elite pros. They operate outside the Winning Edge program. At the junior level, CA's development program is influential. But there's no junior Olympics. Those junior World Champs medals don't cross over to the Olympics. Mountain biking is the same - it's a pro event at the Olympics. You can't throw $20k at it and develop a champ. You won't get close. The major opportunity for bagging cycling medals at the Olympics is on the track and BMX. Traditionally, these are 2nd tier cycling events where a well-funded, dedicated program of talent-identification and training can yield results. But it's getting harder. As others have pointed out, British Cycling have professionalised track cycling. There are no easy medals on offer any more. The Australian track pursuit team's performance was absolutely world class, what would have been a world record time ride - except that the Brits did even better. If you want value-for-money medals, invest in Archery. Or synchronised swimming. They don't come easily in cycling anymore.
commonwombat
Guest
That may've been the case as a kid but she's been based at the AIS in Adelaide for over a decade, so lets not allow the truth to interfere with your narrative !! The issue is that AUS track cycling has a number of pressure issues. Firstly, the budget constraints as compared to GBR, Secondly, generational change. Meares has had a superlative career but has been in the realm of diminishing returns post London. The next generation has yet to step up and may never reach her levels. Glaetzer has pace but as yet lacks the smarts On the endurance side, there is always going to be the flow-on, particularly on the mens side, to the road. At U-23 level, you can split both far easier and have more time with the riders but WT level teams are not always accomodating of riders with track commitments. GBR has been able to manage this better than AUS due to them being able to keep the bulk of their young track enduro riders away from WT level until post Rio. Wiggins has also been able to parlay his road successes into his own team at lower levels which has "warehoused" many of the younger track enduro riders for the past couple of years With womens enduro, again it is a matter of balancing road & track with GBR having greater resources to be able to ensure availability as well as depth. Road racing at Olympic level will always have a random element with team sizes being much smaller and less able to control races than in pro peleton. Whilst one can scout the courses and select teams accordingly; weather & the inevitable crashes are intangibles no one can plan for
Paul
Guest
At the time you wrote that Aus were not 10th, I know that. But to me the table below looks like a lot of nations (2nd - 10th) finished effectively as a dead heat in equal second. Track cycling hasn't been the same since a lot of events got dumped from the program and replaced with the boring Omnium. Anyway all the best at changing the 'system'. 1 Great Britain 6 4 1 11 2 Netherlands 1 1 0 2 3 Germany 1 0 1 2 4 China 1 0 0 1 4 Italy 1 0 0 1 5 United States 0 2 0 2 6 Australia 0 1 1 2 6 Russia 0 1 1 2 7 New Zealand 0 1 0 1 8 Denmark 0 0 2 2
tyrone
Guest
I wonder if the size of our country is an issue? Meares traveled for hours to get to a track to race on as a kid and was lucky that mum and dad were so supportive. How far is the nearest velodrome in the UK? I would guess that it is easier for parents to get talented ids into track cycling in the UK than in Australia.
DaSpooon
Guest
Heard one of the GB cyclists thanking the team behind their success. I'd like to thank the nutritionists, sports psychologists, data analysts, mechanics, track coach, road coach, etc, etc. Was like an Oscars speech. Other nations need to follow the British model if they want to compete, whatever that may be. The Brits will be back in Tokyo and will rest on their laurels somewhat in between as they are champions for the next four years.
Diggs
Roar Rookie
Agree 100% 7.4 million is a scratch on the surface of GB funding. They also work incredibly close with their road teams. Alot of their success has been built over time and they paid bigger money for our best Aussie admin and coaches than us Aussies did lol. They also train in a velodrome worth almost 10 million pounds, which was joint funded by 4 government departments. Leading up to last year, sponsors Sky was also throwing in 10 million pounds over 4 years. Success needs talent definitely and a lot of dedication, but it is often refined and improved by a heck of a lot of cash.
Matthew Boulden
Roar Guru
It has been lost among the rise and dominance of British Cycling that other nations have also moved to improve their performances on the track through increased funding and better use of pre-existing resources. As a result other nations have been closing the gap that Australia once traditionally held over them on the track.
Matthew Boulden
Roar Guru
Honestly is it really a surprise to anyone that Team GB have dominated the track when Cycling Australia's reported $7.4 million funding pool is dwarfed by British Cycling's reported £30 million (~$50 million AUD) funding pool. With that kind of funding British Cycling should be expected to dominate the sport over a four-year period, anything less is underwhelming, until another nation goes close to matching or surpassing British Cycling's investment in the sport. If Australia wants to catch up to the benchmark set by British Cycling in the long run it will require more funding. More efficient use of Cycling Australia's current funding pool is never going to significantly close the gap in the long run. British Cycling simply has more dollars available to invest into better facilities, hiring or keeping the best coaches and support personal, talent identification, research and development, equipment and more. Let's be realistic here, with nations like France transitioning over to following the model set by British Cycling the competition for medals will theoretically only get fiercer - assuming the likes of France invest their funding as efficiently as British Cycling have done. In summary, yes do try to utilise Cycling Australia's $7.4 million funding pool as efficiently as possible but the cycling landscape now is different to when Australia use to dominate on the track.
Lee
Guest
An awful lot of 4th places though, so even if GB weren't there it would just have been a load of bronze medals. Still not great
Republican
Guest
......as do our hockey sides. They were absolutely woeful from day one especially our blokes.
Omega10
Roar Rookie
Cycling Australia administration has been a basket case for years now. Until the slow and agonizing death of track cycling in this country is arrested I can only see a continuing decline in our fortunes at Ilympic level.
Alistair Nitz
Roar Rookie
Currently Australia is sitting 10th on the Cycling Medal table at the Rio Olympics. We were also substantially behind Team GB at the last World Champs in the medal tally as well. There is enough evidence to suggest that it is not a statistical outlier. We can't have this attitude that it was only a statistical outliers or we will risk falling further down the medal tally at future events as other countries try to replicate the Team GB blueprint.
Paul
Guest
Have you looked at the cycling results in full? One country won medals, the rest didn't. More of a statistical outlier in terms of medal distribution for cycling. The reason for that dominance........