John Wylie is a highly-respected and successful businessman, and must have a substantial sporting background to be the chairman of the Australian Sports Commission, and a former chairman of the MCG.
But yesterday Wylie gave the most boring rendition of why the Australian Olympic team didn’t reach target in Rio, and suggested if future teams were funded by a national lottery like Great Britain, the results would be a whole lot better.
What a load of bollocks.
The reasons for the failure in Rio are very simple – either prima donnas, choke, or a combination of the two.
But one after another, Australian Olympic officials, administrators, and many in the media have praised the team for its performance, explaining every athlete gave of his or her best, and we should be proud of them.
What Games were they talking about – Athens 2004, or Beijing 2008?
In Athens with 17 gold, 16 silver, and 17 bronze for 50 medals, or Beijing with 14 gold, 15 silver, and 17 bronze for 46.
No, they were talking about Rio with eight gold, 11 silver, and 10 bronze for 29.
Let’s be honest, gold is the only Olympic currency that counts and three of the eight Australian gold in Rio came from left field – Kyle Chalmers in the 100m freestyle, Catherine Skinner in trap shooting, and effervescent pentathlete Chloe Esposito.
But eight is a Rio embarrassment, missing out on at least 12 more where athletes were either red hot, or white hot, favourites for gold.
Swimming, always the benchmark, was the worst offender with Australians either number one in the world, the world record holder, or world champions – yet they delivered just three gold.
Cam McEvoy pulled out of the 200m free to concentrate on the 100 and 50. But he didn’t reach the final in the 50, and didn’t place in the 100.
Cate Campbell finished sixth in the 50m free final, and fifth in the 100.
Bronte Campbell finished fourth in the 100 free final, and seventh in the 50.
Emily Seebohm finished seventh in the 100 backstroke, and 12th in the 200, while Mitch Larkin was fourth in the 100 back.
What happened to the always reliable cyclists and BMX with not one gold in sight, and only two medals – silver in the men’s team pursuit, and team captain Anna Meares’ bronze in the Keiren?
And what happened to the highly favoured team sports that never got past the quarters – the Kookaburras, Hockeyroos, Opals, and women’s water polo?
To add insult to injury at the end of the Games, the strong Boomers team lost by a point to Spain for bronze.
So to John Wylie and any other senior Australian sporting administrator who wants to cover their backs, or ignore the truth, Rio was a disaster and entirely the athlete’s fault.
Australia needed more like champion sculler Kim Brennan, and the brilliant women’s rugby sevens who lived up to reputations – and then some.
Nickyc
Guest
The maximum British athletes receive is £28000 (AUS$ 49000) and unlike Australian athletes they don't get anything for winning medals. In some areas the Brits have better facilities but Oz is still better off in many areas, e.g. Olympic size swimming pools.
JimmyWine
Guest
Back in my day yadadada... Go back to ancient Athens and talk to your mate Socrates about how bad the kids are.
Simoc
Guest
The usual Lord trash. The bollocks was from those clueless individuals who predicted 17 gold in Rio. These people don't know or understand sport. The usual office and stats crew who expect a win somewhere translates to gold on the big stage at the Olympics or that best times are replicated on a particular day in time when it matters at the Olympics. Eight gold was good and if Australia ever get 17 again that would be achieving great things. Probably 12 was a sensible goal if things went according to plan, but they never do at Olympics. Winning a swag of swimming golds is the normal way to boost the total for Australia but that didn't happen this time. Maybe next time. Hopefully one day we will win an Athletics gold again in a running event, but don't hold your breathe.
jameswm
Roar Guru
I'm talking athletics, not swimming.
Tristan Rayner
Editor
I'd never take mine off.
Geoff Parkes
Expert
Agree with that james, there is a huge difference between "poor performance" and underperforming against expectations.
Master Chief
Roar Pro
David, It's not about how much the athletes themselves are getting paid, it's how much funding they get. So it doesn't even compare to any of those points about the wealth of team sports and such.
Benno
Guest
Jameswm, not sure where your figures come from but the Aussie swimmers I know personally are on about $70K or more with regular physio, massage, nutritionists, Strength and Conditioning and any thing else they need all paid for. There a lot of things with the Australian swimming program but money isn't one of them. -- Comment from The Roar's iPhone app.
BFG
Guest
An embarrassment you say, to who? No one from any other country gives a toss how many medals we won. 99.9% of them don't even know or give it a single thought. The only embarrassment is keyboard warriors who think this stuff is an embarrassment, and frankly, they're probably part of the problem.
jameswm
Roar Guru
You have completely missed the point David. Cricket, tennis, golf and rugby analogies don't work. Everyone's earning a lot there. Not much difference on performance if you're earning $600 or $800K per annum, with similar facilities at your disposal. These are high earners. However, look at classic Olympic sports. In athletics, the difference might be one (Brit) is on $75K from their Govt and the other (Aussie) $12K, and the first has more facilities at their disposal to assist with their training. They can train harder, better, and more often. They will be in better shape. Not that hard to work out. You can't compare the money in golf or tennis on one hand, with the measly below-dole handouts our swimmers and athletes get from the Govt. At that level, it DOES affect your ability to get to world class level. Big time. Are you saying Day and Scott are poor performers? They're ranked what, 1 and 6 in the world in one of the most competitive sports there is? And Day is no.1 by a lot. Don't you think you might have set the bar a bit high for them? Why do you write sentences like the last one, where you're just trying to pick a fight with someone?
David Lord
Expert
On this Legacy Day Torchbearer that's 14 extra medals, but all bar the Boomers should have been gold so why settle for silver or bronze? Gold is the only currency when that's what they should have won.
Torchbearer
Guest
You say gold is the only thing that matters, but in the following events I would have settled for a medal of any colour! C Campbell 50/100.... B Campbell... 50/100...E Seebohm 100Bk/ 200Bk ..... M Larkin 100BK.... BMX Mens and Womens....C MCEvoy 100...Basketball MorW..... Hockey MorW..... for starters....
richo
Guest
so far off the mark, you may have thought you being insightfull but you just show your complete lack of understanding of what it takes to be an elite athlete. Kids birthday parties? Really? Sometimes in sport you lose when you could have won, its really that simple
David Lord
Expert
jameswm, money DOESN'T make a difference. The Australian cricketers are the best paid in the world, and were number one Test nation until they were flogged 3-zip by Sri Lanka, ranked sixth at the time - Australia now ranked fourth. The Wallabies are the best paid in the rugby world, but they have lost their last six internationals and gone from second ranked in the world to fourth. The Kangaroos are the highest paid in the rugby league world, but New Zealand is ranked number one nation, and have beaten the Kangaroos in three of their last four meetings. Jason Day and Adam Scott are two of the world's very best golfers with both deservedly multi-millionaires, but neither could win a major in 2016. Bernard Tomic and Nick Kyrgios have money pouring out of their ears, but that doesn't stop the garbage pouring out of their mouths and losing matches they should win. So try this for size jameswm, the Australian Olympic team, especially the swimmers and cyclists, have joined the other Australian sports in the poor performance club. .
peeeko
Guest
the swimmers had enough funding to set World records and win world championships but not the olympics?
IKnowEverything
Guest
Undoubtedly there are many reasons for the lack of olympic medals, not only the competitors but the coaches need to be looked at. However when a medal contender come out with statements like "I've already won because I'm swimming in the final with my sister," this just shows there are attitude problems with some of our Olympians.
Geoff Parkes
Expert
Chloe Esposito wore her gold medal james. Is she a bragger? Or someone sending a message to other young girls that this is what can happen to you too if you work hard?
Handles
Guest
Results influenced by the distraction of "medal predictions", carried on through completely unnecessary public complaints about accommodation and theft, and completed by media scrutiny of "poor performance", and nanny state punishments handed out like a Boarding School picnic. David, you are right. There were a few wonderful performances, and those athletes need to be recognised and applauded. There were a lot of valiant but ultimately unsuccessful performances, and those athletes should be congratulated. But there were many performances that reflected a significant decline from recent results, and here we need to understand why.
jameswm
Roar Guru
This is so completely on the mark. Cate Campbell swam poorly in the 100 final because little Aussie kids get a participation prize at their soccer club when they're 5. There is such a direct correlation between the two, this is blatantly obvious. These comments are so absurd that maybe you are just taking the proverbial.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Are you kidding? Aussies don't like a bragger.