WHEN Scottish sport concludes its deliberations on theCommonwealth Games, no whitewash of the inadequacies which provokedthe worst overall competitor-medal ratio in 60 years can bepermitted- especially in the light of attempts by the Commonwealth GamesCouncil to do precisely that, to spare certain members of theirhierarchy.
John Anderson, manager of the athletics squad in Kuala Lumpur,admits the competitors "under-performed", so you can expect trackandfield's report to be frank, fearless, and ruthless.
An almost completely new Scottish Athletics Federation team is onthe blocks. Chief executive David Joy has been in place for just 10days, but already there are glowing reports from those who have comein contact. Tried-and-trusted general manager Neil Park now has thetime and resources to run the federation unhampered by extraneoustasks. A new performance and excellence manager, former Commonwealthdiscus champion Meg Ritchie, was appointed this week. Road, track,and cross-country internationalist Chris Robison takes up anothernewly-created post, that of education manager, this month. Two majorcoaches, for endurance (appointed by SAF), and elite performance(paid by the Institute of Sport), are in the pipeline.All this is possible thanks to Scottish Sports Council and lotteryfunding, backing a business plan approved by clubs themselves. It isthe biggest initiative in the sport's history. It is worth well inexcess of #1m per year, and is the best chance athletics will everhave to escape a morass of mediocrity.Yet in a move which is best described as Luddite, reneging on thedeal which their clubs approved, the future is being jeopardised bycompetitors themselves.By October 1, each of Scotland's estimated 12,000 competitors wasto have paid #10 per head into a membership scheme - a possibledeposit of #120,000 to secure future millions in return. Yet only1948 have so far done so.Peter Carton, chairman of the SAF management board, said: "This isvery disappointing, and is verging on a crisis. It has never beenconcealed that the membership scheme is integral to the success ofthe business plan. I do not wish to make threats, but unless mattersimprove, an ultimatum is inevitable."The sport exists thanks largely to volunteers - like starters,timekeepers, judges, coaches, and many others. All give theirservices in all weathers, week in, week out - often for a lifetime -for no reward. They do it, usually, because somebody once did it forthem, or for their children. They do it because they believe in thesport. The very people they do it for won't contribute the cost of around of drinks once a year. It defies logic."If much has to change - and future athletics access to theScottish Institute of Sport may depend on it - then after themiserlyattitude of the performers, the next target must surely be thecompetition structure.On the evidence of results in Kuala Lumpur, the current problemfacing Scotland is lack of quality performers. The fundamentalreason, Anderson believes, is the unweildy and wasteful competitionstructure.He has a pet theory about this, and had drawn up an alternativeeven before the team went to Malaysia, and it has just beendeliveredat a ground-breaking seminar in Perth."The club competition structure was not designed," says Anderson."It just evolved. It is more than 100 years old. Radio and TV,space travel and the Internet have come, but very little has changedcompetitively."It is either individual, championships, or club matches with alltrack and field events contested, most recently by two competitorsper event for each club, in leagues. This will upset many people,but I sincerely believe that leagues hold back the sport."In allowing only two per event, they are costly, involving travelfor large numbers. They are also directly contradictory to the ethosof sport for all."If 20 kids come from a school, all wanting to run 800 or 1500metres, there are only places for the best two in each event. If 20would-be 100 and 200m runners, or hammer throwers and shot putters,turn up, there are still only two places in each event. There isnothing to offer the other 16, and most disappear, lost to othersports. Given that precocity is frequently manifest in such talent,those who never get started at all could be future world champions."If two or three hammer throwers, let us say in Thurso, wantcompetition, and a parent asks how to find it, they will be told tojoin a club, or form a club. They have to draw up a constitution,register their club, find office bearers, join a league, and get twopeople for every event, organise the team, hire a bus. When they getthere, the guys or girls who wanted to throw the hammer willprobablybe asked to do other events as well, 'just for a point for theclub',because there are rarely enough people to cover all events."On the other hand, these kids from Thurso might be told to join aclub in Edinburgh. Other options become more attractive: swimming,cycling, hockey. Our system discourages athlete participation."I doubt if there is one club in Britain, never mind Scotland,which has a fully-qualified coach in every track and field event,never mind for the full ability range. Our system does not encourageanything other than mediocrity."In rural areas in the central belt, where public transport ispoor, access is available only to middle class families with cars.No wonder kids only play football, or worse - do nothing. We do notoffer the opportunities we like to pretend. Our system strangles theaspirations of kids, never mind those of clubs. It is wasteful totell kids at an early age that they are not good enough."Critics rarely offer remedies, but Anderson has one: his PET -standing for points, event, team."Clubs could comprise any number of competitive units, which wouldbe groups of, say, three competitors, in individual events. Thethree hammer-throwers from Thurso would compete against other groupsof three hammer throwers in a national hammer-throwing league, whichcould have any number of divisions. The distance they throw would beadded together, and points awarded. The same could apply to everydiscipline, and there would thus be competition for every member ofaclub, not just the best two in each event."It has the merit of allowing someone in an area without a club toset up a competition unit for, say, pole vault, without having toorganise a full-scale match. Athletics would be viable in towns andvillages where it is impossible now, and club membership could be inthousands."It can still be a team sport. Instead of two per event, it couldbe 10 per event, say, in middle distance, six in sprints, four injumps and throws. If points were awarded, it would mean the lastrunner would count when normally they would never be given a race."David Joy and Neil Park are preparing a seminar report, for clubsto consider, and it will include Anderson's pet theory.Though radical, it has much to commend it. He stresses it ismerely a suggestion, for scrutiny and to provoke debate. Athree-year pilot might be no bad idea. Other, better blueprints, maywell be submitted. Yet all may be denied the chance. Unless thoseselfish individuals - at present the majority of Scottishcompetitors- pay the #10 each, they may have no sport. Anarchy will rule, andthey will deserve the consequences.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий