tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/john-coates-3612/articlesJohn Coates – The Conversation2021-07-08T16:27:44Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1637022021-07-08T16:27:44Z2021-07-08T16:27:44ZHolding the Tokyo Olympics without spectators during COVID-19 emergency puts the IOC’s ‘supreme authority’ on full display<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410210/original/file-20210707-21-zuj18s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=26%2C35%2C5955%2C3925&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The statue of the Olympics rings overlooks people visiting a nearby shopping mall in Tokyo. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Hiro Komae) </span></span></figcaption></figure><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 250px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/holding-the-tokyo-olympics-without-spectators-during-covid-19-emergency-puts-the-ioc-s--supreme-authority--on-full-display" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>Two weeks before the start of the Tokyo Olympics, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57760883">a state of emergency has been declared by the Japanese government</a> in its latest attempt to contain the spread of COVID-19. It’s another setback for these Olympics, which have already been postponed for a year and will now go ahead without any spectators.</p>
<p>With concerns that the Tokyo Olympics could become a super-spreader event, why then are the Games even taking place?</p>
<p>The answer lies in the power that the International Olympic Committee – the <a href="https://olympics.com/ioc/olympic-movement">self-proclaimed</a> “supreme authority” for world sport – holds over the cities and countries that host the Games.</p>
<p>If anyone was unaware of the IOC’s use and abuse of power before 2020, events surrounding the Tokyo Olympics during the COVID-19 pandemic have shed unprecedented light on the organization’s iron grip over host cities and countries.</p>
<p>Since early 2020, IOC president Thomas Bach and fellow veteran IOC members John Coates (chair of Tokyo Co-ordination Commission, the main liaison between the IOC and Tokyo organizers) and Richard Pound have been the dominant voices of the committee. Their statements on the postponement or potential cancellation of the Tokyo Games reflect denial, hubris and self-congratulatory rhetoric. </p>
<p>The Tokyo Olympics as <a href="https://olympics.com/athlete365/voice/22-march-letter-from-president-thomas-bach-oly-to-athletes/">“the light at the end of the tunnel”</a> has been one of Bach’s favourites platitudes, while boosters’ references to a <a href="https://olympics.com/ioc/news/ioc-and-tokyo-2020-agree-on-measures-to-deliver-games-fit-for-a-post-corona-world">“post-corona world”</a> illustrate the same unfounded optimism.</p>
<p>On the question of contingency plans in the event Tokyo needed to cancel the Games, Coates flatly stated last year that there was <a href="https://apnews.com/article/asia-pacific-united-nations-health-olympic-games-tokyo-936a921979a504cb9d4056dc44b2830a">“no Plan B”</a>. Bach <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/01/27/sports/hopes-tokyo-olympics-still-flickering-doubts-growing-louder/?event=event25&event=event25">spread the same message</a> earlier this year.</p>
<h2>Free speech?</h2>
<p>Criticism from Olympic “insiders” is both rare and noteworthy.</p>
<p>In June, Japanese Olympic Committee member <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/olympian-yamaguchi-says-japan-cornered-into-holding-games-1.5455906">Kaori Yamaguchi</a> claimed Tokyo had been “cornered” into proceeding. She was critical of the IOC for appearing <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/04/tokyo-cornered-into-going-ahead-with-games-says-olympic-official">“to think it could steamroll over the wishes of the Japanese public,”</a> given that about 80 per cent of people wanted the Games postponed again or cancelled.</p>
<p>At the beginning of the pandemic — when the IOC was still suggesting the Tokyo Games would start as scheduled in July 2020 — Hayley Wickenheiser, a member of the IOC Athletes’ Commission, called for postponement. She <a href="https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1093067/hayley-wickenheiser-ppe-opc-canada">received a speedy rebuke</a> from an IOC official, stating that it was “a pity” she had posted her thoughts “without asking the IOC first.”</p>
<p>“I didn’t know free speech had to go through the IOC,” <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/hayley-wickenheiser-had-to-speak-out-for-olympic-postponement-1.5512175">she fired back.</a> </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1239985862819155970"}"></div></p>
<p>Attempts to muzzle athletes, as well as journalists and academics critical of the Olympic industry, are commonplace. Athletes are not allowed to engage in podium or on-field political protests — and some are <a href="https://resources.fina.org/fina/document/2021/01/12/c9057283-1c4e-442e-807e-f88c982c7275/logo_fina_code_of_ethics_as_approved_by_the_ec_on_22.07.2017_final_0.pdf">contractually bound</a> by their international federations’ code of ethics to refrain from making “adverse comments” on executive decisions.</p>
<p>Similarly, athletes involved in sport-related disputes with national or international sports organizations, or with anti-doping agencies, cannot use the judicial systems of their home countries. Their contracts require them to submit appeals exclusively to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, a <a href="https://books.emeraldinsight.com/page/detail/gender-athletes-rights-and-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-helen-jefferson-lenskyjGender,-Athletes-Rights,-and-the-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport/?k=9781787542402">tribunal that has come under frequent criticism</a> for its links to the IOC and for inconsistencies in its decisions. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A night time image of people on a rainy street with a large screen in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410401/original/file-20210708-23-14fcky6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pedestrians walk past a giant public TV with a live broadcast of a news conference by Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga after he announced a state of emergency because of rising coronavirus infections. The state of emergency will be in place during the Olympic Games.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Eugene Hoshiko)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The muzzling of free speech and freedom of assembly extends beyond athletes to residents of host countries and international visitors. <a href="https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/General/EN-Olympic-Charter.pdf">The Olympic Charter</a> overrides freedoms that are universally accepted in democracies by prohibiting protests in or near Olympic venues. These areas become de facto IOC territory for the duration of the Games.</p>
<h2>Silencing ‘naysayers’</h2>
<p>I have first-hand experience of what happens to those who speak up against the Olympics, all providing invaluable material for my <a href="http://helenlenskyj.ca/books.html">subsequent research</a> on the Olympic industry.</p>
<p>My hometown of Toronto has mounted two failed Olympic bids: one for the 1996 Games and the other for 2008. In 1998, I became a member of Toronto’s anti-Olympic group, <a href="https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/search.jsp?N=4292540458">Bread Not Circuses (BNC)</a>. </p>
<p>Toronto newspapers were official bid sponsors and senior media executives were members of Toronto’s bid committee. BNC learned that one newspaper had an unofficial policy of rejecting any letters from our group. We were removed from a televised public forum on the bid because bid leaders refused to be on the same platform as our members. </p>
<p>In 2001, the IOC sent a team to Toronto to inspect its bid preparations. Our group was initially prevented from attending a meeting with the IOC. It was part of the bid committee’s transparent attempt to limit the inspection team’s exposure to “naysayers,” as the local press routinely labelled us. In the end, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306032657_Olympic_industry_and_civil_liberties">Bread Not Circuses was blamed (or credited, from our perspective) for “derailing the bid.”</a> </p>
<p>Since then, anti-Olympic and Olympic watchdog groups have proliferated and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/sports/olympics/boston-2024-summer-olympics-bid-terminated.html">a number of bid cities have held referendums</a> — democratizing trends that Bach considers inappropriate and unnecessary. The situation facing Tokyo today demonstrates the vital need for critical voices to be heard.</p>
<h2>Tokyo countermeasures</h2>
<p>Despite IOC claims that athletes’ safety in Tokyo is a priority, COVID-19 countermeasures were <a href="https://uniglobalunion.org/news/ioc-must-urgently-guarantee-world-class-covid-19-protections-tokyo-olympics">universally criticized</a> by medical experts and athlete advocacy organizations.</p>
<p>Most significant was the failure to provide adequate protection for athletes, even adding to their contracts a mandatory waiver <a href="https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/olympics-covid-waiver-tokyo-athletes-202234569.html">absolving the IOC of responsibility</a> if they contracted COVID-19 or suffered any other “serious bodily harm or even death.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Bach raises his hands while appearing on a TV screen at a news conference in Tokyo." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/410398/original/file-20210708-27-1dgwvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">International Olympic Committee President Thomas Bach gestures on screen at the beginning of the meeting in Tokyo on July 8 where the decision was made to ban spectators from the Tokyo Olympics. Bach was in quarantine after his arrival in Tokyo earlier that day.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Behrouz Mehri/Pool Photo via AP)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The IOC’s power even extends to the World Health Organization. Dr. Mike Ryan, the WHO’s chief of emergencies, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/asia-pacific-united-nations-health-olympic-games-tokyo-936a921979a504cb9d4056dc44b2830a">explained at the beginning of the pandemic</a> that it was not the WHO’s role “to call off – or not call off” the Olympics, but merely to provide “technical advice.” </p>
<p>In May 2021, Ryan <a href="https://olympics.com/ioc/news/who-ioc-organisers-and-japanese-government-working-extremely-hard-to-ensure-risks-are-well-managed-at-olympic-games-tokyo-2020">praised the pandemic guidelines and organisers’</a> “very, very systematic risk management approach.” His comments were unsurprising given that the WHO was a partner in the task force which prepared the guidelines.</p>
<h2>The cost of cancellation</h2>
<p>The host city contract for every Olympics states the IOC is the only party empowered to postpone or cancel the event. The contract has a weak “force majeure” clause that states “if the IOC has reasonable grounds to believe, in its sole discretion, that the safety of participants… would be seriously threatened or jeopardised for any reason whatsoever.”</p>
<p>If the IOC terminates the contract, the city, the host National Olympic Committee and the organizing committee all waive any claim and right to <a href="https://www.2020games.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/hostcitycontract-EN.pdf">“damages, or other compensation or remedy.”</a></p>
<p>A cancelled Olympic Games would leave Tokyo liable for billions of dollars — <a href="https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/05/25/business/economy-business/nomura-olympics-cancellation-cost/">one estimate puts the cancellation costs at US $17 billion</a>. But as some experts have pointed out, “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/money-money-money-cost-tokyos-pandemic-delayed-olympics-2021-06-10/">the economic loss would be much greater</a>” if the Tokyo Games turn into a super-spreader event. </p>
<p>The emergency declaration represents one small step towards protecting Tokyo’s citizens, but does nothing towards safeguarding the tens of thousands of athletes and officials who will arrive in the city to participate in the circus maximus that is the Olympic Games.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163702/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Helen Jefferson Lenskyj does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Concerns about holding the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games during a state of emergency highlights just how much power the International Olympic Committee wields over the global sporting world.Helen Jefferson Lenskyj, Professor Emerita of Sociology and Equity Studies in Education, University of TorontoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/774102017-05-09T08:58:08Z2017-05-09T08:58:08ZWinning ugly: the AOC election and the Olympic spirit<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/168550/original/file-20170509-11012-tlyaka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Wendell Teodoro</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Outside the staging of summer and winter Olympic Games, the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC), which oversees the <a href="http://corporate.olympics.com.au/the-aoc/mission-and-role">selection and participation</a> of Australia’s athletes, rarely features in public debate.</p>
<p>In contrast, the recent election campaign for the presidency of the AOC was dramatic viewing. For the first time in 27 years, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coates_(sports_administrator)">John Coates</a> had a challenger – <a href="https://www.danniroche.com.au/about-danni">Danni Roche</a>, a former Olympian and a board member at the <a href="http://www.ausport.gov.au/about/structure/the_board">Australian Sports Commission</a> (ASC).</p>
<h2>Gold for Australia?</h2>
<p>The ASC is the government agency charged with the twin goals of international success in high-performance sport and increased participation across national sport organisations. </p>
<p>The AOC’s priority is Olympic athletes. </p>
<p>In 2009, Coates railed against the government-commissioned <a href="http://apo.org.au/node/19766">Crawford Report</a> into Commonwealth funding priorities for sport. Coates described the Crawford recommendations to direct more money to high-participation sports as an <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-11-17/coates-pissed-off-by-crawford-report/1146166">insult to Olympians</a>, and called for a A$100 million funding increase for Olympic sports to ensure Australia stayed in the top five on the medal tally.</p>
<p>At the 2012 London Olympics, the Australian team did not live up to the top five AOC-ASC performance expectations; it finished eighth overall. This prompted Coates to criticise the federal government for not providing the AOC’s requested level of <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-2184320/London-2012-Olympics-Australia-medal-failure-lack-funding--John-Coates.html">funding to Olympic sports</a>. </p>
<p>At the Rio Games, the Australian team dropped to tenth on the medal tally. In response, Coates lambasted the new chair of the ASC, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wylie_(businessman)#cite_note-abc-8">John Wylie</a>, who had been the architect of <a href="https://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/australias_winning_edge/our_game_plan">Australia’s Winning Edge</a> – a post-London program that prioritised funding to sports thought most likely to reach the podium.</p>
<h2>Game behind the Games</h2>
<p>In August 2016, journalist <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/olympics-australia/australian-olympic-committee-boss-john-coates-hits-out-at-sports-commission-after-poor-rio-results-20160818-gqw5n3.html">Roy Masters</a> reported that AOC-ASC tensions had reached boiling point. In the wake of the “disappointing [Rio] results”, the AOC “has effectively divorced itself” from the ASC. </p>
<p>In December that year, Wylie contacted Coates with a proposal to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-13/olympic-committee-john-coates-draws-battleline-with-asc/8181688">“reset”</a> the AOC-ASC relationship, but he was <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-13/olympic-committee-john-coates-draws-battleline-with-asc/8181688">rebuked</a> by the latter, who published a 15-page, legalistic rebuttal, trumpeting the <a href="http://corporate.olympics.com.au/news/a-partnership-agreement-between-the-aoc-and-asc">AOC’s independence</a> from government.</p>
<p>Coates <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-14/aoc-cuts-ais-director-out-of-2020-olympics-planning/8269462">also contacted</a> the director of the Australian Institute of Sport, Matt Favier, to tell him the AOC would not invite him to be a part of the planning for the 2020 Olympics.</p>
<p>In February 2017, both Wylie and Coates attended the Nitro Athletics Meeting in Melbourne. When Wylie attempted to shake hands with Coates he refused the gesture, telling Wylie that he was a <a href="https://au.sports.yahoo.com/a/35037392/aoc-president-john-coates-called-john-wylie-a-c-nitro-athletics/#page1">“liar” and a “c***”</a>.</p>
<p>This bitter conflict reverberated to Parliament House. Prime Minister Turnbull interceded to extend Wylie’s position as chair of the ASC, while Roche – about whom Turnbull has a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-26/turnbull-involved-in-aoc-stoush-with-coates-in-firing-line/8387544">high opinion</a> – announced her nomination for the AOC leadership at the next election in May. </p>
<p>Coates did not appreciate what seemed an ASC-government inspired move to dethrone him as president. He described Roche as <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/olympics-boss-john-coates-says-rival-for-his-job-is-motivated-by-old-anger-over-sydneys-2000-games/news-story/1fbae9f9c3006858ba16ab6819db40ac">Wylie’s “puppet”</a>. The gloves were off – on all sides.</p>
<h2>Games of thrones</h2>
<p>Roche campaigned on an “athletes first” ticket. She was prepared to forego the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/danni-roche-seeks-to-topple-john-coates-as-aoc-head-20170319-gv1p21.html">$700,000 annual salary</a> paid to Coates, returning that money to Olympic sports. </p>
<p>Sensing the political breeze, Coates announced that it would be his final term as president, but had yet to pinpoint someone “worthy” to follow in his shoes. After 27 years, this was unusual succession planning.</p>
<p>Coates holds two key positions: president of the AOC and vice-president of the International Olympic Committee. In the latter role, he is reputed to advocate robustly on behalf of Australia. </p>
<p>This is an intriguing admission: the vice-president of the IOC is not meant to pursue parochial interests. Yet a blurring of executive roles is, curiously enough, embedded in <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-28/john-coates-to-lose-ioc-vice-president-job-if-dumped-as-aoc-boss/8481132">Olympic governance</a>: for Coates to serve as IOC vice-president, he must concurrently hold the AOC presidency. </p>
<p>Here was the gold in the Coates campaign: should he be supplanted, Australia’s “voice” at the IOC executive would be diminished. From the outset, therefore, the Coates-Roche contest involved protagonists with very unequal political capital.</p>
<h2>Teflon John</h2>
<p>Coates’ opponents were under no illusion that the numbers were stacked against them. While Roche presented a legitimate contender, Coates had decades of experience and a seat at the IOC table. Tantalisingly, though, Coates’s strongest achievements also contained potential or tangible weaknesses.</p>
<p>First, Coates was rightly lauded for helping bring the Olympics to Sydney. However, by 1999 he faced criticism that some of his <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/1999/jan/25/sydney-olympics-bribes-inquiry">gift giving</a> had been tantamount to bribery. A subsequent NSW government inquiry concluded <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=EMGFs3Vmk9cC&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=The+New+South+Wales+Independent+Commission+Against+Corruption+sydney+olympics&source=bl&ots=bfA_6VdAgc&sig=-FeF4vAnB6piZgq1vIuwrVQcMCo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj6ybbGr-LTAhWBsZQK">“Sydney’s bid had breached official guidelines”</a>, but there was no evidence of corruption.</p>
<p>Second, the 2000 Games were a financial boon for Coates. In 1996, Michael Knight, the minister for the Olympics, provided the AOC with $100 million in exchange for it relinquishing <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=mUaOAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA116&lpg=PA116&dq=aoc+veto+power+sydney+olympics&source=bl&ots=GQaUUCSypp&sig=8oYfkbFF8DQbUrdruQQqFnv35C8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwju8JTn9-HTAhVIPrwKHYwfAqIQ6AEINTAE#v=onepage&q=aoc%20veto%20power">veto power</a> over the Games’ organising budget. </p>
<p>However, just one year later the AOC made a rather dire financial decision – a <a href="http://www.news.com.au/sport/olympics/aocs-cairns-casino-investment-threatens-john-coates-bid-to-continue-rein/news-story/41fc586fb1ee5807e43c7e10897334e0">$7.2 million investment in a Cairns Casino</a>, of which Coates was chairman. The AOC eventually lost $3.5 million. </p>
<p>Today, though, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Olympic_Foundation">Australian Olympic Foundation</a> has a very sound financial position – nearly <a href="http://www.afr.com/opinion/john-coates-independent-olympic-finances-crucial-to-team-success-20170502-gvwypf">$150 million in assets</a>.</p>
<h2>Olympi-leaks</h2>
<p>For opponents of Coates, recent history provided a more productive focus of criticism. The media, for so long non-committal about AOC governance, was now awash with tip-offs and complaints about <a href="http://www.news.com.au/sport/olympics/aoc-media-man-stands-down-amid-bully-claims/news-story/ffc83d4ba027529524428ab909c0660b">improper conduct</a> on the part of the AOC media director, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/mike-tancred-00457b20/?ppe=1">Mike Tancred</a>. </p>
<p>As part of the fallout, Coates was accused of tolerating a culture of <a href="https://heraldsunatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/scan1.pdf">workplace bullying</a>. Tancred, who has held the AOC communications role for 18 years, agreed to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2017/04/26/olympic-media-boss-steps-down-over-bullying-complaint_a_22055808/">stand down</a> pending an independent investigation.</p>
<p>Coates, meanwhile, was accused of belittling a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/aoc-not-a-sheltered-workshop-coates-says-to-staff-20170426-gvsitk.html?logout=true">female staff member</a> undergoing chemotherapy for cancer: in criticising the woman’s workplace performance, he suggested that she “get out in the real world” because he was not running a “sheltered workshop”. The staff member resigned, which Coates duly accepted. </p>
<p>Upon public disclosure, Coates apologised for using the phrase “sheltered workshop”, which is a slur against people with disabilities, but reminded the press that he is a recipient of the <a href="http://thenewdaily.com.au/sport/rio-olympics-2016/2017/04/27/coates-regrets-sheltered-workshop-slur/">Australian Paralympic medal</a>.</p>
<h2>Down to the wire</h2>
<p>A virtual who’s who of Australian Olympic sport now lined up in defence of Coates or as advocates for change. </p>
<p>Household names like <a href="http://www.4bc.com.au/podcast/herb-elliott-on-the-aoc-election/">Herb Elliott</a> and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/olympics/olympic-champions-rally-behind-john-coates/news-story/8406333b31fb632ada76610590e5ed80">Ric Charlesworth</a> pleaded for stability, while <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/03/22/consider-new-aoc-leadership-bertrand">John Bertrand</a> and <a href="http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/olympic-greats-call-time-on-aoc-chief-john-coates/news-story/28039e8e05349cc1b693f3c41b43e6af">Dawn Fraser</a> asserted that Coates, while an accomplished Olympic servant, embodied a managerial and cultural paradigm unsuited to the present.</p>
<p>As ever, Coates remained on the offensive, in the fullest sense of the word. In various media appearances, he refuted allegations of a “bullying” culture in the AOC. </p>
<p>Instead, Coates asserted that Fiona de Jong – the principal complainant, who had <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/aoc-chief-fiona-de-jong-resigns-in-aftermath-of-rio-games/news-story/de7bbb4377e6bdd45ef380735b95564e">resigned</a> from her role as AOC chief executive in October 2016 – was <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/aoc-president-john-coates-lashes-out-at-fiona-de-jong-as-battle-comes-to-a-head-20170505-gvz0gr.html">not proficient in the job</a>, despite the AOC’s best efforts to provide professional development.</p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, Coates was re-elected by member sport organisations by 58 votes to 35 – a powerful mandate. The opposition campaign to displace him was ineffective; the substance of claims about workplace harassment were, after all, in progress. Would smoke mean fire? </p>
<p>Perhaps most critical to the Coates campaign was endorsement by the Athletes Commission following a “non-unanimous majority decision”. But this was associated with a <a href="http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/4644498/the-smart-money-was-always-on-a-coates-victory/?cs=7">list of demands</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… a non-executive role for the president and a review of the president’s pay, a truly independent review of the bullying claims, and mending bridges with Swimming Australia and the Australia Sports Commission.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Roche (and Wylie) did not unseat Coates. But they set in motion a debate about how the AOC and its leadership <em>should</em> function. This includes working with, rather than against, the ASC. That would be transformational. </p>
<p>Coates has been returned, but will this be a pyrrhic victory? The Athletes Commission and the public now expect independent investigations about workplace harassment that, if proven, would require a rethink about management within the AOC.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77410/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Outside the staging of summer and winter Olympic Games, the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC), which oversees the selection and participation of Australia’s athletes, rarely features in public debate…Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/636482016-08-09T20:08:56Z2016-08-09T20:08:56ZAre the Rio 2016 Games a true measure of Australia’s Winning Edge?<p>Australia has had a good start to the Rio Olympics, appearing well placed for a more successful campaign than the London Games. But does that mean the strategy created in response to Australia’s poor Olympic performance in 2012 is working? </p>
<p>Under its new policy – known as <a href="http://ausport.gov.au/ais/australias_winning_edge">Australia’s Winning Edge</a> – the Australian Sports Commission set high targets for the national Olympic team. The strategy projects a top-five finish on the medal tables for the 2016 and 2020 Games. </p>
<p>While, on the one hand, the government has been praised for setting such high standards, it has also been criticised for implementing a funding model that clearly favours traditional sports with a proven record. Former Australian Institute of Sport director and world champion marathon runner <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/olympics-2016/rio-olympics-2016-questions-raised-over-credibility-of-the-australian-institute-of-sport/news-story/bd42e39b0c804d03371cd14d619fb002">Robert de Castella</a> has criticised the policy for just “going for easy medals”.</p>
<h2>Winning ways</h2>
<p>Australia’s Winning Edge was implemented in late 2012, following the disappointing performance of the Australian team at the London Olympic Games. </p>
<p>The ten-year strategy marks a strong shift for Australian sport, and supporters and critics alike will be watching the results at Rio to evaluate its success. But athletes competing in Rio are there as a result of the previous sports strategy. </p>
<p>Before 2012, government funding embraced a “<a href="https://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/aust_sport_path/$file/aust_sport_path.pdf">whole-of-sport</a>” approach that rewarded disciplines with a large participation base and clear pathways for athletes. But the high-performance <a href="http://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/634682/High_performance_investment_allocation_model_2015-16.pdf">investment allocation model</a> supporting the new strategy categorises sports according to their contribution to its targets. </p>
<p>Those with a record of achieving multiple medals or having consistent team success will receive support. So will sports most likely to achieve a top-eight finish at the Games or garner gold medals at the Commonwealth Games. But those that fail to meet these criteria receive less funding. </p>
<p>One sport that has already felt the impact of the new funding model is artistic gymnastics. The <a href="http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/wa-gymnastics-community-rally-in-perth-over-wais-decision-to-axe-elite-program/news-story/36e5198c9fe5ef5f13ea59ebf6c2cd84">Western Australian Institute of Sport</a> (WAIS) cut its women’s artistic gymnastics program after the Australian team didn’t qualify for the Rio Games earlier this year.</p>
<p>Only the top 12 nations in the world qualify to send a team to compete in the Olympic Games and this was the first time Australia hasn’t qualified for 28 years. </p>
<p>Although other state-based institutes have retained their women’s artistic gymnastics programs, WAIS had produced Olympic and Commonwealth champions for many years, as well as training athletes who transitioned successfully into other Olympic sports such as aerial skiing, snowboarding, and diving. </p>
<p>WAIS claimed its decision to redirect funds was made in order to prioritise Western Australia’s contribution to “<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-12/wais-closes-doors-on-gymnast-program/7621876">Australia’s international sporting success</a>”.</p>
<h2>Rio and beyond</h2>
<p>The concern among many involved in less popular sports is that the government’s sport investment focus is now only supporting successful sports and successful athletes. But how do athletes become successful without support structures and systems around them? And how can sports develop and nurture talented athletes with no funding? </p>
<p>Prior to the implementation of this new strategy, the Australian Institute of Sport housed and developed Olympic champions. It no longer operates a daily training hub for pre-elite or developing athletes. </p>
<p>And there are no residential full-time athlete programs based at the Institute. What was once considered a “gold medal factory” is now described as a “<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/sport/federal-government-to-review-australian-institute-of-sport-operations-five-months-out-from-rio-olympics-20160221-gmzn37.html">tumbleweed town</a>”. </p>
<p>The Winning Edge strategy is focused on supporting traditional sports that have historically been successful at the Olympic Games, such as swimming, rowing, sailing and cycling. </p>
<p>But Australia’s first medal at Rio was in archery, a sport not identified to contribute to the Winning Edge performance targets. <a href="http://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/634681/Investment_allocation_2015-16.pdf">In 2015-2016, it was allocated</a> A$600,000, compared to sports such as basketball ($4.7m), cycling ($7.8m) and swimming ($8.4m).</p>
<p>Public criticism of the strategy by the Australian Olympic Committee president <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/olympics-bosses-claim-credit-for-archery-medal-in-rio-20160807-gqn5s4.html">John Coates</a> suggests we can say goodbye to these lesser-known sports and athletes winning surprising medals. </p>
<p>At the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, the Winning Edge strategy will have been in place for eight years. We will then be able to identify how the program has contributed to the development of the next generation of Australian athletes across all Olympic sports. </p>
<p>The results in four years’ time will truly reflect the impact the strategy has had on sport development, sport participation and sport pathways in Australia. That is, of course, if the strategy remains in place after the Rio Games.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63648/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lisa Gowthorp does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia has had a good start to the Rio Olympics. But does that mean that the strategy created in response to Australia’s poor Olympic performance in 2012 is working?Lisa Gowthorp, Assistant Professor of Sport Management, Bond UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/86612012-08-17T02:36:54Z2012-08-17T02:36:54ZDollars and sense: funding and Olympic success<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/14358/original/tzxtffwt-1345167332.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia's 4x100 metre medley swimming team with their gold medals.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Dean Lewins </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is now more than 30 years since the <a href="http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/">Australian Institute of Sport (AIS)</a> opened in Canberra, so it was predictable that a modest, rather than overwhelmingly successful campaign at the London Olympics would spring calls for an inquiry into “what went wrong” and “how things could be improved.” </p>
<p>It was, after all, a far more abysmal performance at Montreal that sparked the formation of the AIS in the first place and the overarching <a href="http://www.ausport.gov.au/">Australian Sports Commission</a>. Over time, both initiatives created more success for Australian sport internationally, and not just in Olympic sports – cricket, too, has drawn heavily on national investment approaches.</p>
<p>The London performance has produced some strange and often illogical commentary. Shaun Carney, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-cost-of-doing-business-20120807-23s6h.html">in The Age</a>, produced a “moral outrage” piece about athletes sponsored by taxpayers’ money needing to perform to justify the support. </p>
<p>That is not far from the debate that surfaces periodically about AIS scholarships needing to be funded on a HECS-type basis, with built-in repayment schedules. Perhaps the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/no-olympic-silver-is-not-the-new-gold/story-e6frg7bo-1226445131393">best and most astonishing counterpoint</a> to this line so far has come from The Australian’s Janet Albrechtson.</p>
<p>Normally the fire-eating seeker of accountability and self-help and all the other shibboleths of a free-market, Albrechtson now stood up for the athletes’ rights to compete in their own terms and respond in their own fashions. Not a word about the public funds that put them there.</p>
<p>That Albrechtson role-reversal points to the abiding problem at the heart of the Australian debate about funding for elite sport. There is no logic that clearly underpins that cash injection, no philosophy about the reasoning, unlike in every other area of public funding. It is all about sport being <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3561895.htm">“a good thing”</a>. </p>
<p>As <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/hard-to-win-medals-when-turncoates-takes-breath-away-20120808-23ue8.html">Richard Hinds noted</a> in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Australian Olympic Committee and its leaders – such as John Coates and Kevan Gosper – have always relied on what might be called the “national ego massage” factor: sporting success makes Australia feel good, and there is international prestige involved. </p>
<p>Therefore, governments should dump in funds as and when required, no questions asked, and no deep-seated statements about precisely why the nation should support all this in times of economic fragility. That was essentially the AOC response to the <a href="http://apo.org.au/research/independent-sport-panel-report-crawford-report">2009 Crawford report</a> on sports funding that questioned the value of support for elite sport, and the government responded positively to that fuzzy AOC view in a way that would not have been brooked in any other portfolio.</p>
<p>One core reason why the 2012 “failure” is now likely to re-open debate is because the social and political context that produced the AIS and the ASC has changed dramatically, but the AOC still acts as if that ancient regime still exists.</p>
<p>Every area of government and funding policy now comes with the mandatory over-riders, “accountability,” “value for money” and “return on investment”. Just ask the university sector which has seen its operating conditions turned upside down since 1981. Even the International Olympic Committee realised that a few years ago, and produced its shambolic “legacy” policy that now, effectively, legitimates the <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/12/sport/london-olympics-close-quest/index.html">sort of spending that we have seen in London</a> – about GBP9.3 billion at current estimates.</p>
<p>So when John Coates and Kevan Gosper <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/london-games/money-the-difference-between-olympic-silver-and-gold-says-aoc-chief-kevan-gosper/story-e6frgdg6-1226443802086">began making public pronouncements</a> about the London performance, the messages were a bit mixed to begin with.</p>
<p>First it was that government had provided enough money, but too late. Then it was simply that there had not been enough public funding put in to athletes – this is always an awkward line to run when it is clear that the AOC has over $100m in reserve in its own coffers.</p>
<p>If the funding was so important, why did the AOC not spend some of its own?</p>
<p>That was all “old context” response, but then came a change. John Coates <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/hard-to-win-medals-when-turncoates-takes-breath-away-20120808-23ue8.html">suddenly declared</a> that revitalising school and community sport was now the key to future success, so national funding should be directed there. Several commentators seized on this as an Olympian triple somersault with double pike at maximum difficulty from the perennially elite-athlete-oriented Coates. </p>
<p>It was actually more than that. It could well be that the shrewd sports management veteran has finally seen the need to change the policy levers, to suit the “new context” of accountability and justification.</p>
<p>If so, then he is right, if Australia is to continue competing at the top end of international sport. The other thing that London has shown is <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2012/08/201288978482990.html">just how much money</a> is now required to be in the top echelons. As usual, at least <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/aug/08/olympic-arms-race/">one dour critic</a> has come out and likened the increasing “spend” as the “new arms race” that further stretches the gap between the rich and the poor.</p>
<p>China came second on the London medal table, symbolically proving that it can do so away from as well as at home. While the cost of achieving that success is not always easy to assess, it is clearly well into the billions. In advance of the 2008 Olympiad, the Chinese constructed Project 119 (much as they had done with the 211 and 985 Projects in higher education earlier) and <a href="http://m.si.com/news/archive/archive/detail/1180876;jsessionid=A63084533C9716D241E11C3265B3EB60.cnnsi2">invested vast sums of money</a>. </p>
<p>One estimate has each of their London gold medals costing US$1.6m but, if anything, the figure is probably a lot higher. The UK enjoyed great success, partly as a home town result but more especially because of its enhanced funding via the national lotteries that is pumping in enormous sums. It has spent perhaps over $US400 million on sports preparation for these Games. If that figure is close to correct, then the Australian issue stands revealed as its gold medal count has declined: 16 in Sydney and 17 in Athens, 14 in Beijing and down to seven in London.</p>
<p>At present Australia spends around $170m a year on elite sport, which is a lot in the national budget (the AOC would argue not), especially when the sporting heart of the country still runs along traditional lines. In light of that, at least <a href="http://www.centralwesterndaily.com.au/story/181052/australian-olympic-officials-cry-poor-while-rural-sport-battles-for-the-basics/?cs=12">one regional newspaper</a> took exception to the AOC “spend more on elite sport” line, arguing that rural and regional sports organisations are operating on a shoestring and getting little or no government support, when investment would help reinvigorate those areas as well as improve performance.</p>
<p>That highlights the dilemma for the Australian government in both its current and possible future forms. Going into election mode, <a href="http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/08/08/gold-medal-funding-means-more-gold-medals-right/">neither side wants to hint at cutting sports funds</a> even though, as one observer points out, that Olympic funding might help solve more essential problems, like the ongoing lack of funding for our hospitals.</p>
<p>Yet neither side has a justified and logical position on why elite sport should be funded as it has been. Governments, too, have remained in “old context”, but this London performance might just see the Crawford report dusted off, at least, as a precursor to “new context” thinking where taxpayers see any investment in sport made “accountable,” transparent" and subject to “value for money.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/8661/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian Stoddart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It is now more than 30 years since the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) opened in Canberra, so it was predictable that a modest, rather than overwhelmingly successful campaign at the London Olympics…Brian Stoddart, Distinguished Fellow, Australia-India Institute, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.