The Maladministration of cycling in Australia

[Tok1960]

The Maladministration of cycling in Australia

As a spectator of cycling I am amazed by the frequency of scandals which affects this sport year after year. Cycling is a commercial business and not a complex one at that. The organisations which administer the sport, federations like CA and AIS, are small enterprises tasked to do simple administration. But they are a monopoly, guaranteed public funding and as shown have serious problems. To date, due to their structure, they seem accountable to no one.

The topic of this thread is Maladministration and Nepotism. To my knowledge CA has been chaired and managed by mostly the same executives and board members for 15 years. During this period CA has been involved in many scandals. It is a failed organisation by any reasonable measure. AIS had the Del Monte affair and more. But as I read and learn more CA's primary funder the ASC is intertwined in the management and oversight of the professional cycling team (AIS is a operating subsidiary of ASC). Considering CA is near fully funded by the ASC they are also in effect a operating annex of the AIS. Obviously the government would dispute this but to my knowledge AIS public servants, CA employees and contractors work side by side on a daily basis. Hence the grey area delineating management oversight and responsibilities. In the past ASC and CA shared Chairmans, committees were co-chaired, operational facilities jointly used and coaches were predominately ASC employees (public servants).

So the question for members in the know is who is employed by whom? Who reports to who? Who operates/owns/leases the offices, facilities and overheads of cycling in Australia? I believe this is important because the administration problems in Australian cycling are not new and as I remember reared its ugly head before the Sydney games. Then the ASC seized control of the management and financial responsibilities for a period of about two years. After this it was handed back to very same persons whom it removed it from. Are many of these individuals in cycling positions friends, colleagues or relatives (conflict of interests in appointments?).

I believe it would make a interesting graphic and chronological chart. Also I suspect looking at the current fiasco the time has come for the books, finances, contracts and awards to be publicly scrutinised of these organisations. Considering they are a expense on the public purse every cent should be accounted in full exposure. Remembering SMH (shown: http://www.smh.com.au/national/defence-expenditure-20100305-poci.html )were able to obtain the DOD finances, contract awards, engagement expenses and near every expense made for 10 years I cannot see why ASC, AIS and CA should withhold such information (its the public purse isn't it?).

To kick it off this is what I know (google ). Cut & paste, make corrections and add more info please. And add any information about purchasing, contracts, sourcing, sponsor deals, consulting or whatever. Time to turn the table on the operators, pension recipients, managers and sitting officials so the next generation of youth have a 'healthy' chance in the sport of cycling.


CA President RAY GODKIN
President Australian Cycling (1985-2000); Elected President Oceania Cycling Confederation (1986 -…); President Australian Commonwealth Games Association (1986-1998); Technical Delegate Commonwealth Games (1990 , 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006); Vice President and Treasurer FIAC (until 1992); Member Jury of Appeal (1992- 1996); Executive member Australian Olympic Committee (1994-1998); Competition Manager Sydney Olympics (2000); UCI Vice-President (1991-…) ; President of the UCI Track Commission ; Member of the UCI Training and Development Commission.

Notes: ??

AIS Coach CHARLIE WALSH
Gained an F.I.A.C./U.C.I. International Cycling Coaches Diploma in East Germany (1982); Head Cycling Coach AIS (1987-2001); Developed and conducted International Coaching Courses in Switzerland and other countries for U.C.I. & International Olympic Solidarity (2000-....);

Notes: Cycling coach at the South Australian Sports Institute until about 1987 with Mike Turtur; From 2004 to 2011 Walsh assisted Adelaide coach Neil Craig who was also a consultant to AIS cycling?;

AIS MICHAEL FLYNN
(wasn't he the AIS HP manager who departed before the Athens Games (i.e. Del Monte saga), then off to UCI, NZ and back to the AIS?);

Notes: ??

CA GENNIE SHEER
CA Director, Media and Communications (1997-...); Sheer Rhetoric Marketing & Communications Manager, Cycling Australia (contractor or employee of CA?); Media Manager - Santos Tour Down Under
South Australian Tourism Commission (2000-...);

Notes: ??

CA GRAHAM FREDERICKS
CA CEO (??- ...); Sports Administrator of the Year Recipient (2008);

Notes: ??

CA UCI PHIL BATES
CA Board Member (??-??); UCI arbitration member (??-??);

Notes: ??

 

[eljimberino]

Anthony Tan, that you?

 

[blackcat]

think its PARK Chan-Wook's Old Boy character Dae-Su.

Everyone knows TanMan is addicted to his blue velvet like a heroin addict on a bender

 

[DirtyWorks]

If you stick with the research long enough, you'll discover most countries that have a UCI affiliated federation are organized in a similar manner. You may also find that IOC-blessed sports are legislated a monopoly.

I think you'd find quite a number of features that standardizes an athlete feeder system and sports monopoly for the IOC's fourth-year epic entertainment event and a lack of transparency to go along with it.

What the IOC has accomplished is remarkable really. It dwarfs Hein's considerable accomplishments.

BTW, it's okay to call cycling dirty. Just don't examine swimming too closely!

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

If you stick with the research long enough, you'll discover most countries that have a UCI affiliated federation are organized in a similar manner. You may also find that IOC-blessed sports are legislated a monopoly.

I think you'd find quite a number of features that standardizes an athlete feeder system and sports monopoly for the IOC's fourth-year epic entertainment event and a lack of transparency to go along with it.

What the IOC has accomplished is remarkable really. It dwarfs Hein's considerable accomplishments.

BTW, it's okay to call cycling dirty. Just don't examine swimming too closely!

This 10 char

 

[Tok1960]

I suspect CA and AIS operate more like a union. I agree that most most countries who have a UCI affiliated federation are organized in a similar manner. This doesn't make it right. In CA case they have a fiduciary responsibility to their members and funders and without full transparency they have been accountable to no one.

There is no point in Australians feeling superior and believing the political spin the ASC and its AIS are 'world class' organisations. Corruption is seeping into the Australian fabric just as it is into other Western systems. They are not immune.

There is no cause for complacency in Australia sporting federations either. The truth is the recent New South Wales ICAC hearings have revealed massive corruption in the previous NSW Government. Here the former NSW Resources Minister Ian McDonald conferred “massive cascading profits” of $100 million on his then colleague Eddie Obeid. Obeid’s alleged dedication to public service didn’t stop him turning his hand to a little business when the opportunity presented itself. Like when its been reported he acquired a investment property and sold it the following day to the NSW Housing Department for a $300,000 profit. The ICAC enquiry has shown that politicians and legislative members continued to aggregate considerable business assets while pursuing a political career.

Your blind to believe sporting officials and federation employees are not unlike some politicians and public servants who have developed a sense of entitlement as a corollary of their service. The historical structure and near lifetime appointments within sporting organisations exposes itself to charges of cronyism through the appointment of associates, friends, colleagues and in some instances relatives. This cost is ultimately borne by the taxpayer. Like a corporate entity appointments should be strictly based on merit and performance: not cronyism!

This idea that people in life long roles at sporting federations have the right to spend other people’s money on themselves has clearly been entrenched in the Australian union movement for many years. A case in point is the existence of slush funds was simply the icing on the cake of a larger slice of pie. Look at the Health Services Union enquiry which has shown that substantial amounts of members’ fees have been diverted to the personal gratification of officials. Corruption also exists at universities which has been shown in the recent prosecution of a NSW University IT manager.

The sooner a ICAC empowered body is assembled with the powers to forensically investigate, call witnesses, demand records and files of Australian cycling bodies including the AIS little will change. Until then this creeping corruption and cronyism seeping into the system and structure of Australian cycling is an insidious infection that impacts negatively on the sport, careers of cyclists (youth), sponsors and return on investment for the tax payer. Until then the cronyism in this sector will only continue to undermine the real potential which exists for cycling as a professional and amateur sport.

So I believe mapping the historical appointments and relationships of CA and its structure with AIS should raise a few eyebrows. But from experience the fastest way forward to force change is to expose corrupt financial dealings. Exposing maladministration and corrupt practices in purchasing, contracts, sourcing, sponsor deals, consulting or whatever forces the parties to answer to the authorities. Change would then be near immediate. Complete sacking of the current organisation.

OFF TOPIC: If a AIS or CA or cycling employee was involved in the provision of drugs; or, acted in manner to the detriment of health and performance of a athlete and team; or, acted and committed a offence to the detriment of good will awarded to financial sponsors; then could the AIS or CA or cycling employee face potential legal action? Also, as I see it any clean athlete who may have had a opportunity to ride professionally, thus earn a income, and who failed to qualify for selection or refused to toe the party line to dope and cheat, has been deprived of a potential income and livelihood. Just a thought.

 

[Tok1960]

Anthony Tan, that you?

I googled 'Anthony Tan'. Unfortunately I am not Anthony Tan - I am on the otherside of the tube watching

 

[blackcat]

well, jobie dajka is a black mark

 

[fatsprintking]

As DirtyWorks has said about 50 times in about 50 different ways, while the key performance indicatiors for the sport relate to olympic results, we are p-----g in the wind.

But will anyone have the stones to change this? Yes the administration of cycling is all screwed up in all countries (unless someone can give me a country where they have it all worked out). But my belief is that you cant "fix" the current system - you have to scrap it and create a new one, but that will require an acknowledgment of how big the problem is and to what levels it extends and I cant see this happening.

Oh the despair...

 

[peterst6906]

some invented links between political corruption at the upper levels and lack of opportunities for talent to shine

Sorry, but while I admire your attempt to justify your position, your argument demonstrates that you have no real knowledge or experience with cycling in Australia.

You've invented connections that aren't backed up by the evidence you can go and see for yourself every weekend.

While there very well may be some people who take advantage of their position, that hardly has a huge influence on the bulk of the competitive cycling community in the country and at the grass roots level (from U9 upwards) cycling as a competitive sport is more active in developing talent than it has been for quite a while.

Even just last night with the Clarence Street Cyclery Cup in Sydney, Cycling NSW was able to get Mark Renshaw and Graeme Brown along to race against the up and coming talent in the State and they happily signed race numbers and autographs for the juniors, who also had parts of their program mixed in with the senior program. For pros to make themselves totally accessible to the kids just starting out and for the program to be structured so that everyone was competing together is a huge positive, not evidence of cronyism.

That's the type of thing that happens weekly, not only in NSW but across Australia. Series like the National Junior Track Series, Junior Road Series, National Road Series have all either been introduced in the last couple of years (eg. National Junior Track Series) or have been enhanced and, with funding support provided through CA, provide a great introduction to the sport, providing kids down to U15 age with funding and subsidies to race all over the country.

Some of the next batch of great talent out of Australia (Caleb Ewan, Travis Smedley, Michael Rice, Angela Smith, Scott Law...the list goes on) and all of their competitors have benefited, not through corruption at the top, but because of the support and innovation that the top of the sport is providing.

Go visit a meet or few and you might just change your mind.

 

[Tinman]

You've invented connections that aren't backed up by the evidence you can go and see for yourself every weekend.

The 2 are not mutually exclusive...

 

[blackcat]

As DirtyWorks has said about 50 times in about 50 different ways, while the key performance indicatiors for the sport relate to olympic results, we are p-----g in the wind.

But will anyone have the stones to change this? Yes the administration of cycling is all screwed up in all countries (unless someone can give me a country where they have it all worked out). But my belief is that you cant "fix" the current system - you have to scrap it and create a new one, but that will require an acknowledgment of how big the problem is and to what levels it extends and I cant see this happening.

Oh the despair...

but the KPI is perfect. The public demand medals. See the tabloid media for London Olympics, and the hue and cry over the swim team. They only exist to win medals for the ignorant and stupid jingoists. its a shame.

 

[peterst6906]

The 2 are not mutually exclusive...

In what sense? Are you saying it's possible he's invented connections, but that those connections are correct?

If so, it's rubbish. Whatever corruption, nepotism or cronyism there may be at the top of the sport, it is not affecting the opportunities for cyclists to develop.

The ability of riders to develop up through the junior ranks and have opportunities to advance further is greater now than it's been for a while.

In addition, the claim that because there is political corruption within the State, this must lead to wider problems involving all portfolios and all levels within Government is wrong. There are plenty of hard working, honest public servants who put in the hours, irrespective of the politicians.

Same with the cycling. Irrespective of what the top administration may be doing in the country, there are plenty of honest, hard working people (including many, many volunteers and parents of young riders) that aren't affected by that. However it still stands that much of the innovation in competition and opportunities over the last couple of years have been led by senior management.

 

[fatsprintking]

In what sense? Are you saying it's possible he's invented connections, but that those connections are correct?

If so, it's rubbish. Whatever corruption, nepotism or cronyism there may be at the top of the sport, it is not affecting the opportunities for cyclists to develop.

The ability of riders to develop up through the junior ranks and have opportunities to advance further is greater now than it's been for a while.

In addition, the claim that because there is political corruption within the State, this must lead to wider problems involving all portfolios and all levels within Government is wrong. There are plenty of hard working, honest public servants who put in the hours, irrespective of the politicians.

Same with the cycling. Irrespective of what the top administration may be doing in the country, there are plenty of honest, hard working people (including many, many volunteers and parents of young riders) that aren't affected by that. However it still stands that much of the innovation in competition and opportunities over the last couple of years have been led by senior management.

I dont think anyone is saying that there are not opportunities to develop younger riders and it may very well be that good people with good ideas are driving this, but the issue will be what occurs when those people reach elite pro level. The question is has anything really changed?

Time will tell I guess.

 

[Tinman]

In what sense? Are you saying it's possible he's invented connections, but that those connections are correct?

If so, it's rubbish. Whatever corruption, nepotism or cronyism there may be at the top of the sport, it is not affecting the opportunities for cyclists to develop.

The ability of riders to develop up through the junior ranks and have opportunities to advance further is greater now than it's been for a while.

In addition, the claim that because there is political corruption within the State, this must lead to wider problems involving all portfolios and all levels within Government is wrong. There are plenty of hard working, honest public servants who put in the hours, irrespective of the politicians.

Same with the cycling. Irrespective of what the top administration may be doing in the country, there are plenty of honest, hard working people (including many, many volunteers and parents of young riders) that aren't affected by that. However it still stands that much of the innovation in competition and opportunities over the last couple of years have been led by senior management.

I suspect we are talking same thing.

Corruption by senior officials (financial nepotism and/or supporting doping) is not mutually exclusive with working hard for junior programs and sports promotion, etc. And sadly that's where the problem in Australia is likely to be. Many of these guys have done a great job for cycling, but they are also (likely) to be a big part of the doping and financial nepotism problem.

If you are serious about doping and transparency you cannot have/retain these guys in leadership positions.

 

[peterst6906]

I suspect we are talking same thing.

Yep, absolutely.

My only problem was with this quote from Tok:

There is no cause for complacency in Australia sporting federations either. The truth is the recent New South Wales ICAC hearings have revealed massive corruption in the previous NSW Government. Here the former NSW Resources Minister Ian McDonald conferred “massive cascading profits” of $100 million on his then colleague Eddie Obeid. Obeid’s alleged dedication to public service didn’t stop him turning his hand to a little business when the opportunity presented itself. Like when its been reported he acquired a investment property and sold it the following day to the NSW Housing Department for a $300,000 profit. The ICAC enquiry has shown that politicians and legislative members continued to aggregate considerable business assets while pursuing a political career.

Your blind to believe sporting officials and federation employees are not unlike some politicians and public servants who have developed a sense of entitlement as a corollary of their service. The historical structure and near lifetime appointments within sporting organisations exposes itself to charges of cronyism through the appointment of associates, friends, colleagues and in some instances relatives. This cost is ultimately borne by the taxpayer. Like a corporate entity appointments should be strictly based on merit and performance: not cronyism!

It doesn't follow that corruption amongst politicians means that federation employees are the same. The evidence I have seen (and which anyone can see any weekend of the year at different events) is almost the exact opposite of a feeling of entitlement amongst most of the people working in the sport.

 

[Tinman]

Cycling news article today on the NSW Grand Prix next week.

"Defending NSW Grand Prix champion Chris 'CJ' Sutton (Sky) believes he will face stiff opposition in claiming a third title when the two-race series gets underway next Saturday December 8 at Cronulla. The event continues the following day at Wollongong."

Event organizer = Phil Bates, father in law, St George cycling club president, and also on UCI disciplinary committee.

Wonder what the doping control process will be for this event.

 

[Garry Allen]

Cycling news article today on the NSW Grand Prix next week.

"Defending NSW Grand Prix champion Chris 'CJ' Sutton (Sky) believes he will face stiff opposition in claiming a third title when the two-race series gets underway next Saturday December 8 at Cronulla. The event continues the following day at Wollongong."

Event organizer = Phil Bates, father in law, St George cycling club president, and also on UCI disciplinary committee.

Wonder what the doping control process will be for this event.

Depends whether the NSW Police set up an RBT site on President Avenue. Or the dog squad takes the drug detection dogs to Cronulla Station. Otherwise you can expect the same controls as a post tour criterium.

 

[Tinman]

What a joke. How can anyone take such conflict of interest and presumed lack of doping control seriously at a time like this in the sport.

I wonder to what extent sponsors are aware of this. Several major public institutions forking out money. Time to ask some serious questions Australian cycling journalists and media. It's your backyard.

http://www.nswgrandprixcycling.com.au/nswgpc/Sponsors.html

 

[Garry Allen]

Drug testing? Do they drug test at the post tour criteriums?

 

[Ferminal]

Cycling news article today on the NSW Grand Prix next week.

"Defending NSW Grand Prix champion Chris 'CJ' Sutton (Sky) believes he will face stiff opposition in claiming a third title when the two-race series gets underway next Saturday December 8 at Cronulla. The event continues the following day at Wollongong."

Event organizer = Phil Bates, father in law, St George cycling club president, and also on UCI disciplinary committee.

Wonder what the doping control process will be for this event.

No Australians dope anymore, so no need for drug testing.

 

[Tok1960]

Cycling is a mess because of the union and federation management teams. These people have led a disinformation campaign for years to cover up their incompetence or dare I say wrong doings. They have held onto their positions through a comprehensive program of lies and denials.

Cycling Australia and AIS executives, board members and employees are expected to maintain higher standards of integrity than the rest of us: this is because they want us to trust what they tell us. This trust is more abstract than that we share with others. Why? We do not know these public figures and we rely on their integrity because they are asking us to make commitments on the basis of their advice. These commitments include access to public funds for salaries and expenses at mostly the public expense. When significant facts come to light about their behaviour, past or present, the public are entitled to undertake vigorous due diligence, ask questions or to rely on the media to do it for us. Cycling Australia and AIS don't seem to get this. In the recent troubling matters which have arisen at Cycling Australia and within cycling management in Australia (which includes the AIS) a full and transparent explanation is necessary but in each case these officials seem to believe that, because they may not be personally guilty of wrong doing, no detailed explanation is necessary.

In the case of Cycling Australia CEO and President their disclosures and statements are wavering and shallow. None of their statements to my knowledge point to their involvement in any wrongdoing. But then nobody knows how many skeletons lie in the closet. Rather they infer Cycling Australia CEO and management was duped by wrongdoers with whom they admit having close personal relationships with (i.e. CA President Mueller statement said Hodge is a close friend). Not only does this suggest a degree of nepotism at Cycling Australia but it shows ethical and professional misconduct. The President of Cycling Australia, a solicitor, has however, decided to mount a pedantic defence that his board and executives has no case to answer based on employment law. But obtaining benefit by deceit, be it monetary or position or whatever, is undoubtedly wrong and the accused should be dealt with accordingly.

The public should be furious with Cycling Australia President Mueller statement: http://soundcloud.com/cycling-central/cycling-australia-president-2 . Here we have Mueller evangelising Cycling Australia VP (Hodge) who obtained his position and athletic pedigree by deceit. Weeks before we had the exposure of fellow CA member Matt White. Both these individuals exposure was a direct result of a foreign investigation into cycling: the LA case by USADA. The very investigation which Cycling Australia President Mueller peddled publicly a flawed argument about jurisdiction followed by CEO Graham Fredericks seeking out the public airwaves to in essence campaign for LA's legal defense team. So here we have the Cycling Australia President, himself a lawyer, making flawed statements along with the CEO. One would think as a legal practitioner he would had been aware of the legality of Court ruling? But then by his very own admission on SBS Central he admitted as a solicitor he neither understands Australian employment law. Where is CEO Graham Fredericks, recipient of a Australian Sporting Hall of Fame award for sports administration, in recent weeks? He is silent.

Cycling Australia CEO and Chairman have pivotal roles which requires them both to understand the bigger picture. Both must have strong focus on its members, akin to shareholders of a company, and up hold their value. The CEO and President positions demand leadership in establishing vision and setting the tone in such areas as integrity and ethics. But the positions have differences. CEO Graham Fredericks is more 24/7 whereas President Mueller is part-time. Consequently, CEO Fredericks 'should' be more abreast with the details of business, human resource development, succession planning and overall general management. So why is CEO Fredericks suddenly silenced and President Mueller, a lawyer, going live on SBS Central http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/video/2294497565/Cycling-Central-doping-discussion to answer questions from the interview panel members including Michael Ashenden? During the course of the interview President Mueller was evasive about crucial matters. On questions about Allan Davis files from Ashenden President Mueller said "I don't know the answer to that ....... In what year are we speaking about ....... You got to understand I am the honorary President of the organisation. I don't receive those files. The administration do. And their protocol is to hand over whatever they get ahhh and I am confident that if they received those files they would've been handed on". How convenient Graham Fredericks didn't appear to answer questions which as the chief administrator he must have the answers!

Or is the structuring of the ASC and AIS high performance teams and funding mechanisms intentionally at arms length from the government. I raise this point because Cycling Australia sole quasi shareholder (financier) is in reality the ASC. Without ASC annual funding Cycling Australia would be insolvent. Now we have the ASC, which I argue is the single most powerful controlling shareholder of Cycling Australia, conducting an allegedly independent investigation of Cycling Australia (itself) under the auspices of the Minister. It will be a hard slog for any independent investigation team to discover the underlying truth. There would no paper trail and no way to verify much wrong doing because rogues don't keep records or either destroy them. The terms of reference speak for themselves (see here: http://www.katelundy.com.au/2012/11/07/former-judge-appointed-to-head-cycling-review/ ). Its a administrative process review only NOT a investigation. A judge doesn't investigate.

Until a investigation is conducted then little will change. The flawed system begins with the administration process and funding mechanisms set by the Government itself, the ASC. The ASC, AIS and CA are again reviewing oneself! Reads like the Del Monte affair 8 years later! Until the financial affairs, contracts, awards and business dealings of these bodies are fully investigated and the management are compelled to answer questions the skeletons remain in the closet.

 

[Tok1960]

Sorry, but while I admire your attempt to justify your position, your argument demonstrates that you have no real knowledge or experience with cycling in Australia.

You've invented connections that aren't backed up by the evidence you can go and see for yourself every weekend.

Firstly, there is no connection between weekend events, mostly run by good-willed volunteers. I am writing about maladministration at the top.

Finally, if you take the time to read Cycling Australia annual reports you will notice something - they are shallow, self promoting and lack financial detail and substance. Considering this organisation is near fully government funded, and the Government has decided to 'review' the administrative and management processes of a beneficiary to the tune of 8M per year of public funds, albeit too late, something is wrong. My analogy is corruption does occur, even at the very top echelons of power, and all too frequent at government funded non profit organisations.

 

[hughmoore]

I would have thought Cycling in Australia is booming sport.

More and more cyclists out riding every weekend
Great results by Anna Meares in Olympics and some of the young riders.
Cadel Evans won the TDF last year
We have our own Pro Team in GreenEdge
TDU getting bigger every year and contract with SA Govt exteneded another 5 years or so

What more do you want?

Hugh

 

[Tok1960]

Its all very obvious isn't it? Ever wondered why the UCI became so protective when they have allowed the USADA to prosecute in the past. Do they have something to hide? Why has Cycling Australia and Turtur been so publicly vocal with disinformation to the local media. When Armstrong goes down, I am talking about lawsuits in Texas from his former sponsors, then I think the UCI will be pulled to pieces and exposed. For example, TDU and South Australian government attendance fees will be exposed and much more.

As I see it the UCI has moved heaven and hell to protect themselves and as such protected Armstrong. I'm speculating but it should make you think. Remembering former Cycling Australia President Godkin became the VP at UCI! Fellow board member Bates also holds positions at the UCI! Turtur, once a member at CA, resides on the UCI Committee! The former ASC Chairman and CA President Peter Bartels held marketing roles with the UCI! Michael Flynn, Charlie Walsh and the list goes on.

I smell a rat. Conflicts of interests are everywhere. Cycling Australia is a franchise of whom?