A Sporting Secession? There Would Appear To Be Grounds For One.

According to The Australian Newspaper today there may be a sporting secession about to take place in Australia. As far-fetched as that may sound to many, there are other issues at play that make it a possibility.

The newspaper stated that Billionaire Andrew Forrest, who has been bankrolling Global Rapid Rugby to keep the Western Force franchise alive after it was cut from Super Rugby had thrown up the idea of a stand-alone West Australian team at international level. This was however only if Rugby Australia refused to properly engage with Western Australia. The newspaper quoted Mr Forrest as saying “It would be devastating if the states began to explore other options, such as the creation of an alternative union, but if pushed into a corner I believe this is something the rugby community and the state would get behind.”

Rugby Australia are not the only ones that need to beware of discontent in the West.

Sport Australia (formerly the Australian Sports Commission) is trying to implement a reform of sport in Australia under a project named “One Management and One Sport.” This has ruffled more than a few feathers in Western Australia and a few other states.

Interestingly we raised a similar issue in 2015 when we asked “Should Non-Elite Sport Be Run As A Business?”

The idea being put forward currently is that every sport will be run from one central office, and there will no longer be State Bodies running the sport locally. There will be staff on the ground, but the staff numbers will be heavily reduced and they will report directly to a staff member at the central location.

First of all one of the concerns that many states outside of New South Wales and Victoria have is that we are likely to see all of the sports run from these two centres. As currently most National Sporting Organisations have their bases in the cities of Sydney or Melbourne. The reason many of us are told this is the case is because this is where supposedly the sponsorship dollars are, and they are closer to Government.

The Australian Institute of Sport which is Canberra-based ceased offering offered scholarships directly to athletes in 2014, this was all part of the heavily criticised Australia’s Winning Edge 2012-2022 strategy; a program implements by the Australian Sports Commission, now Sport Australia. The fact that athletes no longer receive scholarships does beg the question as to why they are not now receiving Superannuation, as this was never paid because they were on scholarships!

Many national sporting organisations are still utilizing the AIS facilities and services and some are still located in Canberra. The AIS Website states that when it comes to sports not based in Canberra “The AIS does continue to support other athletes in other sports however they are self funded and not under the National Training Centre banner.”

Sports that are not based in Canberra, and that fall under this banner are diving, squash, softball and cricket (men & women) which are administered from Brisbane, while sailing and slalom canoeing are administered from Sydney. Sprint canoeing, triathlon and BMX are run from the Gold Coast, and Road cycling, track cycling and beach volleyball are administered from Adelaide. Winter sports in partnership with the Olympic Winter Institute of Australia are run from Melbourne

The Hockey program has its High performance unit in Perth, but its administration in Melbourne. Although this may change as Victoria is looking to try and woo the sport away from the city that has been its spiritual home since 1984, Perth. Many believe that the success of the program since then should see the administrators move West rather than the highly successful athlete program move East.

The concern in relation to these new reforms is not only that Western Australian sport will be controlled by people in an office 3,934Km away if they are in Sydney and 3,406Km away if in Melbourne, but the way in which the National Sporting Organisations and Sport Australia has gone about trying to implement these changes. The tactics used were described by one CEO who asked to remain nameless “as very close to standover tactics.”

That does not sound an unfair assessment when it is disclosed that the sporting bodies must sign up to this new management structure or face the possibility of “penalties.”

What the National Sporting Associations and Sport Australia are assuming is that funding currently handed out by the State Governments to their State Sporting Associations will be re-directed into the central pot for their use. It is pleasing to hear that many of the State Sports Ministers across the country have been quick to advise that this will not be the case. Having no State Sporting Association, could well result in no money from the State Government for that sport, and the funds being diverted elsewhere in the State’s economy.

There is no feasible way that any State Government can contribute funds to a centrally based management system without being assured of certain key issues, one being having representation at National Level to ensure that that money is directed back into the State, to benefit the electorate and the sports in that State. Only a fool would hand over such money without such guarantees.

It is very pleasing to hear that the Western Australian Sports Minister, the Honourable Mick Murray has apparently authorised funds so that the State Sporting bodies under threat can obtain legal advice.

It is also understood that there has been a call to suspend the “One Management and One Sport” reform process, as there are many issues that have been flagged and that are causing concern.

It would appear that bullying tactics have been used to try and force State Sporting Associations to relinquish control and bow down to the powers that be over East and at Sport Australia.

It is rumoured that if Western Australian State Sporting Associations do not sign over their legal assets and rights, then Western Australian athletes will not be eligible for National and International selection! This seems hard to believe. It honestly defies belief that in a move to try and implement unity you would promote disunity. As such a move can only create disagreement and a great deal of conflict.

Many dismissed Andrew Forrest’s comments in the Australian newspaper today as being hot air, but it would appear that his comments are in fact backed up by a great deal of animosity and disenchantment from those on the West coast with those running Sport on the East coast of Australia.

If those rumoured threats are indeed true, and if a National Sporting Organisation made a conscious decision to not select an athlete worthy of their place simply because they could not gain control of the State Sporting Association, their assets, and the Government money, it would be a very Black day for Australian sport.

Is Succession really the answer? The problem facing a Secession in any Sport is that the National Organisation is the member of the World Body Governing that sport, and they would in most cases have to table such a proposal. That is unless Western Australia had people who were able to obtain an audience with the powerbrokers and explain their case.

Just like the Secession movement that crops up every decade in Western Australia, this one is unlikely to ever eventuate, however one feels that the Sporting Landscape is definitely going to shift. As Andrew Forrest has done with his Western Force, expect more Western Australian sporting bodies to look to Asia rather than Eastern Australia. After all they are in fact closer than Sydney or Melbourne, and potentially offer greater financial benefits.