Open Letter - Frustration at Cycling Australia

[AUbicycles]

Rob Arnold is the proprietor of Ride Media.

I was interested to learn that he has penned an open letter to Cycling Australia to highlight his frustration with the recent changes, focus and operation.

In summary he outlined:

• Cycling Australia’s main remit is to be an administrator: it is not a race promoter, not a media outlet, not a lobby group.
• Cycling Australia should place a greater emphasis on grassroots development and be more inclusive to all associated with the sport – not just elite competition.
• Cycling Australia should cooperate with its stakeholders rather than against them.
• Cycling Australia should communicate better – by being open and accountable; full transparency will greatly improve credibility.
• Cycling Australia should provide better value membership packages – or customisable options that suit its constituency better than the existing options.
• Cycling Australia is prone to announcing “reviews” but there is little subsequent communication. The NRS “review”, for example, was announced in January and yet no one knows of any affirmative action from this process – not the media, the promoters, the teams, or the sponsors.

The full letter is here: http://www.ridemedia.com.au/features/an ... australia/


I have heard plenty of comments from club riders and from inside the bike industry so this it is not unexpected that this is raised. What are your thoughts?

[foo on patrol]

It's right on the mark!

Foo

[Arbuckle23]

Spent a lot of the last 30 years involved in motorsport (still am).
Sounds a lot like dealing with CAMS.

[fat and old]

It sounds like dealing with any group that has competition for the dollar.

I can't begin to understand the issues faced by the media (I'll stay with that as the open letter was written by a media stakeholder and presented here by another) in dealing with CA. I can however make this point. The letter states:

And the need to kowtow to the Australian Sports Commission for the sake of attaining important, and significant, government funding illustrates that the stated objectives are only an afterthought typeset on an annual report for the sake of achieving some semblance of a feel-good factor others can nod along to.

If the aim is to “inspire Australians to ride”, it seems odd that such a strong emphasis is placed upon Olympic success.

The recent media focus on Anna Meares seems to suggest that Olympic/Games/WCC success is important for cycling's exposure. Do we really believe that the English experience of the last 10 years is something unique to that country?

I’ve often said that one of cycling’s major problems is that many of those involved believe they are the most important entity for the success of the sport:

This too is not unique. Ever seen the silverbacks go at it in the boardroom? Ever worked in a small office? Ever grown up and experienced life? Get used to it. There's always somebody who thinks it's their duty to frame the answers to life's problems that only they can see.

Why can’t we ride together instead of in separate bunches, each with our own ambitions?

Because cycling is essentially an individual pursuit. This should be obvious to any observer, and factored into any ideas, conversations, projects, outlooks etc. Especially when you move away from "organised" cycling which I believe is what most would associate CA with and attempt to cross over to "inspiring Australians to ride".

Actually....why does the author believe that CA should move away from what he terms

sports administration

?

towards something else? There's something missing here, and it's hard to understand his frustration without all the pieces.

[Thoglette]

It sounds like dealing with any group that has competition for the dollar.
.... The letter states:

If the aim is to “inspire Australians to ride (racing bikes)”, it seems odd that such a strong emphasis is placed upon Olympic success.

The recent media focus on Anna Meares seems to suggest that Olympic/Games/WCC success is important for cycling's (as a sport ) exposure. Do we really believe that the English experience of the last 10 years is something unique to that country?

There, fixed it. CA is a road/velodrome bicycle racing organisation, beknighted by the UCI.

This too is not unique.

Not wrong. Refer to the comment on CAMS above.

The recent success of Australian athletes-on-bicycles overseas has resulted in more money swirling around here. And the resulting angst is completely inevitable.

Ask anyone involved in any Pro/Am sport (especially if operating under the licence of an international body) and you won't have to wait long before someone gives you a "free and frank" description of the politics and personalities.

Or, for that matter, watch "Strictly Ballroom".

[g-boaf]

Politics are normal in any organisation. There is always one or two people who have strongly differing opinions and who like to exercise their influence to better their lot, sometimes when it isn't the best decision.

Even the media has these problems.

I have only occasional dealings with CA and our state body, so I won't go in guns blazing towards either side.

[duncanm]

same problem with so many sporting organisations in Australia.

They have become captive to their Olympic (taxpayer) dollar, at the expense of the ground roots - which they now pay lip service to.

2015 annual report
approx 11 mil from the taxpayer
2 mil membership fees
3 mil events

19 mil total revenue.

Where do you think they're going to focus?