Treacy admits funding still lacks focus

Assuming Olympic performance is based on at least four years of preparation, you can't easily explain it all in a couple of hours.

Yesterday, John Treacy of the Irish Sports Council at least tried. In the end it was clear funding played a significant part in the preparations, but perhaps not the most important one.

Treacy's audience was the Oireachtas Committee on Arts and Sport, and the subject was still fresh in the minds of the Irish public. The Sports Council had been called before the committee to address a broad range of issues to do with Ireland's performance at the Athens Olympics, not least the perception that Irish athletes had performed poorly.

The issue of funding was always prominent, the committee examining whether Olympic athletes and their governing bodies got too much or too little, or simply needed to spend their money more wisely.

Treacy, the Sports Council's chief executive, opened that end of the discussion with a reference to Cathal Lombard, the runner who failed a drugs test shortly before he was due to depart for Athens. The Council would be writing to Lombard to get back the funding he received over the past year: around €18,500.

"Obviously that was a very serious case," said Treacy, responding to the suggestion that drug testing should be more strictly enforced after such investments.

"But drug testing is very much a part of the carding scheme, and part of the criteria for funding is that athletes give their whereabouts at all times so they can be tested at whatever point we wish. And if they're not giving their whereabouts there's no funding."

Yet there is, admitted Treacy, a definite need to review the entire funding process, which should be completed by next year.

He was asked if there should be some obligation for funded athletes to give something back to the sport, such as by visiting schools or coaching clinics.

"Part of the criteria is that they compete in their national championships, but it's really up to the governing bodies to use the athletes in the best way they can, and a lot of them just aren't that organised.

"But the carding scheme is under review because it is too broad. And we do need to focus more on junior athletes, and those looking at Beijing and beyond. But right now you're only talking about one or two athletes in Ireland making any sort of money, so the funding is absolutely necessary.

"Also, the international criteria that gets athletes onto the scheme is too broad. But an important part of the carding scheme is recognition of their achievement."

From the views of the committee, it was clear funding was a key factor but that the days of athletes just being handed money should end. The investment in preparations for Athens was significant, over €7.7 million through the three-year period. This included €1.44 million to the Olympic Council of Ireland (OCI) and €695,000 to the Paralympic Council.

The share going to some of the sporting bodies was remarkable: €844,562 to boxing, €887,020 to rowing and €1,087,000 to sailing. Athletics, which remains the centrepiece of the Olympics, got €538,192.

On the more general issue of how the Irish performed in Athens, Treacy said the two main ambitions were accomplished.

"We made a commitment that the Irish team would be the best-prepared ever, and this was accomplished. We also intended to improve on our Sydney performance with a view to Beijing and beyond, and on close examination the Irish Olympic team produced some exceptional results.

"Cian O'Connor led the way with his individual show-jumping gold medal. This alone would have put us ahead of Sydney, but the improvements ran much deeper.

"It is acknowledged that there were a number of performances that were disappointing, and no one feels that more than the athletes themselves. However, the Sports Council is satisfied that the steps we have taken since Sydney have supported our athletes in a meaningful way."

An Athens review is already under way, with a steering group chaired by Dan Flinter, to be delivered by the end of next year.

Treacy noted that 28 of the 29 Sydney review recommendations were implemented.

The committee, however, wanted to know about other high-priority recommendations, such as a national institute for sport. Treacy simply pointed to the current limits on their resources.

"We do need to ensure the athletes have all the supports in place. All our competitors throughout the world are doing the same thing. We've also been compared to New Zealand in terms of size. Well, I know New Zealand have had a high-performance strategy in place for 25 years. I've said before that it's going to take 15 or 20 years for our strategy to come up to speed, that we'd be playing catch-up for a while.

"But I think the attitude that we should be coming back with a truckload of medals is not based on reality. We're not ever going to do that. Bringing back two or three medals from the Olympics will mean we have done exceptionally well."