‘The athlete has no voice’: war on water erupts

Our Olympic rowing team has been dealt a huge blow after a mass walkout from the sport’s new centralised program.

Olympic rower Karstern Forsterling before a training session on the Yarra River yesterday Picture: David Geraghty

One of Australia’s most senior Olympic rowers has launched a scathing attack on the governance of his sport, saying recent changes have damaged the sport and ­compromised athlete welfare.

To add insult to injury, Rio Games silver medallist Karsten Forsterling said Campaign Number One (CNO) — designed to take Rowing Australia to global domination — had one set of rules for athletes and another for ­administrators.

The key pillar of CNO is the centralisation of the men’s high- performance program to Canberra and the women’s to Penrith, in Sydney.

The move is part of a grander scheme driven by the Australian Sports Commission to break away from a federated model of governance and its unnecessary duplications. “It is an uncompromising move to get our best rowers into the two centres and written into the selection policy is that eligibility requirements are not appealable,” Forsterling told The Weekend Australian.

“It institutionalises a master-servant relationship between administrators and rowers. The athlete has no voice in a centralised program, where their livelihood depends on the largesse of their federation. Even if you are the most skilled servant in the house, if you are not compliant with the master, you are a lost cause.”

Forsterling, who won silver in the quadruple sculls in Rio, said the post-Olympic exodus from his sport was a “damning reflection of the reform”.

“From the 30-member Rio Olympic rowing team, 22 have walked. Eight of the nine medallists,” he said. “Had they been given the ­opportunity to train with the autonomy they have become ­accustomed to, some may have stayed.”

Forsterling, who wants to continue to row for his country after 15 years with the national program, said some rowers had careers, responsibilities and dependants which they could not abandon.

“As a consequence, they ... are ineligible for the Australian rowing team without recourse for ­appeal,” he said.

Forsterling, who sits on the RA Athletes Commission said he felt he had no choice but to speak out because formal avenues of appeal had been dismantled by RA and there was a real “head-in-the-sand mentality going on at the moment” when it came to athlete welfare.

“One of the reasons we haven’t spoken up is because we’re always told we need to look after the sport and make sure we don’t bring it into disrepute,” he said. “That was used as a vehicle to keep us quiet when we disagree with the administrative affairs.

“If I speak out of turn, it affects my chances of ever representing the country.

“But I’m old enough now that if I see something’s that not good for sport ... then I will.”

While there is one rule for ­athletes there is another for key administrators. Both RA chief executive Michael Scott and high- performance director Bernard Savage live in Victoria and commute to Canberra each week.

Forsterling also questioned the programs’ repercussions on ­athlete welfare as it demands training three times a day in the centres and working towards a goal “with little or no work, no study, no ­compromise”.

Given the average age of an Olympic gold medallist is just under 30, Forsterling said a 22-year-old entering the program faced eight or more years’ training, which would see them leave, ­“almost inevitably without a gold medal ... and few other life prospects, and the outlook is considerably worse”.

“I have seen and read of enough retired athletes battling with ­depression or substance abuse ... that I don’t need to illustrate the potential pitfalls of this pursuit-at-all-costs model.”

Scott answered Forsterling’s criticism by saying, “through any change program there will always be some people that are not ­supportive”.

“What we don’t want to do is to revert back to the old system that made it even tougher for our elite athletes that often moved training location year to year and ultimately did not deliver results,” he said.

He pointed to Kim Brennan, Australia’s only Olympic gold medallist in the past eight years, as an example of “an athlete that ­essentially trained in an environment consistent with” the national centres. RA president Rob Scott said “it was important to break the Canberra-centric nature of the ­organisation” and in having the sport’s world-class leaders meeting with various stakeholders around the country RA’s relationship with them had improved.

“Meanwhile, our two head coaches have relocated to be ­permanently based with our ­athletes,” he said.

Savage said the “overwhelming response from the athletes in our centres is positive”.

“Rowing Australia is dedicated to ensuring that our athletes have the best level of support on and off the water,” he said.

He said 67 per cent of athletes from Rio had chosen not to compete, while after London 2012 that number was 76 per cent and they were “actively engaging” those walking away from the program.