Why only Swimming Australia?

Australia's cycling program at the 2016 Rio Olympics is winding down with only MTB and BMX remaining.

Our success can only be summed up as extremely disappointing or lackluster with Australian cyclists winning a silver and bronze medal so far.

The only remaining gold medal hope is Caroline Buchanan in the BMX.

The Australian media have put Swimming Australia under the blowtorch with calls for the Board to resign given the lack of success.

As yet, the Board, and CEO, of Cycling Australia has not come under the same scrutiny. Why not?

Cycling's success at these Olympics games has been lower than people's expectations, including the Chef de Mission.

As Britain’ cycling boss said, countries like Australia ‘simply did not show up’.

The lack of success could have ramifications for cycling's future funding levels.

With this in mind, an urgent and independent review of Cycling Australia, including its operations, personnel, governance frameworks, selection policies and funding (how it is allocated, from grassroots to state bodies), is necessary in the wake of Rio.  

This review cannot be left to Cycling Australia and its high performance coaches.A review that must be broader than required by the Australian Sports Commission.

The Australian Government, via the Australian Sports Commission, allocates funding to cycling through the 'Winning Edge program’.

Cycling Australia receives one of the highest funding allocations. In 2015-16, it received around $7.4 million in high performance funding. A figure that has probably been given each year since the last Olympics.

This dwarfs the $600,000 that archery received in 2015-16 where one of its athletes won a bronze medal.

It is arguable that Australia did not get much of a return on its taxpayer funded investment during the Olympics.

Sports funding is not just limited to the performance at one event, whether it is the Olympics, World Championships or the World Cup.

Under the 'Winning Edge’ funding model, the Australian Sports Commission looks at the historical performance as well as future potential to determine future investment in sports.

It is this that will be a worrying problem for Cycling Australia. At the 2015 World Track Cycling Championships, Australia won 11 medals, including four gold. Six of the medals being Olympic events.

Fast forward 12 months and the medal haul at the world champs had fallen to five, including 2 gold. Not that encouraging in the lead up to the Olympics.

The trajectory of success at international track events was trending downwards. The medal haul at the Rio Olympics confirms this trend.

Australia has not fared any better at the UCI Road World Championships.  In 2014, Australia was very successful winning eight medals, including two gold. However, this may have been an aberration as in 2015 Australia only secured a silver and bronze at the Road World Champs.

Australia's cycling programs are struggling against our international sporting counterparts. Particularly, against Team GB which is setting the performance benchmark.

We should not let the opportunity of Australia's poor performance at the Rio Olympics pass without undertaking a full and proper independent review, not just its high performance programs.

Failure to address this issue may not only damage Australia's future international sporting achievements, but also grassroot participation - that is, our future Olympic champions.