News Around the World
air of anticipation that surrounds this new venture. ‘The Django group is buzzing,’ said Reid. ‘They will get involved with other sailing over the summer, but we will regroup in March when this new boat goes in the water.’ It will, no doubt, be a closely watched debut. (Principal dimensions are: LOA 11.3m; BMax 3.75m; draft 2.65m; displ 3,630kg; upwind sail area 101.7m2
.)
Just back in the water in New Zealand is the totally rebuilt Bakewell-White maxi that was first launched as the 98ft Zana. For new owner Manouch Moshayedi, Bakewell-White designed an ambitious rebuild, which completely reshaped the hull and stretched it to a 100-footer. The major surgery was completed to a very high standard at Cookson Boats. Rio100, as the boat is now called, has so far had a sea trial in about 10kt of breeze. ‘She hit some good numbers, reaching at 17kt,’ said Bakewell-White. Rio100is a fixed-keel yacht with all manual control systems – which qualifies her for a tilt at the Barn Door trophy in the Transpac. Her first assignment is the New Zealand Coastal Classic Race, where she will be up against Karl Kwok’s impressive 80-footer Beau Geste. Gavin Brady, who has worked with the Beau Geste programme for many years, also played a key part in bringing the Rio100 rebuild to New Zealand. He has come up with an intriguing sideshow either side of the Coastal Classic with a maxi race in Auckland the day before and in the Bay of Islands the day afterwards. Beau Gesteand Rio100will duke it out along with Sir Peter Blake’s earlier- era Whitbread IOR maxis Lion New Zealandand Steinlager 2. Rio100will then go on to race in the Sydney-Hobart classic before getting ready for the Transpac. Ivor Wilkins
AUSTRALIA Delivering the goods
Phil Jones has just retired after 17 years as CEO of Yachting Australia. Blue Robinson spoke to him of the highs and lows of developing high-performance sailing in a wide, brown land. Seahorse: You started as CEO of Yachting Australia in 1997 – what shape was the organisation in? Phil Jones: It was at a pretty low ebb. They had recently been involved in a court case concerning selection for the Tornado and at that time the organisation had a fairly modest budget; from memory there were only three staff when I joined. However, with a home Olympics just three years away there was a little funding available… as long as there were programmes in place. SH: Things to do quickly? PJ: Really it was about engaging with the funding agency, the Australian Sports Commission, and then securing appropriate coaches and team management. Within about six months we had a high-performance director in the shape of Victor Kovalenko; even with his 470 track record back then it was a fantastic move, plus we secured 470 bronze medallist Ian Brown. SH: Was the selection of Victor at all controversial? PJ: I think anyone who knew anything about Victor was delighted. But those with more of an insular view couldn’t under- stand why we couldn’t appoint Australian coaches; that mindset had been a feature of the land- scape in the past. SH: Then post-2000, after the intensity of a home Olympics, what was your focus? PJ: It was interesting because even with an organ- isation the size of Yachting Australia their priori- ties shift pretty quickly. Though the period 1997- 2000 was dominated by high-performance develop - ment, there was also work done trying to develop a broader base, building participation and also membership which wasn’t increasing. So immediately post-2000 the focus shifted to that while still maintaining the high-performance side. By now we were performing well internationally but going into Athens we didn’t have the fine-grain work done, meaning we came away with no sailing medals at all… That was hard.
16 SEAHORSE
SH: Athens was a shock; would you go as far as to say it was the medal recession we had to have? PJ: It was certainly the catalyst for a lot of change. What it really enabled was a complete review of the programme, so we brought in a management consultant with a strong sailing background, Peter Conde, who is still our high-performance director. He helped us develop that plan, along with Michael Jones. We knew the changes we had to make and Michael was exactly the guy to do that; his back- ground was as a former helicopter test pilot in the Navy who also ran a regional airline, so a strong character who understood the corporate side and was prepared to make changes. This meant the culture of the team was very different looking towards Beijing. SH: After Athens how important to the high-performance team was a body like the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS)? PJ: The interesting challenge was at that time the institute was very focused on AIS programmes. Sailing has been an AIS programme since 2000 and it took some time to get it away from a standard sports science model in terms of physiology and all the other things you would expect a sport-wide agency to deliver. We needed support for the more sport-specific and technical areas we have, for example getting the AIS to understand the significance of a mete- orologist when most sports don’t have that requirement. Now the relationship has matured, and they are a very strong partner. Interestingly, the AIS approach has changed over the last years where they have moved away from the AIS being in charge to the sports having complete authority over their programmes with AIS support. Australian sport will benefit significantly from that because it shifts the responsibility for performance right back to the sport, exactly where it needs to sit. SH: Funding – the eternal problem for all sports in all countries. PJ: Funding is always a challenge. Australia is a large country with a relatively small population so inevitably government funding is limited. And the opportunity to raise funds through a system like a national lottery is difficult, because most gambling legislation here is state and territory based. Sponsorship in sailing is challenging, particularly when your athletes can spend half the year in Europe. What we did in 2006, when we launched the Australian sailing team, was set up the patrons’ programme, which supported us up to 2008 but really kicked in from 2008 onwards.
The programme is chaired by John Calvert-Jones, one of 18 patrons who provide a certain level of financial support, but also a signifi- cant amount of mentoring – from people like Marcus Blackmore, the Oatley family and Steve Ainsworth, all remarkable people and really committed patrons. Funding is a challenge and most of the key events take place in Europe so our cost base is pretty high, which is not so bad when the Olympics are in London, allowing athletes to base themselves in Europe but when we come to an Olympics in South America that adds a lot of complications – sometimes we still find ourselves with the right boat in the wrong place… SH: Beijing in 2008 presented strong opportunities for Tom Slinsgby in the Laser and Nathan [Outteridge] and Goobes [Jensen] in the 49er. PJ: It did… and despite a lot of analysis it is still rather difficult to understand what happened to Tom Slingsby. Nathan would have won gold in the 49er had it not been for that capsize just before the finish, so I think his view and approach to 2012 were some- what different from Tom’s. Nathan thought he was close and it was just one of those things, Tommy spent a lot of time soul searching after 2008 wondering if he wanted to go round again; but it was pointed out to him during our patrons’ meeting that, although he didn’t perform well at the Olympics, he was still a world champion and his lead-up to Beijing had been phenomenal. Obviously with the help of some key people he came back and was a very different person at London 2012. SH: You were also on the ISAF events committee for 10 years… how much of a challenge was that? PJ: It was an interesting period. ISAF is an organisation that is much maligned, and our view was you can either throw stones or roll your sleeves up and do something about it. For me, the
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74