Big sports bodies must re-examine their roles

There are sports fans who would agree that many federations are comparable to Eskom when it comes to poor management.

Few would disagree that a significant number of national administrators aren't worth the paper their names were scribbled on at the last election ballots.

The lack of sponsorship among the smaller sports is frightening.

Athletics, swimming, rowing and canoeing all captured medals at the 2012 Olympics - but they barely have two sponsorship cents to rub together.

You might think that times are tough but, after participating in the Cape Argus Pick n Pay Momentum Cycle Tour on Sunday, I can tell you that there is money out there.

I counted 23 different sponsorship brands associated with the 2014 Argus, which was superbly organised (except for that confounded southeasterly wind).

Make no mistake, this country has excellent sports administrators, and there are sponsors out there eager to find new opportunities to create awareness for their brands.

Think of the Comrades and Two Oceans marathons.

Think of the millions that get pumped into local golf tournaments every year.

Heck, even soccer, with all its problems, from match-fixing allegations and lowly ranked national teams to poor administrators, pockets a fortune from corporates.

So why is there such a chasm between well-run, popular events, and smaller national federations?

They say money talks, so what is it telling us?

It's worth stating that these federations are not necessarily crooked, but, their inability to obtain sponsorships directly impacts on their athletes, who end up paying the price in some form - like having to cough up to compete overseas. That counts as a failure in my book.

Cycling SA and the SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee were recently smacked down in a Cape Town court.

The judge ruled that the Pedal Power Association, based in the Western Cape, did "not require prior sanction or approval" from Cycling SA to organise events, such as the popular Argus.

The ruling could have wide-ranging ramifications for other sports, especially athletics, but it drives home the gap that exists between people on the ground and those in lofty positions of power.

Right now, the smaller guys are outgunning the cash-strapped fatcats when it comes to sponsorship.

Several people involved in sport have mentioned to me recently that the problem might not be so much about the calibre of administrators at national level but, rather, the structures of sporting codes where too much power has been centralised. When athletics was once a thriving sport, meetings were organised by individual clubs and provinces; it was not the domain of the national federation.

But that was changed in the 1990s, so that sponsorship and television incomes went straight to Athletics SA.

The cake went into one mouth but, after sponsors pulled out, the sport suffered.

Athletics SA even managed to kill off Port Elizabeth's Great Train Race, once a key fixture on the calendar, which will make a comeback in July this year.

There are going to be two track and field meetings later this month - one scheduled for Potchefstroom and the other in Sasolburg - both organised locally.

It is time that South Africa's premier Olympic federations started thinking hard about restructuring in ways that could best serve their sports.

I don't know what the precise model, or models, should be - perhaps down-sized national bodies should be funded by profitable clubs?

Maybe their tasks should be limited to presenting national teams, and co-ordinating high performance and development programmes?

Whatever the solution, all the evidence - past and present - suggests that a decentralisation of power is what is required.