Kayaker Fitzgerald had ‘gutful’ of Canoe Racing NZ
ANY YOUNG New Zealand paddler looks out on the water and sees a golden pond, a shimmering lane to Rio, a chance to be the next Lisa Carrington. And then the water starts to turn murky and fetid. They find themselves struggling against oppressive contracts, bizarre non-selection decisions and withdrawn funding.
Some have walked away from the sport, three have appealed to the Sports Tribunal, but others just stay quiet and miserable. Jarrod Fitzgerald, a promising 20-year-old who had represented New Zealand at the world championships, says, ‘‘I had had a gutful of the organisation.’’
He walked away and struggles to find the word to describe his broken dreams. Jarrod’s brother Darryl has just had his case heard by the Sports Tribunal. The week before it was a kid called Zac Quickenden, who went before the Sports Tribunal because he had nowhere else to turn.
Canoe Racing New Zealand hired an expensive QC Paul David, a former arbitrator at the Court of Sport in Lausanne.
They had the case thrown out on a contractual technicality, but the judgment was damning of the organisation.
Justice Sir Bruce Robertson ruled: ‘‘It is a sad day for sport when circumstances like this arise and a 20-year-old is left without an opportunity to air his grievance. . .
‘‘It would have been much better for everyone if we could have assessed and evaluated the circumstances.
‘‘Taking advantage of a simple error with no real consequences flowing from it is unhelpful. The way CRNZ has drawn up the policy meant it had the whip hand and it was able to insist on absolute compliance with the letter of the law in its contract.’’
There have been many sad days for sport recently. In eight days’ time another young man takes his case to the Sports Tribunal, appealing his non selection.
It is just about unprecedented that a sports organisation should be taken to the tribunal so many times in such a short period.
Broken seat pins, weed in the lane, overwhelming results ignored, false comparisons made, bias, the athletes all appeared to have very good cases to appeal their omissions from the forthcoming World Cup and World Championships later in the year. Their Olympic dreams depend on a fair outcome.
But these kids didn’t want their day in court. They suggested that CRNZ appointed a panel of independent experts to assess their non selection. The request was denied. ‘‘They (CRNZ) put themselves first before the athletes,’’ says Jarrod Fitzgerald.
Instead of an independent review, CRNZ preferred to throw away taxpayers’ money on legal fees. How are they going to explain that to Scott Martlew, a disabled kayaker who has just had most of his funding removed despite being in the world’s top 10 in his class?
‘‘Scott’s an inspiration to all the kayakers,’’ Jarrod Fitzgerald says. ‘‘Even Lisa would admire his comeback. It’s a hell of a story. I don’t know how they reason these things.’’
Martlew took a bang playing rugby and his leg became infected with a rare flesh-eating disease. He was in a coma. The leg had to be amputated. Hundreds of his mates raised funds by swimming in Canterbury’s icy waters. A group of All Blacks came to visit. And Martlew took the strength to become one of the world’s top para paddlers.
Now he has had his funding cut by an organisation that hires QCs and spends a good chunk of its income on management salaries.
As Quickenden found out, it is hard to get justice because CRNZ makes these kids sign a contract or be ineligible for selection. It is a contract that would probably fail New Zealand’s Bill of Rights – ‘‘Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form’’ – if tested in a court of law.
The contract stipulates that the athlete "must comply" with all the directions of coaches and staff; the athlete, who is amateur, must be available for up to 20 hours of promotional work; no media comment may have "a negative effect" on CRNZ or public comment be ‘‘prejudicial’’.
‘‘You acknowledge that this Agreement may operate as a restraint on you, your Imagery and your personal sponsors but you agree that such restraint is reasonable and necessary to protect the interests of the public.’’
Are our public interests being protected or are the interests of a small, well-paid management group being protected? It is a document that would not have been out of place in the former East Germany.
‘‘It’s a bullying contract,’’ Jarrod Fitzgerald believes. ‘‘You get the feeling they don’t care about you. They only care about Lisa.’’
Yet these are kids we can be proud of. The only place they’re sitting around is in a kayak.
Next Monday another young man goes to the Sports Tribunal. His ‘‘psyche’’ has been challenged by a coach unqualified to do so. He attests that the sport’s CEO had asked him whether he had falsified a surgeon’s medical notes.
The young man is called Andrew Roy. He is literally a life saver. Two years ago he swam out through a rip at Mt Maunganui to save a 16-year-old from drowning. He trains twice a day, six days a week. He funded himself to train out in Perth. He is rewarded by a lack of trust and a non selection that bordered on the bizarre.
We should be proud of these kids. We should be encouraging them. Instead they are being driven away from something they love. As Justice Robertson said, ‘‘It is a sad day for sport.’’