Collins comes under fire as track and field falls short of target

Published on Sunday 24 August 2008 22:51

IT WAS a strange mood given the celebrations going on elsewhere. As UK Athletics' director of elite performance Dave Collins sat at the top table facing the British press he might as well have been bound to the chair and blindfolded. The media firing squad may have peppered him with questions but the intention of some was clear, they wanted him to get the bullet.

And they are not the only ones gunning for him. Within his own organisation there have been leaks suggesting he is a matter of days from receiving his last rites, a move undoubtedly intended to appease UK Sport as they embark on their latest review and decide funding for the various sports. At a Games when a clutch of sports exceeded all expectation, athletics was one of those who flunked the examination. And as the blue riband event it has prompted knee-jerk wrath.

Going into the Games, the sport had promised five medals. It delivered only four, which was bad enough. The fact that only one of them was gold is what truly aggravates those who remember the halcyon days. Which was the reason he was forced to spend yesterday defending himself and his record. Appointed in 2005, he said an honest investigation would show he had moved the sport on. "This is a sport that had a lot of issues that needed addressing and it would be nice to have everyone agree on a plan now. Better to come inside and help rather than sniping from the outside. If I was the chief executive of UKA then I would have sorted this out months ago. I think I should be judged on more than the medal count."

He said, unlike many of the sports which had reaped rich seams of medals for Team GB, his still had to make up it's mind if it was a top performance sport, focusing it's considerable finances and coaching resources on the very best or a body which subsidised the entire sport, regardless of Olympic potential.

"The trouble with athletics is a lot of money came into it and was distributed too broadly. It was given to athletes not necessarily capable of performing at the highest level. That has all changed," he said.

"Would four medals in London be enough? Clearly not. But this is the first year since I've been in the job that we have not exceeded expectations." Was it likely to be any better in four years time? "I can't guarantee it," he said, "but I'd say it's a pretty good bet. I'd bet my job on it."

Come the next few days, it may not be his to use as gambling collateral.