'Gymnastics abuse report again shows darker side of sport'

Anne Whyte's shocking report into the "systemic" physical and emotional abuse of young athletes is a devastating blow to the reputation of gymnastics.

But as the QC makes clear early on in her 306-page report, while undoubtedly the most serious to date, it is far from the only athlete-welfare scandal to cast a shadow over publicly funded British sports in recent years.

The governing bodies of cycling, swimming and canoeing are just some of the other sports that have had to apologise after inquiries into their cultures. There have also been investigations into allegations at British Judo, British Bobsleigh, and GB Archery. UK Athletics remains under scrutiny over its past record on child safeguarding after an independent review of its policies found a "lack of precision" in lines of responsibility.

With each passing controversy, some of the pride at the supposed thoroughness, attention to detail and professionalism that British sport became known for has been eroded. After all, if the high-performance system was truly world class, how could all this have happened under the noses of sporting authorities?

Indeed, Whyte says in her report: "One wonders how many sporting scandals it will take before the government of the day appreciates it needs to take more action to protect children who participate in sport, a sector where coaches do not have a central regulator and where most complaints lack independent resolution."

So as more parents now consider whether they want their kids involved in gymnastics, and victims' legal action against the governing body continues, could all this lead to a rethink of Britain's whole sporting system?

Crucially, while the abuse in gymnastics occurred at the grassroots as well as at the top of the sport, Whyte is clear that Britain's ruthless pursuit of Olympic glory and the strict linking of medal potential with funding, may have come at the expense of duty of care.

She says she has "no accurate way of assessing whether perceptions around 'cash for medals' adversely affected the welfare of gymnasts". But the QC also points out that UK Sport's previous 'no compromise' approach to funding athletes "could imply a 'win at all cost' philosophy that relegates athlete welfare and wellbeing below performance and success".

"It is possible that as a slogan, it could be understood as an incentive to push everyone to their limits and so to place tacit pressure on NGBs [national governing bodies], coaches and gymnasts to feel an unacceptable amount of pressure," Whyte's report says.

Ambitious medal targets have been credited with the sustained success Team GB has enjoyed over the past two decades. But for Whyte, they are another area of concern.

"I asked UK Sport whether it had undertaken any research into the impact of medal targets on athlete welfare across sport. It had not," she says.

Whyte details how the evaluation and monitoring process used by UK Sport to assess the performance programmes that it invests tens of millions of pounds into "did not accurately reflect, with any consistency, the state of the gymnastics programme so far as athlete welfare and culture was concerned…even though athlete wellbeing and culture were apparently yardsticks of success that British Gymnastics had to demonstrate in order to justify funding".

"UK Sport recognised that up until 2017, athlete welfare had not been 'front seat'…there had been less rigour around welfare assurance."

Speaking to my colleague Natalie Pirks after publication of the Whyte report, UK Sport chief executive Sally Munday said: "We do not accept the notion that there has been a priority across the system for medals over other things…I reject the notion that there has ever existed 'cash for medals'.

"I've been in this post since 2019 and before then I was chief executive of a national governing body [England Hockey] for 10 years…every year we received money from UK Sport. Never once during that time did I ever feel pressure to deliver medals at any cost."

UK Sport insists duty of care to athletes is ultimately the responsibility of national governing bodies, and that it is not a regulator.

However in a statement, UK Sport did admit that "the assurance systems in place clearly did not identify, until relatively recently, long-standing cultural problems in gymnastics, and for this we are sorry".

Former Team GB cyclist and Olympic gold medallist Callum Skinner was unimpressed - the athlete rights campaigner tweeting that UK Sport "wouldn't know good culture if it smacked them across the face".

Campaign group Gymnasts for Change said: "Ultimately, medals were prioritised over athlete welfare.

"Delivering a new standard for athlete welfare won't risk our success on the world stage, but naturally create the conditions for success at every level. More happy and healthy gymnasts will lead to more individuals being attracted to the sport, members remaining participants for longer, and talented gymnasts reaching greater heights, as they are able to be helped to their full potential."

The campaign group called for mandatory reporting of known and suspected child sexual abuse, and greater transparency over suspended coaches.

This is not the first time the wider funding system has come under scrutiny.

In 2020 for instance, a report found a "culture of fear" at British Canoeing, saying it "appears to have come about as a result of a common held view that the pursuit of medals was at any cost; and as elite funding was inextricably linked to UK Sport, British Canoeing used this relationship to facilitate the spread of this culture of fear".

In recent years, UK Sport has taken a number of steps designed to improve duty of care and welfare, including a public consultation, new funding for the British Athletes Commission, a culture survey, a new Sports Integrity department and a shift away from "no compromise" and towards "winning the right way". Some believe they can still do more.

Last year a House of Lords committee on sport and recreation said: "Monitoring of what works for duty of care and safeguarding in the sector is insufficient. The credibility of [grassroots funding agency] Sport England and UK Sport is undermined if the threat of financial sanctions is raised but not implemented. They must follow through and remove funding from NGBs which fail to meet required duty of care and safeguarding standards."

But even after the damning Whyte Review, UK Sport has chosen not to strip money from British Gymnastics, saying: "We believe that would not only prevent them from implementing the vital changes outlined in the report but also negatively impact on the support to and wellbeing of gymnasts now."

UK Sport did warn however that "continued funding will depend on its new leadership team making significant changes to the sport".

Significantly, Whyte argues an independent sports ombudsman - as proposed by Baroness Grey-Thompson back in 2017 after she conducted her own duty of care review - is "an obvious step in the right direction".

On Thursday, the former Paralympian expressed her hope that this time her recommendation would be acted upon, telling BBC Sport's Laura Scott: "Sport has to step up…to say, 'we're going to do something different'.

Grey-Thompson continued: "I still think we can win medals, but apply duty of care to everyone in the system. We have to do something. I do believe there needs to be an independent body because the cost of this review, the human cost, the financial cost, is not one that that sport can keep paying."

The government has recently shown an appetite to get tougher with English sports authorities. It has vowed to bring in legislation to set up an independent football regulator amid concerns over governance. The ECB has been threatened with the same in the wake of cricket's racism controversy.

But ministers remain unconvinced a pan-sport ombudsman or regulator is needed. They believe a new independent disclosure and complaints service that UK Sport is piloting, and which it claims will uphold the highest standards of conduct and ethics in sports, is sufficient for now.

In a statement the government said UK Sport and Sport England "have already taken significant steps to improve safeguarding in sport…and we are strengthening our positions of trust legislation".

But many believe the problem extends beyond the sporting authorities.

Cath Bishop - a former British Olympic rower and silver medallist - recently told the Guardian that "many more are complicit in this - the media hound sports only about their results; sponsors are primarily interested in funding those who are going to win in the short-term; at government level, the short-term boost to national pride from hosting sporting events or winning medals is prioritised over longer-term opportunities for human and social development through sport".

In her report, Whyte acknowledges that "medals will always be a metric for sporting success" and does accept improvements have been made to duty of care.

But she adds that changing the culture of a given sport "will only occur when the leadership of NGBs along with the leadership of funding bodies find ways of reassuring athletes [and coaches] and the public that the definition of success is squarely on a demonstration of excellence across all aspects of a World Class Programme and not primarily on medal hauls".

With the 10-year anniversary of London 2012 just weeks away, this was already a natural moment to reflect on British sport.

Unfortunately, as well as the medal hauls British athletes have delivered since, a darker side of the past decade will now feature - mounting concern over toxic cultures and the suffering that accompanied such success.

And in the wake of Whyte's findings, many will insist there has never been a greater need for welfare to be given as much attention as winning.