Could cyclist Maritess Bitbit have competed for the Philippines at the 25th Southeast Asian (SEA) Games in Laos?
Bitbit was the only cyclist of 13 Philippine riders with a license from the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) to participate in the 11-nation meet. The other 12 were accredited by the Philippine Olympic Committee (POC), not by UCI. The Philippine Sports Commission (PSC), taking the lead from UCI, supported Bitbit with allowances and benefits but withheld assistance from her 12 teammates.
Bitbit would’ve been good for at least a gold in Laos. At the 2007 SEA Games in Thailand, she collected a gold in road race and two bronzes in cross-country and time trial track.
There was talk in the grapevine that Bitbit was ready to ride when she was dissuaded by POC officials. Bitbit reportedly felt threatened when told to expect repercussions if she insisted to compete.
POC troubleshooter (or is troublemaker?) Go Teng Kok phoned from Laos yesterday to explain that Bitbit was never threatened because in the first place, she had no choice on the matter. Go said the SEA Games Federation ruled out the Philippines’ participation in cycling because of the leadership crisis in the Integrated Cycling Federation of the Philippines (PhilCycling). “It’s true that Cong. Peping (Cojuangco) spoke with Maritess one-on-one but it was to assure her of the POC’s support, no matter what,” said Go. “We even took a step further by requesting Dr. (Mikee) Romero to give her the bonus for a gold medal,” Dr. Romero agreed. Cong. Peping also told Maritess that in this problem, it was all for one and one for all. Nobody from our team could compete because that was the decision of the organizing committee – all or nothing with no exception.”
Go said the Philippines had the backing of the 10 other nations in the SEA Games to field the 13 cyclists but couldn’t get the approval of UCI president Pat McQuaid.
* * * *
When contacted for his approval, McQuaid reportedly told the Laos organizers the decision was up to Tagaytay City Mayor Bambol Tolentino who is recognized by UCI as the Philippines’ president of the cycling National Sports Association (NSA).
Despite UCI’s recognition of Tolentino, the POC has stood firm on its ruling to recognize Romero instead. Tolentino is president of the Philippine Cycling Association (PCA) while Romero is president of PhilCycling. According to Go, the POC considers the PCA and PhilCycling to be one and the same with Romero as president, not Tolentino.
Poor Romero. He never expected to be thrown in the mud of politics. All he wanted was to help cycling. The POC convinced him to get involved because of his resources and influence. Romero is probably regretting his acceptance.
Go said the POC suspects “monkey business” in UCI backing up Tolentino and will create a fact-finding body to get to the bottom of the “connivance.” He added that the POC is poised to declare Tolentino persona non grata for his refusal to surrender authority to Romero.
Tolentino reportedly said he would accredit the 12 cyclists if the POC made the request. But you and I know the POC couldn’t imagine begging for Tolentino’s approval. For one, it would mean recognizing Tolentino’s authority. For another, it would mean admitting a grave mistake in recognizing Romero instead. Besides, the POC is just too proud to beg.
Asked for his comment on the issue, a POC official who declined to be identified said UCI has absolute authority to appoint its designated country affiliate or NSA and the POC must abide by the decision.
“Our Olympic committee leaders only showed their ignorance of the protocols of the Olympic movement,” said the source. “It’s a waste to have sent athletes not eligible to compete. The International Federations (IFs), like UCI, not the POC, have the mandate for NSAs to become NSAs. It’s the athletes who suffer if the POC insists on its undeserved authority to intervene in a sport for which it has no jurisdiction over internal affairs. The welfare of the athletes must always be above any political interests.”
The official said the POC is only the umbrella organization of the NSAs, not the “mother” body because it cannot dictate on the NSAs. The NSAs are empowered by their IFs, not the POC. In fact, NSAs are given clearance to send athletes to competitions overseas by IFs and the POC is given the license to accredit only in the SEA Games, Asian Games and Olympics strictly because of logistical reasons.
The same source said even the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has nothing to do with the operations of a sport – even in the Olympics – because that is within the IF’s authority.
“If an IF does not want to compete in the Olympics, it has all the right not to play and the IOC can’t do anything about it,” continued the source. “That’s how powerful the IF is. In Laos, the POC should’ve known that it can’t go against UCI in the case of cycling.”
* * * *
The imbroglio in cycling is symptomatic of the widespread chaos that plagues Philippine sports where athletes are victimized by unscrupulous politicians masquerading as sports leaders on a continuing basis.
It’s laughable that a Third World country is wracked by leadership disputes in sports when the Philippines is just a small fish trying to survive in a big pond. Maybe, it’s because the pie isn’t big enough so that nobody wants to settle for crumbs – it’s every man for himself in a dog-eat-dog world. Given a situation of dispute, nobody wants to give in.
In this sordid scenario, the POC must play a vital role as peacemaker and stabilizer. But firstly, it must know the rules of the game. The POC must realize the power that an IF wields and understand that it’s futile to go against an IF’s wishes.
Secondly, it must be apolitical. A position of neutrality is imperative if the POC hopes to settle local disputes between and among opposing groups. Thirdly, it must enjoy a close working relationship with the PSC. Sending athletes to Laos with either a PSC or POC badge is a reflection of lack of moral leadership. It’s an embarrassment to the Philippines for two chartered planes to transport athletes to Laos – one courtesy of the PSC and the other, the POC. And finally, it must govern with wisdom and vision. If the POC wants to make a difference, then it must prove itself capable by making decisions that are logical, lawful and correct.