The Olympiad Saga - an article by Doug McClary

[willie reynolds]

The Olympiad Saga - an article by Doug McClary

Doug is a highly respected figure in the show world and he has compiled an article for publication regarding this sorry affair. I re-produce it below. I feel it is worth mentioning that his reference to Mr King of the Southern Region being on the Olympiad Committee is somewhat misleading as regards the current problem - he was only elected on to the Committee in February this year and has taken no part in the matters under investigation. Similarly, Mr Murray of the North-West Region was not a member of the Committee at the relevant time. Alen Gibb.

HOMING WORLD FOCUS SPECIAL
By
DOUG McCLARY

RPRA Council and Mr and Mrs Thresher
Someone pointed out that I had not mentioned the Thresher case in my column despite it being a showing matter. There are very good reason for that, firstly because of my friendship with Roland Thresher and knowledge of Graham Thresher but also because as there was a hearing pending, it would have been incorrect for me to comment as in my view the matter was sub-judice. I had seen letters in the pigeon press and been informed of some events and must say that I was impressed with the manner in which the General Manager tried to answer queries without prejudicing events to be heard. My BHW of the 6th November was late arriving and I have now been able to read and digest the report of the Council meeting and of the appeals meeting, as well as seeing the report by Alen Gibb on the matter.
To say that I am shocked at the present hierarchy of the RPRA would be an understatement, for the conduct of the President and the entire Olympiad committee is reprehensible, especially by Mr Gordon the Team Manager but also and very sadly for the sport, as he is a Vice-President of the RPRA.
I do not want to go into the evidence of the case as that can be seen by anyone interested but what interests me more is the conduct of the President, Mr Blacklock and in the manner in which he seems to operate without being questioned by a supine committee – many of them may never have had an original thought in their lives. Let me say right away, that this unfortunate case has come about by the negligence of the Olympiad Committee Messrs Blacklock, Carlton,Mitchell, Murray and King. They are probably more culpable than the Threshers because as members of considerable experience, they should know better.
It is the Team Manager however who deserves the highest criticism. If he had performed his job properly the entries from Graham Thresher would never have been selected as the most basic of checks would have revealed their falseness. It would appear that he was more concerned at having a gold medal winner to gloat over than in doing what was right for the sport. For many years I Have warned about the cheating involved in the Olympiad movement. You can read about it in my latest book ‘A history of the Show Racer in British Pigeon Showing where it will be noted that in all previous occasions where proof was found of cheating, the penalty was Expulsion.
As for the President, Mr Blacklock, what can be said? I felt very ill-at-ease when the ‘coup’ was conducted to depose the then president on a ‘No Confidence’ motion but living in another hemisphere I felt it inappropriate to comment especially as the matters reported were so bare of fact. Mr Blacklock grasped at the Chair again aided by the chosen few. In the light of recent events, can we not question his suitability to lead the RPRA into the future Can there ever have been a Council Meeting when three votes of ‘No Confidence’ were raised as well as one to have the entire Olympiad Committee removed. This was defeated by 2votes to 17 with three abstentions, while the ‘No Confidence’ votes were all 5/17. Can someone assure me that in each of these matters, that Mr Blacklock vacated the Chair so that a full and fair hearing could ensue?
To return to the Thresher hearing, I have to presume that the entire Olympiad Committee took part in the decision, the debate and the voting. In my view, the President and the Olympiad Committee should not have been part of that hearing as they were interested parties. Their cognisance of the facts and decision rendered them all as ‘interested parties’. Over many years I have seen John Robilliard chairing numerous meetings in a fair and authoritative manner and in my view had he been in Mr Black lock’s situation he would have stood down for that part of the hearing. Mr Blacklock does not seem to have the same rules of fairness. I WILL BE PLEASED TO BE PROVED WRONG.
The sport has been tarnished by the Thresher claims and amounted to an extremely serious breach of rules and of the law. One could wonder why the matter was not dealt with as a criminal one i.e. Obtaining a Pecuniary advantage by deception. Therefore, had there been better leadership an investigating officer should have been appointed to look into the 2015 Olympiad, but also the previous one when the GB team won medals and perhaps also the Thresher win at the Blackpool show of 2014. There are plenty of able people with the ability and skills to conduct such an investigation and John Tyerman springs to mind with a wealth of detective experience and knowledge as well as pigeon administration knowledge and experience.
Could it be that the hierarchy of the RPRA did not want the lid raised as it might have revealed a can of worms and inefficiency? Most certainly the Team Manager and the President would have been properly interviewed and made to account for action or lack of action. Instead, and unfairly, it was left to the West of England Combine and the skills of Alen Gibb to conduct as investigation but his terms of reference were limited to that one claim. I am sure that had Alen been charged to do so, he could have conducted full and complete enquiry but it is my suspicion that Mr Blacklock did not want that much discovered as it would reflect on his presidency. Alen Gibb has done an excellent job in bringing this to attention and despite the obstruction by members of the Olympiad committee has done considerable service to the sport.
The Team Manager’s obduracy throughout has been most unhelpful and obstructive. He finally admitted that he had written out the Thresher claim himself and even tried a little forgery in signing them in Graham’s name. Why did it take him over six months to finally come clean over the matter when had his actions been clear and above board he would have helped Alen with his investigation? I have no doubt in my mind that Chris Gordon should resign both as Team Manager and as a Vice President of the RPRA. Who could ever have confidence in him again? He is more culpable than Graham Thresher in this case. Mr Gordon’s plea that he was too busy to check claims is a total nonsense as it would have taken one letter to the secretary of the West of England SRCombine (Alen Gibb) to ask for verification of the claims. The same applies to the President, as chairman of the Olympiad Committee who should have made sure that all claims were verified and clean and above board.
The RPRA has been demeaned by this case and I would like to see the FCI take firm action against the RPRA and ban the GB team from future Olympiads. If this happened, I might feel that at least something positive has emerged because the cheating which has been perpetrated in the name of the Olympiad movement over many years is beyond reason. I worked for years to produce an Olympiad pigeon and studied the qualification criteria with great interest. I finally came to the conclusion that they were too onerous except for the best and finest racing pigeons to equal and of course good racers do not win showing classes. Had I managed an entry, you could be sure that every mile, every entry would have been above board. One mile short of the required distance would have rendered any claim as being insufficient. This is why I have a particular interest in this.
I do not admire Graham Thresher over this matter but had even basic steps been taken he would not find himself banned at the end of what has been an excellent career in pigeon administration and as a man who would do anything in his power to help others. He allowed things to go too far but his blame should be directed at others within the RPRA who are quite happy to see him shoulder the blame for their lack of basic care towards a member and of the sport of pigeon racing.

Douglas McClary
Kemyel Lofts of British Show Racers
douglas-mcclary.blogspot.com.au

[willie reynolds]

Find this really sad.

The accusation is always made \\\"other Countries are at it\\\", usually from tales from RPRA Councillors who were at an Olympiad and decided other Countries cheat rather than accept they operate on a 1 in 4 or 1 in 3 result system that allows pigeons to qualify as their results show 25% or 33% of the race entry instead of the first 10 or 20.

The RPRA Team Manager \\\"appears\\\" to have been complicit in fraud at the last 3 Olympiads the UK has been represented at and has \\\"selected\\\" numerous ineligible entries for the GB team.

For the RPRA to (despite having clear evidence of a fraud and the involvement of the Team Manager by his own admission) blame the WoESRC/SW Region for making a mountain out of a molehill for what was a minor administrative error is mind blowing.

The report sent to the FCI is astounding when read in conjunction with the details of the falsified performances for the partnership mentioned.

The FCI will not ignore this issue, it will not go away and the whole of the UK fancy will be assumed to have the same morals as the fanciers/officials involved.

There are two components to the Olympiad:

1) Sporting Class - this is the important part and it is calculated on a co efficient basis on racing performances that meet the qualification criteria.

\\\"Sporting Class\\\" entrants from Belgium/The Netherlands/Germany etc. are respected and have a great value placed upon them as they are the top racers from that Country in each category and it is viewed as an honour to have a pigeon selected for the team.
Fanciers such as Geerincx/Willem de Bruijn/Geraard Koopman etc. all vie to have their pigeons selected to represent their Country in the Sporting Class.

2) Standard Class - the \\\"show pigeons\\\"... these just need to have been in the first 20% of the result and are judged to a standard.

In this case the pigeons just need to be in the first 200 of a 1000 pigeon entry.

PIPA were going to hold a big auction for a UK loft following the Poznan Olympiad and eventually it was put \\\"On hold\\\" while some discrepancies were investigated. Strange how that auction never took place despite the PIPA UK agent insisting the results were 100% accurate.

Prior to Poznan the Team Manager was advised of discrepancies in the performances claimed and chose to \\\"look the other way\\\".....

The then President of the RPRA was contacted and given all the evidence and refused to take action stating \\\"he noted the information but as it had come from a non RPRA member he did not need to do anything\\\".......

A current Vice President spoke to the Team Manager and assured me he had been told the RPRA would never do it again... Lo and behold the next time the GB Team went to an Olympiad there were several fraudulent entries in the team...

It is fairly straightforward, the Qualification Criteria are always published numerous times in advance and if you have submitted an entry you would be assumed to have checked that your pigeon actually met the qualification criteria....


It has to compete in races flown under the rules of an FCI affilated Union (for the GB Team that is the RPRA and NEHU) and has to have a minimum distance of 100 KM and at least 25 competing members for the Sporting Classes and at least 250 pigeons entered.....

Fanciers are advertising pigeons on the basis of having represented the UK at Olympiad\\\'s which they use as reason to increase the price...

Pigeons that qualified cleanly have been refused to be allowed to represent the GB team while pigeons with fraudulent results have been taken in their place.

It will be interesting to see what the outcome of the next FCI meetings are and how the RPRA will report it.

Unfortunately Steve Richards as Editor of the BHW is employed by the RPRA with Council of the RPRA as his boss has his hands tied and cannot \\\"publish and be damned\\\" as he is not going to endanger his livelihood/career.

Well Done to the South West Region/WoESRC for at least getting it formally to the attention of the RPRA/FCI and the membership.

My personal view is the Team Manager/Assistants and the Presidents at the time of each of the last 3 Olympiads should resign in disgrace and not be allowed to hold any official position in the sport again and all entrants in the last 3 Olympiads should have the claimed results scrutinised and action be taken against anyone found to have submitted an entrant to the GB Team that did not actually qualify....

My thoughts are inn future all entrants should have their results published in the BHW once the team in selected before the Olympiad to allow them to be scrutinised. Stuart WDA.

[willie reynolds]

See Doug McClary\'s letter has made it into this weeks BHW (08/01/16) Letters column and has received a short response from Les Blacklock and Stewart Wardrop..

Sir,
RPRA COUNCIL AND MR AND MRS THRESHER
Someone pointed out that I had not mentioned the Thresher case in my column despite it being a showing matter. There are very good reasons for that, firstly because of my friendship with Roland Thresher and knowledge of Graham Thresher but also because as there was a hearing pending, it would have been incorrect for me to comment as
in my view the matter was sub-judice. I had seen letters in the pigeon press and been informed of some events and must say that I was impressed with the manner in which the General Manager tried to answer queries without prejudicing events to be heard. My BHW of the 6th November was late arriving and I have now been able to read and digest the report of the Council meeting and of the appeals meeting, as well as seeing the report by Alen Gibb on the matter.
To say that I am shocked at the present hierarchy of the RPRA would be an understatement, for the conduct of the President and the entire Olympiad committee is reprehensible, especially by the Team Manager but also and very sadly for the sport, as he is a Vice-President of the RPRA. I do not want to go into the evidence of the case as that can be seen by anyone interested but what interests me more is the conduct of the President, and in the manner in which he seems to operate without being questioned by a supine committee.
Let me say right away, that this unfortunate case has come about by the negligence of the Olympiad Committee. They are probably more culpable than the Threshers because as members of considerable experience, they should know better.
It is the Team Manager however who deserves the highest criticism. If he had performed his job properly the entries from Graham Thresher would never have been selected as the most basic ofchecks would have revealed their falseness. It would appear that he was more concerned at having a gold medal winner to gloat over than in doing what was right for the sport. For many years I have warned about the cheating involved in the Olympiad movement.
As for the President, what can be said? I felt very ill-at-ease when the ‘coup’ was conducted to depose the then president on a ‘No Confidence’ motion but living in another hemisphere I felt it inappropriate to comment especially as the matters reported were so bare of fact. In the light of recent events, can we not question his suitability to lead the RPRA into the future? Can there ever have been a Council Meeting when three votes of ‘No Confidence’ were raised as well as one to have the entire Olympiad Committee removed. This was defeated by 2 votes to 17 with three abstentions, while the ‘No Confidence’ votes were all 5/17. Can someone assure me that in each of these matters,
that he vacated the Chair so that a full and fair hearing could ensue?
To return to the Thresher hearing, I have to presume that the entire Olympiad Committee took part in the decision, the debate and the voting. In my view, the President and the Olympiad Committee should not have been part of that hearing as they were interested parties. Their cognisance of the facts and decision rendered
them all as ‘interested parties’. Over many years I have seen John Robilliard chairing numerous meetings in a fair and authoritative manner and in my view had he been in Mr Blacklock’s situation he would have stood down for that part of the hearing. Mr Blacklock does not seem to have the same rules of fairness. I will be pleased to be proved wrong.
The sport has been tarnished by the Thresher claims and amounted to an extremely serious breach of rules and of the law. One could wonder why the matter was not dealt with as a criminal one i.e. Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception.
Therefore, had there been better leadership an investigating officer should have been appointed to look into the 2015 Olympiad, but also the previous one when the GB team won medals and perhaps also the Thresher win at the Blackpool show of 2014. There are plenty of able people with the ability and skills to conduct such an investigation.
Could it be that the hierarchy of the RPRA did not want the lid raised as it might have revealed a can of worms and inefficiency? Most certainly the Team Manager and the President would have been properly interviewed and made to account for action or lack of action. Instead, and unfairly, it was left to the West of England Combine and the skills of Alen Gibb to conduct as investigation but his terms of reference were limited to that one claim. I am sure that had Alen been charged to do so, he could have conducted full and complete enquiry but it is my suspicion that Mr Blacklock did not want that much discovered as it would reflect on his presidency. Alen Gibb has done an excellent job in bringing this to attention and despite the obstruction by members of the Olympiad committee has done considerable service to the sport.
The Team Manager’s obduracy throughout has been most unhelpful and obstructive. He finally admitted that he had written out the Thresher claim himself. Why did it take him over six months to finally come clean over the matter when had his actions been clear and above board he would have helped Alen with his investigation? I have no doubt
in my mind that he should resign both as Team Manager and as a Vice President of the RPRA. Who could ever have confidence in him again? He is more culpable than Graham Thresher in this case. His plea that he was too busy to check claims is a total nonsense as it would have taken one letter to the secretary of the West of England
SR Combine to ask for verification of the claims.The same applies to the President, as chairman of the Olympiad Committee who should have made sure that all claims were verified and clean and above board.
The RPRA has been demeaned by this case and I would like to see the FCI take firm action against the RPRA and ban the GB team from future Olympiads. If this happened, I might feel that at least something positive has emerged because the cheating which has been perpetrated in the name of the Olympiad movement over many years is beyond reason. I worked for years to produce an Olympiad pigeon and studied the qualification criteria with great interest. I finally came to the conclusion that they were too onerous except for the best and finest racing pigeons to equal and of course good racers do not win showing classes. Had I managed an entry, you could be sure that
every mile, every entry would have been above board. One mile short of the required distance would have rendered any claim as being insufficient. This is why I have a particular interest in this.
I do not admire Graham Thresher over this matter but had even basic steps been taken he would not find himself banned at the end of what has been an excellent career in pigeon administration and as a man who would do anything in his power to help others. He allowed things to go too far but his blame should be directed at others within the
RPRA who are quite happy to see him shoulder the blame for their lack of basic care towards a member and of the sport of pigeon racing.
Yours,
DOUGLASMcCLARY
Kemyel Lofts of British Show Racers
douglas-mcclary.blogspot.com.au

Mr Les Blacklock, RPRA President’s comment:
do not know Mr McClary personally, but I am aware of his work in this country in the local constabulary and I am sure he well knows that there are two sides to each story. however he has chosen to hang, draw and quarter me on the basis of information received from one party, who also happens to be a retired police officer. With this in mind I have no intention of getting into a public spat with Mr McClary. As President of the RPRA I am elected by the Council of the RPRA, and at the forthcoming AGM it is this Council who will elect the next President.
One final point, at the \"votes of no confidence\" I was out of the room for all the debate and voting. ie I took no part.

Mr Stewart Wardrop, RPRA General Manager’s
comment on Mr McClary’s letter:
It has been the President and Vice Presidents that have steadfastly managed this situation throughout, despite the actions of others. That individuals openly published and distributed public comment along with selective release of “dossiers” of information prior to appeal hearings risked this case becoming “void” in its entirety.
The Team Manager made his report to both the Olympiad Committee and full Council; he accepted full responsibility for the events at the FCI Olympiad’s, Council dealt with the matter.
The report from the RPRA, following the reports actions and recommendations of the October 2015 Council meeting, has been sent to the FCI, we await their decision.
Mr Stewart Wardrop, RPRA General Manager’s
personal comment – Mr McClary’s comments and criticism made regarding the President, Les Blacklock cannot be any further from the truth. In my nearly five years as General Manager I have never met anyone who cares more about the wellbeing of the RPRA; often at the cost of personal sacrifice and abuse, witness the events
of last year! Anyone who even remotely knows Les Blacklock will know the honest, trustworthy and hardworking man he is, always with the RPRA at heart. To infer otherwise does Mr McClary a real disservice