Dialogue – the best lane to run

Within recent times, there seems to be a stretch in the relationship between some coaches and the executive body of Team Athletics SVG, the governing body for track and field here.

The latest has been the queries over the selection of the St Vincent and the Grenadines’ team to the Carifta Games, which ended in Curacao.

Whilst this is a normal occurrence of dissatisfaction among persons close to the sport, there was some greater currency gained, as the wider population was dragged into the discussions.

Using forms of the media, the disgruntlement became somewhat topical, as some coaches did not spare the opportunity to vent their criticisms of having a lone athlete selected.

But most of the displeasure was hurled at the operations of Team Athletics SVG.

In all the media expositions by the coaches, Team Athletics SVG has remained mum, and goes about its business as usual.

Either way, no one seems right or wrong in the circumstances, as both entities have chosen a path which suits them best.

However, should all matters of such nature be settled by lamentations in the public domain and the personal accusations?

But there lies the deeper issues, as from the revelations of the coaches, a gulf of disconnect exists.

From all appearances, it can be assessed that it is a “we versus them” stand-off taking place within the track and field fraternity.

Furthermore, from some of the pronouncements, there appears that a cleaning of the cupboard is the lone solution from their perspective.

The sport, though, is being overrun by emotions rather than reasoning and both factions would be found guilty, in some instances, for its current state.

Analysing the sport, it takes more than simply qualifying for some regional or international meets, as more is required from a set programme which would ensure success.

Preparations of the nation’s stock goes beyond the regular local meets and the seasonal training that occurs within some of the set-ups.

Coaches and the track and field organisations are the ones who go into the trenches and produce the athletes for national representation and otherwise.

On the other hand, it is the administrators who have to frame out the policies which should be in the best interest of all involved and at the same time maximize the potential available.

But whilst the coaches are vocal, their apparent frustrations are emanating from a lack of formal confabulation with the local parent body.

Both rarely interface; hence they are sometimes working without either knowing what the other is doing and what are the other’s objectives.

Therefore, it points to the need for dialogue from the two sides: the coaches and the executive of Team Athletics SVG.

But that too puts another spin in the works, as even from within the active coaches’ pool, they are a divided bunch. They have what it takes to effect changes technically and otherwise. They are also endowed with the acumen to take their charges to the next level of development, but they cannot do so on their own and in a vacuum.

Why then should this type of bickering be the order of the day, when all stakeholders of track and field can sit and work out what is the best lane to take to develop the sport?

This may be just wishful thinking, but as we divide and pull and tug, the sport degenerates into a monologue of displeasure.