By Oscar Lin
Olympics. For many athletes, participating in this rare, once-every-four-year event is a dream. Achieving the world ranking necessary to qualify requires years of relentless training and dedication. But for New Zealand athletes, there’s an additional hurdle: nomination by the New Zealand Olympic Committee (NZOC).
The NZOC holds the final authority over the composition of New Zealand’s Olympic Team, imposing an extra rule that goes beyond the qualification standards set by international federations. This secondary selection criterion requires athletes to demonstrate the capability to achieve a top-16 placing, with the potential to win an Olympic Diploma (awarded to those finishing in the top eight).
This rule was introduced after the Sydney 2000 Olympics when a team of 151 athletes returned with only four medals, placing sports leaders under tremendous public pressure. To appease the public, the NZOC introduced the rule of top-16.
However, the strict criteria have had significant repercussions for many athletes. Despite qualifying through international rankings, some were left out of the Tokyo Olympics. Notably:
- Abhinav Manota: He qualified for the Tokyo Olympics by the standard of the Badminton World Federation and was nominated by Badminton New Zealand.
- Zoe Hobbs: She was the first New Zealand woman sprinter in nearly 50 years to qualify for the Olympics in the 100 meters.
- Eddie Osei-Nketia: At age 21, he became New Zealand’s fastest man, breaking a 28-year-old national record set by his father.
A blanket top-16 policy seems unreasonable. Not all sports are created equal, and the reality is that some are far more competitive than others. While the rule aims to push athletes towards high performance, it may have the opposite effect. Denying an athlete the opportunity to compete when they have qualified is a huge blow to their morale and to the generations that follow. The presence of athletes at the Olympic Games can inspire countless children to take up the sport, and without representation, the opportunity for future generations to compete becomes more challenging.
Notably, New Zealand has not had a badminton representative in five successive games, impacting the sport’s visibility and inspiration for young athletes.
Eliza McCartney, a star of this year’s Olympic team for Paris, has voiced serious concerns about New Zealand’s tough selection policy. She stated, “I disagree with denying qualified athletes entry to the Olympics. My main concern is the impact on individual athletes, including lost opportunities: experience, sponsorship, funding, longevity in high-performance sport [and] ability to medal at subsequent Games. And the human element: grief, erosion of self-confidence, loss of identity, [and] distrust in the system.”
Eliza McCartney further highlighted that “the top-16 philosophy is often justified with the idea of inspiring a nation by sending a ‘successful’ team. Yet this overlooks the fact that medals aren’t the only source of inspiration. Every athlete has a story and these stories can inspire even in the absence of medals. The media have a role to play here too.”
Since implementing this selection criteria, New Zealand’s team size and medal count have grown. But in that same period, funding for high-performance sport has increased significantly, from $10 million for the Sydney Games to around 25 times that amount for the Tokyo Games.
So yes, it’s true that on paper, the results seem to have improved. But if that improvement comes from throwing a bunch of money at the issue, this band-aid solution will inevitably become unsustainable in the long run.
While the NZOC’s additional selection criteria aim to send a successful team, they may inadvertently harm the broader athletic community and future Olympic hopefuls. Medals are important, but so are the stories and journeys of athletes who qualify for the Olympics. A re-evaluation of the criteria is necessary to balance excellence with inclusivity, ensuring that all qualified athletes have the opportunity to inspire the nation.
References:
Johannsen, D. (2024, May 10). The almost Olympians: How NZOC selection criteria scuppered Olympic dreams. The New Zealand Herald. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/commonwealth-games/the-almost-olympians-how-nzoc-selection-criteria-scuppered-olympic-dreams/E5DO77KHWZGNBFLI7FNT5HKEIA/#:~:text=The%20NZOC%E2%80%99s%20selection%20criteria%20is%20not
Johannsen, D. (2024, June 15). Yachting NZ Olympic selection ‘debacle’ was waiting to happen, windsurfing veteran says. RNZ. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/olympics-2024/519587/yachting-nz-olympic-selection-debacle-was-waiting-to-happen-windsurfing-veteran-says
George, Z. (2024, May 29). The complicated path to Olympic selection, explained. The Spinoff. https://thespinoff.co.nz/sports/29-05-2024/the-complicated-path-to-olympic-selection-explained