An independent review of British Cycling was told that "a culture of fear" operated on its elite program but the review "faces accusations of a whitewash after many criticisms contained in a draft report were removed," according to Martyn Ziegler of the LONDON TIMES. The Cycling Independent Report said that "good governance" was "lacking" at British Cycling's board, which failed to act on warnings from an internal report in '12. The panel also said that the pursuit of medals meant those '12 warnings "were not acted upon by the board." The report added that funding from UK Sport "should be made conditional on the recommendations being acted on." It also criticized the board for its "inappropriate" handling of an internal probe into allegations by former rider Jess Varnish. However, "a number of damning statements in the draft report have been removed," including that the board had been "shocking and inexcusable" and had "sanitised" the findings of the internal investigation into Varnish's claims. The draft also "seriously questioned" whether the board was "fit to govern the sport" (LONDON TIMES, 6/14). In London, Murad Ahmed reported morale "was low" at the organization, according to the review. Riders who were not part of Britain's "all-conquering" track cycling team described themselves as "second-class citizens," the panel found. Staff members feared "retribution" if they tried to intervene against the "autocratic" behavior of senior coaches. The panel said that it found a "polarisation" of views among athletes, with some defending the actions of coaches and others "sharply critical." The organization, known as the "medal factory" for the success of its cyclists at three successive Olympics, is shown to have few controls on "autocratic" coaches and a "focus on victory above the welfare of athletes and staff" (FINANCIAL TIMES, 6/14). The BBC wrote the report criticized British Cycling's board, former Technical Dir Shane Sutton and UK Sport. Pursuing "medals and the National Lottery funding they brought from UK Sport meant addressing behavioural issues was not prioritised," the report said. Sutton is said to have worked within a "power pocket" without real oversight (BBC, 6/14).
'WHITEWASH?': In London, Ben Rumsby reported Annamarie Phelps, the head of the "much-delayed" review denied her final report was "a whitewash." The findings of British Rowing Chair Phelps and her panel were "in danger of being branded just that" on Wednesday after the "most damning conclusions reached in a leaked draft were expunged from the published version." The draft, leaked in March, accused British Cycling of "sanitising" a press release regarding the outcome of its internal investigation into allegations made by Varnish against Sutton. That word was removed, as was a conclusion that the conduct of the governing body's board had been "inept" and "shocking and inexcusable," and doubts over whether it was "fit to govern a national sporting body." A source close to the Varnish camp said on Tuesday that such a report should be branded a "whitewash." But Phelps said, "I don't believe it's a whitewash. I think it's quite a strong report with very strong recommendations and very strong criticisms. I don't think there's a shift in tone. I think we've been as strong. We've changed some of the wording" (TELEGRAPH, 6/14). Also in London, Martha Kelner reported the word "bullying," which appeared in the draft report, was removed from the final version -- except for in reported speech -- as was any "direct criticism" of former Performance Dir Dave Brailsford. Phelps said, "The panel collectively looked at the wording very carefully before we decided on a final version." UK Sport, which is "in the midst of a duty of care crisis in many Olympic sports," promised to conduct a "root-and-branch review of culture across the high-performance system" (GUARDIAN, 6/14).
