Sporting Goods

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Executives strike gold in London 2012 Olympic pay league

The publication of the London 2012 organising committee’s annual accounts has highlighted the large salaries earned by those responsible for delivering the Olympics.

Locog chief executive Paul Deighton received a total package of £699,998 in 2010-11, including a £220,125 bonus that he will donate to charity. His chairman Lord Coe was paid £357,000.

Both had their basic salary in 2010-2011 frozen in a nod to the economic climate, and Locog say the salaries reflect the company’s progress in meeting targets. By happy coincidence, they announced that the £700m sponsorship mark had been reached a couple of hours before they published the annual report. Locog also point out that it is a private company and that salaries reflect market rates.

There is no arguing that progress has not been impressive across the project. Deighton, Coe and senior executives at the Olympic Delivery Authority deserve – and receive –credit. Sponsors have signed up, the majority of the tickets have been sold, infrastructure has been built and the recent test events were promising.

Even so it is a stretch to argue that Locog, the body responsible for staging the games, is a straightforward private enterprise . Technically it may be, but it would not be possible for Locog to operate without the £9.3bn public investment in the Olympic Park and other infrastructure. Without this taxpayer subsidy there would be no games.

Deighton is at the top of the Olympic pay league, but only just. When it comes to the Olympics some public sector executives are earning gold-medal salaries too. At the ODA, the Government Olympic Executive (a division of DCMS tracking Olympic progress) and UK Sport, which funds the athletes, six-figure salaries are common.

David Higgins, the former chief executive of the Olympic Delivery Authority, was paid £544,000 last year, made up of a £325,000 salary, a performance bonus of £179,000 and pension payments of £40,000.

His replacement Dennis Hone earned £401,000 last year and a further seven directors earned more than £200,000. Over at the Government Olympic Executive meanwhile director general Jeremy Beeton receives between £265,000 – £270,000.

Here’s a full list of executives across the Olympic project whose most recent declared annual remuneration exceeds £100,000.

Paul Deighton, LOCOG chief executive £699,998* (salary £479,873, bonus £220,125)

David Higgins, ODA former chief executive £544,000** (salary £325,000, bonus £179,000, pension £40,000)

Dennis Hone, ODA chief executive £401,000** (salary £274,000, bonus £79,000, pension £48,000)

Sebastian Coe, LOCOG chairman £357,000*

Howard Shiplee, ODA director of construction £320,000** (salary £287,000, pension £33,000)

Jeremy Beeton, GOE director general £265,000 – £270,000***

Neil Wood, LOCOG chief financial officer £260,000*

Alison Nimmo, ODA director of design and regeneration £257,000** (salary £228,000, pension £29,000

Hugh Sumner, ODA director of transport £255,000** (salary £228,000, pension £27,000)

Simon Wright, ODA director of infrastructure and utilities £255,000** (salary £228,000, pension £27,000)

Ralph Luck, ODA director of property £255,000** (salary £203,000, pension £47,000, taxable benefits £5,000)

John Armitt, ODA chairman £250,000

Godric Smith, ODA director of communications £218,000** (salary £195,000, pension £23,000)

David Goldstone, GOE finance director £185,000 – £190,000***

Jonathan Stephens, DCMS permanent secretary £155,000 – £160,000***

John Steele, UK Sport former chief executive £145,000 – £150,000****

Liz Nicholl, UK Sport former chief operating officer £105,000 – £110,000****

Tim Hollingsworth, UK Sport former communications director £100,000 – £105,000****

* For 2010-11 financial year. Source LOCOG Annual Report & Accounts 2010-11

** For 2010-11 financial year. Source ODA Annual Report & Accounts 2010-11

*** Salary band for financial year 2009-1. Source: DCMS Resource Accounts 2009-10

**** Salary band for financial year 2009 -10. Source: LOCOG Annual Report & Accounts 2009-10

F1 in Iran? Never say never

An extraordinary PR release landed in my Inbox last night relating to the recent speculation about Iran as a possible F1 venue.

The email confirmed that the Tehran-based TSI Group is building an enormous multi-purpose facility called iLand just outside the capital with a 5km circuit designed by a UK agency called Apex Circuit Design at its centre.

The development, on which construction started in 2008, will also feature “housing for 50,000, shopping malls, water parks, hotels, an International standard 18 hole golf course, indoor and outdoor fun parks, equestrian facilities, auto mall, motorcycle dirt tracks, an Olympic standard sports complex and an International standard kart circuit designed by Schreiner Consulting in Austria.”

We're told that the track will be based on "naturally contoured circuits such as Spa-Francorchamps (Belgium), the Nürburgring Nordschleife (Germany) and Donington Park (UK)."

I say 'extraordinary' because, while it is always nice to see motor sport expanding to new territories, it is difficult to conceive of a less likely venue for many people's idea of the apotheosis of bloated, western, capitalist culture. There is also the issue of security for F1's multi-national community (current FCO advice states that “British travellers to Iran face greater risks than nationals of most other countries… There is therefore a risk that British nationals could be arbitrarily detained, despite their complete innocence… There have been occasional cases of independent travellers detained for more than a month without access to anyone outside the Iranian system.”)

In fact, the PR statement goes on to say that the initial intention is only to apply for a FIA Grade 2 licence, which would not be enough to host a F1 race. But it's always possible to upgrade. And F1 has already shown that if a state is prepared to fork out the big bucks to host a grand prix then it is prepared to suspend moral judgement. Politics has no place in sport, so the saying goes…

"Initial groundworks have commenced for construction and Phase 1, the West circuit, is scheduled for completion in 2012, with full construction and operation anticipated in 2013," the statement adds.

US Open Diary 2011: Were Rafael Nadal and co right to be so disgruntled about playing in the rain?

Rafael Nadal requests officials to examine the slippery courts

Wednesday in New York

More rain, and a revolt in the offing…

Standing up for themselves

Tennis is a lucrative business. A very lucrative one. How else could the tours and tournaments announce recession-defying increases in prize money, television networks continue to pay more and more for broadcast rights, and fans still flock to put bottoms on seats.

But there would be no business without a major ingredient…the players. Rafael Nadal seems determined to remind everyone of that fact.

"It's the same old story, all you think about is money," the world No 2 said. "We don't feel protected here. The tournament grand slams, they are [getting] a lot of money and they are working for that, but not [for] us."

Joined by Andy Murray and Andy Roddick, Nadal voiced concerns to US Open referee Bill Earley about being forced to take to wet, slippy, courts to give TVs something to broadcast.

CEO Adam Helfant leaves the ATP at the end of the year, with his successor yet to be appointed. Is this the time for the players to take back some of the power?

John McEnroe certainly thinks so…

Poor decisions

Putting the players on wet courts was not the only piece of strange thinking…

Playing in the rain: Not only did Murray and the others reveal that the courts, balls, towels and nets were still wet when they were announced onto court, but the decision was so abrupt that Nadal kept opponent Gilles Muller hopping on the spot for some time while he taped his fingers. Donald Young also kept Murray waiting.

Three-day first round and the Super Saturday: Every other Grand Slam seems to have the art of playing one day on, one day off, down to a tee. Why do the US Open do it differently? The legendary 'Super Saturday' of course – the back to back orgy of men's semi-finals sandwiching the women's final. As Rafa says, it's all about the money.

As for the three-day first round, who knows. But it is surely absurd that someone can play their first match on Monday, and have two days relaxing, while someone else is still stewing that they haven't got a win on the board yet.

Why communicate? Sam Stosur, being Australian, is a pretty mild-mannered creature. But even she was nearly driven to distraction when her match against Maria Kirilenko was shunted from Ashe to another court, but no one actually told them for almost an hour.

In defence

In their defence, the USTA issued a statement saying that forecasts had indicated a two-hour window of play, hence the decision to send the players out into the mist.

"We have experienced referees, and they decide if courts are fit for play. Conditions may be not ideal, but still can be safe. However, if a player or players feel that conditions are unsafe, we listen to them, as we have always done, and the referee uses that information as part of his/her assessment on whether to continue or halt play.”

So…what do you think? Right or wrong? Or muddled…please do comment below.

Roof-gate

Naturally, there was continued discussion about the lack of roof at Flushing Meadows and whether one will be built in the immediate future. Jeff Tarango, one of the USTA's board of directors, said plans were in place to build a roof by 2016.

But a USTA statement denied that plan.

"The USTA disavows the statements made by USTA board member Jeff Tarango to BBC Radio regarding plans for the demolition of Arthur Ashe Stadium and Louis Armstrong Stadium. There has been no scenario discussed that includes the demolition of Arthur Ashe Stadium and any talk about the future of Louis Armstrong Stadium at this point is both premature and inaccurate."

Stories need to be straightened somewhere…

Coming up this evening…

The USTA still insist they are aiming to complete the tournament on Sunday, meaning that those still in the fourth round (Murray, Nadal and co), would have to play and win four best-of-five-set matches in four days to win the title.

As a result, the schedule is jam-packed again, although they've done a little jiggling and brought the new Court 17 into action.

ARTHUR ASHE – Day

4R Rafael Nadal v Gilles Muller 0-3

Is Rafa over his bad mood?

QF Serena Williams v Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova

They came out to warm-up last night. And then sat in their chairs.

QF Novak Djokovic v Janko Tipsarevic

Night

QF Roger Federer v Jo-Wilfried Tsonga

The last two have gone Jo-Willy's way…

LOUIS ARMSTRONG

4R David Ferrer v Andy Roddick 1-3

A-Rod got the better start.

QF Caroline Wozniacki v Andrea Petkovic

The wall versus the machine. Could be interesting.

GRANDSTAND

4R Andy Murray v Donald Young: 1-2 on serve

Delayed for two days…

QF Sam Stosur v Vera Zvonareva

How much birthday cake did Vera eat I wonder?

COURT 17

4R John Isner v Gilles Simon

Little and large? Power v poise? Something like that.

QF Anqelique Kerber v Flavia Pennetta

The one no one's quite sure about. Forza Flavia, I'd say.

Also in action

British duo Colin Fleming and Ross Hutchins aim to make their first Grand Slam semi-final (again), while the four British boys aim to make it into round three.

The daily click

Ross Hutchins being ribbed by Andy Murray. Even Mark Petchey joins in.

Rugby World Cup 2011: My predictions – Scotland to beat England, an early exit for Ireland, Wales to top Pool D

Under 24 hours to go to Rugby World Cup 2011 kick-off (at the time of writing), so time to spell out how I think the pools will develop. Is this what I hope will happen, or think will occur? Not entirely sure myself – probably a mix of voices from the heart and the head – but no matter, here goes.

And please let me know how and where you agree or disagree.

Pool A

Very much a two-horse race, with the only real significant match on September 24 between New Zealand and their nemesis, France. On paper you'd have to say the All Blacks, but then you think back to 1999 and 2007, and suddenly it's one of THE biggest pool matches imaginable.

Can Les Bleus upset the apple cart true and proper by beating the hosts? Both will obviously want to win the group – thereby, on paper at least, securing an 'easier' quarter-final – but Pool B is wide open and coming second in Pool A might ultimately not be a massive price to pay.

Being the hosts has huge pros and cons for NZ – possibly unbearable pressure and expectations, but also masses of support. The current All Blacks seem to be open and relaxed, mingling with the public and coming across confident. Compare that with the siege mentality of previous campaigns (and failures), and they may just be on to a good thing here.

Prediction 1 NZ, 2 France.

Pool B

One of two 'pools of death'. And gut feel says this is so tight to call that bonus points – for scoring four tries or more or losing by seven points or under – may just come heavily into play.

Yes, Argentina seem not to be the force they were in 2007, but I think they may still be good enough to trouble their opponents. Fence-sitting? No way! England to beat the Pumas by a comfortable few, before backs-against-the-wall Argentina rumble Scotland.

All which sets up the group perfectly for a killer clash at Eden Park on October 1. And in an ugly, messy, attritional slug-fest among the two packs, I predict the Scots to squeeze home by a point or two (all courtesy of kicks). And so we're back in bonus-points territory and possibly points difference.

Prediction 1 England, 2 Scotland.

Pool C

The most predictable in terms of who'll finish on top. Can't see any of the four teams remotely threatening Australia. The Wallabies are also in the comfortable position of having played their two 'big' pool opponents by September 17, allowing some rest for key players in preparation for the play-offs.

Who'll finish second is the exciting bit. On paper it would seem to be Ireland by a country mile – but Italy will fancy their chances given Ireland's lacklustre warm-ups and the narrow 11-13 defeat in Rome in February. Having both lost to the Aussies come October 2, I think the pressure will simply mess with the Irish players' heads. Their dismal RWC record will play on their minds – and continue.

Prediction 1 Australia, 2 Italy.

Pool D

The most physical, closely contested group of the lot – and the other one in which bonus points could determine the final standings. Spare a thought for Namibia, who will be lambs to the slaughter in every match. And much as I like the Fijian way of playing – and despite their heroics last year – this year they'll end fourth in the pool, leaving it to South Africa, Wales and Samoa to slug it out.

This may sound like a caveat, but much depends on whether Wales learn to play the full 80 minutes or stick to exerting themselves only in the last 40, which, against the Boks and Samoa, could mean both games are lost for them by half-time.

Much has been made of Samoa's win over Australia in July, but it was against a mix-and-match team, so I'm going to discount that slightly. Ultimately, then, I somehow believe Wales will win both matches while South Africa's rather boring but efficient kick-and-chase game will stifle Samoa (of course, and I expect some biffo from both, this match could be won by the team who earns the fewer yellow/red cards).

Prediction 1 Wales, 2 South Africa.

Now kick that ball in anger!

Finally, you can still enter the competition to win Maximuscle gear and products by predicting the England v Argentina and Wales v South Africa scores (see the previous blog).

And very finally, my predictions for the big opening matches: NZ 35 Tonga 13, England 22 Argentina 10, Wales 20 South Africa 17. Now let the games begin.

Follow me on Twitter @lookdownsouth

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, the sports nutrition choice of Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh team. For more information on how Maximuscle is the Team Behind the Team, go to www.maximuscle.com/tbtt

US Open Diary 2011: Were Rafael Nadal and co right to be so disgruntled about the rain?