KEY POINTS:
In the end, the Beijing Olympics were not quite the success for New Zealand that some had predicted. Team mentor Sarah Ulmer had looked at the world rankings of our athletes and concluded this could be our best Games if potential was matched by performance. That did not eventuate but, by and large, this was a reasonable performance. Certainly, there was no cause for the angst that followed New Zealand's showing at the 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games. Those associated with sports administration and the country's high-performance centres will be breathing easier.
That is not to say questions should not be asked. This, in many ways, was a traditional New Zealand Games performance. Rowing, athletics and yachting, the stalwarts of our Olympic success, were again to the fore and on this occasion, for the first time, all three won gold at the same Games. Yet both rowing and yachting were somewhat disappointing. Rowing, which has received copious funding, failed to live up to its performances at world championships since the 2004 Olympics. It can point to the unfortunate illness suffered by the gritty Mahe Drysdale, but several other crews were surprisingly off the pace. Yachting, likewise, could, yet again, not uphold this country's reputation for producing fine sailors, and was saved by the efforts of boardsailor Tom Ashley.
The other major disappointment was the equestrian team, which has struggled consistently to rediscover past glories. Mark Todd's inclusion in the squad provided probably a telling commentary on our young riding talent. Elsewhere, results went much as expected. No New Zealander emerged from relative obscurity to grab gold. In a world of frequent international interplay, this is becoming increasingly difficult. That, however, did not prevent Argentina from winning cycling's madison, or German Jan Frodeno from triumphing in the men's triathlon.
If anything grated about the New Zealand team's performance, it was the attitude of two of its higher-profile members. Beatrice Faumuina's frivolous dismissal of her abject display in the women's discus and her wish to quit the team early represented calamitous new lows in the career of an athlete who carried the New Zealand flag at the Athens Olympics. Liza Hunter-Galvan revealed a similar gracelessness after the women's marathon when she talked of switching allegiance to the United States. Many people had gone out on a limb to overturn her original exclusion from the team. They have the right to feel duped. The team selectors have a right to feel vindicated.
Equally justified was the decision to hold the Games in Beijing. This was a well-organised Olympiad boasting excellent facilities. Even the Chinese capital's pollution dissipated as the Games progressed and the impact of taking cars off the road and closing down factories increased. This was also an Olympics that will be remembered, above all, for American swimmer Michael Phelps' record-breaking eight gold medals. Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt was the other major figure but he did not do anything that had not been done before.
As always, there was the problem of drug cheats. Some, such as Ukrainian heptathlon silver medallist Lyudmila Blonska, got their just deserts. Others doubtless evaded detection. There was also the emergence of a new problem in the shape of an increasing number of athletes switching nationality to compete at the Olympics. This takes two forms. The first is competitors who missed selection for their country of birth; the second involves Arab countries buying world-class runners from Africa. Given the principles underpinning the Games, it is an issue that should worry the International Olympic Committee.
