The Olympic Games and the Duke of Westminster's Appeal

~l 'HJ!J OLYMPlC GAMES. ll It was the same story as ha · a.lrna.dy been of inadequate training and organization slovenly management on the spot. L ACK OJ,' i\'IANAGE~illN'l'. told and The judgment of The Times Special Correspon– dent at Stockholm was expressed as follows :- " Much might bE> written on the subject of the o.ccommodation and handling of ow·mon at Stockholm - of the crowding in ino.doquato sleeping quarters, o[ t ho unstutal.Jle food p1·ovidod, of the lack of cLiscipline, and the futility of tho trninfag instructions. It is a fact that certainJy the majority, and probably tho wholo number, of t he British trnck athletes a.t Stockholm lo t weight to a n extent which in somo individua l casos amOLmted to ove1· a stone. For men in training they wore quite improperly now·ished. The idea which has obtained currency, that the majority of them neglected trnining a ltogether, is untrue and unjust to the mon. The majority did their best to keep in condit ion (though there were notorious e.·ceptions), but t hat they did so was to their individual credit ; nothing was clone to put any heart or enthusiasm into them, to bring them to the post either physically fit or morally con– fident. Thero was probably not one of t hem but folt acutely that he mn, as it were, 1mbacked and single-handed a.go.inst competitors made fit, by care– ful handling, to the last 01mce, full of enthusiasm and esprit de corps, completely versed in all the t echnique of the track and the science of winning races. It was unfair to our men and unfair to our national interests. It is not the Olympic manage– ment under which, if we are to compote at all in the future, we ca.n hope to compete successfully." (The Tirnes, July 2Q, 1912.) upon such e. subject, but I have the advantage of completo independ~~ce since I' do n?t 'belong now: o.nd never could m the future, to any governing body, nor have I taken siqes in ! ny-altercation:– Perhaps, then, I may bo allowed to make a sugges– t ion as to org:anizatipn. It is clear thq.J; j;~ l'Il!ltter must be set right and endorsed J>y Press itnH pqblic before any appeal for funds upon a lq.rge s~le vyµI have any cha nce of success. "The Olympic Association of the past has worked a.go.inst the groat difficulty of public a.pa.thy. it )111.s done some particularly good ~ork-especie.lly m the matter of the London Ge.mes, which will probably fix the Olympic type for evei:. The Council consists of a.bout 50 members, who include the presi– dents or representatives of nearly every branch of sport. Such a body is, e.s it seems to me, fe.r too . valuable to dissolve, e.ncl should always be retamed e.s a final court of appeal in which any matter affecting the general policy of Great Brite.in towards the Game~ might be discussed and settled. "It is clear, however, that such e. ge.thuring is much too large for executive purposes. The smaller a body the more does each member feel his personal responsibility and the greater the results achieved. The ideal executive committee would, as it seems to me, consist of e. nucleus of fo_w· or five from the present Olympic Association, wit h as many more co-oP,ted from outside-not only from the universities, b~t from poptilar' athle~ic bod.ies tlU'oughout t he country, and from' men of affairs who a.re outside the ordinary circles ofsport. Various committees for finance, training, and other purposes could be formed in such a we.y, !ie.ch with wide powers in its own department. Such an arrangement would -t mve the advantage that it could be to.ken ii) h!:Jnd by the Association and put through without delay. " My contention is that if some practical organiza– tion of this sort could be at once formed and ~ain the general endorsement and confidence of t\}e public, we could then appeal for the large sum which will be needed without any clanger of lieing refused. The public will want to know in advance what it is going to get for its money. If they see e. aefinite practical scheme, and if the names which guarantee it show j;ha.t the ranks a.re closed and all are of one mind, we shall have overcome the greatest difficulty wjtlch lies betweiin us and Ber:iin." In p,ublishµi~ the letter T4 Time11 l¥1d6!1 an editorial footnote, which saiq :- The British Olympic Council did not deny that in ma~y respects our an-angements were inade– quate, but pleaded that they were the best that could be made with the inadequate funqs avail– able. However valid the plea may have been, the feeling was widespread that a more ener– getic, less unwieldy, body than the British Olympic Council wo~d sm:µehow have managed to do better. Controversy once iµore raged in the Press, which WljB ~roµgqt to a head by a letter from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to The Time.s P,Ublished on August 8, 1912, in which he recurred to and urged the adoption of the reform which The Time11 had ro:eosed in the P.revious winter.___ "Vie are glad to be able to endorse Sir Arthur ---9-------------->--,----- - · Conan Doyle s l?roposa . e are preJ?&r to Sm ARTHUR CONAN DoYLE's LETTER. assure the Olymp10 Association that we qmte r'ecog~ . . nize tlw ~qlfishnes~ qf their 'j'l'Ork !ll~ th!! mpivi~ual This letter. from Sir Arthur Conan :Qoyle may ?,Ovot1on of mambo~. We ,liq.ye t!io~ht it o~ 41!~1 be repeated m full. He wrote :- m t he past to pomt out matters of orge.mzat1011 .. The . debate as to our preparations for the which were ~e:tain!y' capable of 'iinproveme~t,' liut next Olympic 'Games tends to take· the shape such an addition of co-opted members as 1S ~e~ of recrimination rather than of construction. Might suggested would, we feel sure, be acceptable to tlie I appeal to all concerned to let bygones be by- sp_orting public, who would without doubt ex~e gones, and to centre our efforts upon the future ? with sympa~~y any P:ogre.mme recommend~ by The scoring pf debating points over ea.eh other sueh a body. (The Tvmes, Aug. 8, ~912.) oµly darkens COunB!)l._' Th!) c1!,ie, O~ender in the pas~ ~ WI¥! th!l stwting Vofflt pf th~ sefiops tiffort has.been ~h!) ~y-gi)lpg pubµc,. w¥c!i, has not taken at reform which has sincp beeq made· . e.n mterest until our compare.t1ve failure e.t Stock- · , · · · · · ' · • ·· · • · hplm ea.me to 'waken it out of its indifference. The VI FOR A1'TTl AGATIJST THE GA"Lf"li'~ first step now is tliat every one' shoula be Illll!P.lani- .-. ' ~·+'I ' - · ' . ·• ·' . • ·-· mous enough to forget any quarrels of the ~. to exprOl!B regr.et for them, and· to 'unite with ·the one unselfish idea.I of forming the best instrument for the ·J_>tµ'pose· in hand. "1' ~ ~t,q.re "t~t I seee.k w~~h p~ ,~t~!!~i~~ Tlt!l su~cstiqµs PW4ll by SW, Art}\ur po~ Dqyle w~J:'!l qo~ ~ve~y 8'$l~P~ withQut criticism. Mr. R. C. Lehmann was · repqrted in The Times of July 21, 19li as apialong in • f, • • t ....~.. • • • .. • • -: