example-image
Connect with Us:  

Suit Makers Flood FINA With Latest Tech Solutions

Jan 16, 2009  - Craig Lord

"I ran past the first watchman. Then I was horrified, ran back again and said to the watchman: 'I ran through here while you were looking the other way.' The watchman gazed ahead of him and said nothing. 'I suppose I really oughtn't to have done it,' I said. The watchman still said nothing. 'Does your silence indicate permission to pass?" - Kafka

Suit makers are estimated to have submitted more than 30 suit approval requests in a bid to beat any deadline they may face on technological advances that may still be in play for a Rome World Championships in July that is now at serious risk of descending into the kind of farce witnessed in Rijeka at the European short-course Championships last month. 

SwimNews understands from sources close to several suit makers, that, in the absence of a moratorium on suit approvals during a period of investigation and inquiry into forming new rules and approval process to avoid a repeat of the blunders of 2008, a wave of requests was considered by FINA this month. Makers hope to have their new products on the blocks in Rome in the face of widespread opposition to the use of performance-enhancing technology that has made the swim suit a device, a tool, that benefits some more than others, with different brands working in different ways to create an artificial playing field.

According to the FINA guidelines in place, the latest requests were considered on January 10. No word as yet as to how many approvals were sought or whether FINA has approved all submissions for use in the sport this year. The questions have been put to FINA and we will bring you the answers here should we get any.

The deeper questions that the latest news raises include: is FINA serious about the suit issue? Is it going about resolving the issues and concerns of a large body of people in a professional manner? Is it receiving worthy legal advice? Are suit makers truly wedded to listening to the widespread concerns of the federations and coaches and swimmers on the issue of technology? Are suit makers listening to the voices of the people without whom they would have no market?

And: can FINA be absolutely sure that among the latest requests for approval is not at least one that is destined to become the first doping suit? Just about every approval granted in 2008 got through on the basis of no scientific tests - and certainly no independent scientific tests - being carried out. It would be impossible to detect something rare in a suit that looks and feels exactly like others flowing into the pool. Some still paint things that already exist in this world as fiction and prefer to wait until fact not only stares them in the face (as it did at Manchester 2008 with the LZR Racer) but takes a wet fish and slaps them across the face several times and then steals their wallet in broad daylight. 

The arrival of anything that could be called a doping suit should be avoided at all costs. Has FINA already seen the frame on which such a garment will be built - without realising it?

  On the rush of requests, the argument of most suit makers - and some swimmers - is the same: if FINA allow it, then we should be competitive. The ball, therefore, returns to the court of FINA. 

 It is hard to fathom why FINA - in the midst of enquiries into how best to get the sport out of the spot it finds itself in, in the midst of a process supposedly designed to reintroduce fairness to a sport that lost its way in 2008, in the midst of moves to find ways to woo the likes of adidas and Nike back to the fast lane, in the midst of a period of calm that it called for and was granted in order for proper consideration to be given to the whole debate - would wish to grant approvals for more than 30 new suits just two months before it may make a move to place limitations on technology.

   The use of the word limitations is used advisedly. It is the best word to described what is being demanded by the two leading aquatic superpowers in the world, the world's leading coaches and many leading current swimmers and legendary athletes who regard what was allowed to happen in 2008 as somewhat tragic. Anyone doubting that last assertion needs to know that SwimNews has received statements urging change from athletes who collectively have won 114 gold, 127 silver and 232 bronze medals at the Olympic Games, mostly in the past 20 years, while some support comes from legends who made their names in the pool from 1956 onwards. I think that is evidence enough to suggest that a substantial number of those who don suits in serious pursuit of the podium are unhappy to carry on with the chaos of 2008.

   Surely,  it would be fanciful and farcical to imagine that FINA would not place a moratorium on all new approvals until a new regime is in place, until new rules have been discussed and agreed upon. It is common and legally binding practice in international business, among governments and governmental institutions, both nationally and internationally, to pick up the moratorium tool the moment that serious inquiry into problematic and challenging issue is issued. 

 Why has FINA not done so? In light of events in Rijeka last month - where Mustapha Larfaoui, President of FINA, cannot have failed to hear the loud concerns voiced by Europe's leading coaches and federations, cannot have failed to notice swimmers wearing wetsuit lookalikes that had never been seen in the sport until the past few months, wearing two, three and in one case four suits in one race, one over the other, three brands at one in some cases - it must have been obvious to all who take seriously their responsibilities within FINA that a moratorium on suit approvals at a time of investigation was (and is now) essential.

 Both FINA members, federations and coaches have called for a moratorium. No response to that call has been given. The issue is being avoided. Why? I have put the question and will add the answer here when any leading light in FINA feels it appropriate in the interests of the sport they govern to speak out on the wound that festers yet in their sport. (When you are ready Mr Larfaoui, the world of swimming would doubtless welcome any words of wisdom you may have to contribute to the biggest debate in your sport since China heaped shame on your heads in the 1990s before it was decided to defend the indefensible no longer).

Meantime, SwimNews has this from suit-maker sources:

  • "Yes, we have submitted [X] for [X] and an additional [X] new approvals... Our count is that FINA must have received well over 20 requests for suit approvals and updates this month alone."
  • "We feel that we had to keep on top of things. If FINA don't take some big action to prevent the big mistakes of 2008 then we must decide 'are we out of the sport or do we get technology approved for our suits that will be able to enter the race to make swimmers faster". Q: Enhance performance? "Yes".
  • "I can't say how many approvals we have submitted but we have heard that there are a lot of requests ... someone said more than 20 but [X] told us it could be double that. It's madness."

I dug out some old FINA minutes and found the only reference I could get hold of on the FINA Swimwear Commission. It can have up to five members but just three names are listed in the papers as having been charged with responsibility: Cornel Marculescu, FINA Executive Director, Jean-Pierre Morand, the FINA lawyer who did for the likes of Michelle Smith de Bruin at  an unforgettable CAS hearing, and Soeren Korbo, a member of the FINA Technical Swimming Committee. 

Understandably, perhaps, there was no answer to my question about how many new approvals were being sought. What is certain is that all three members of the commission have the wisdom and experience to know that the latest wave of requests could cause a problem, including one for organisers who are spending 50 million euros on staging the world championships in Rome this summer - and now face the prospect of a farce that will sweep us back to the kind of atmosphere that prevailed in 1994, when the dark art of Zhou Ming and his mates was at play day after day. If any doubt it, ask President Larfaoui: he was in Rijeka, with eyes wide open. He was there in Rome, 1994, too - and this is what he said after six days of obvious cheating: "From a population of a billion people, you could expect something special to emerge."

He changed his mind after lengthy inquiry - and the good work of the likes of Taffy Cameron, Allen Richardson and others - and under pressure from a body of opinion in the sport. In the meantime, many titles, many results, many world records joined the list of that part of swimming history labelled "tainted" and many swimmers and coaches were robbed of rightful recognition. The president should not take any of that personally. The point is: swimming does not have time to pontificate over an issue that will lead to another skewed result in Rome - this summer. Perception is, as M Larfaoui has surely learned down the years, is extremely important. Time is of the essence and the watchman should stand in silence no more. By all means choose diplomatic language - but speak, and sent the right signal in a timely fashion.

Meantime, M Morand has the knowledge, expertise and experience to realise that a moratorium would be most useful at this juncture. He may, of course, be happy to rely on no such thing: he may feel safe in the knowledge that the wording of the FINA suit approvals guidelines and the Swiss law under which they and FINA are protected are weighty enough weapons in the face of any legal challenges that may ever flow from an untimely set of circumstances.

For those who may not have read them as yet, here are those guidelines.

Mr Marculescu, who is keen to have decisions on suits based on science, told SwimNews that the guidelines "are still in place and will be updated during this year of 2009". Hope lives in the word "updated". Meantime, 30 new suit approvals equals 30 x US$1,500 for FINA. Not a fortune but the cost of that money could be much higher.

The guidelines tell us: "If it deems it appropriate, the Commission can submit issues and questions to experts or laboratories.  In such case, the Commission shall inform the applicant of the expert or laboratories which it intends to consult, the questions to be asked and the costs linked thereto." 

So, If FINA is not wedded to the idea of a moratorium, the very least it should do in the face of the risk presented above is to send every single one of the latest suits sent for approval straight to an independent laboratory with a note stating: given patents that exist in this world, is there any way that this garment could be used as a platform for technology that could interact with the central nervous system of the human body? There are other questions too – about angle buoyancy, about flotation tools, about fabrics that are not fabrics at all. About where to draw a line that will allow suit makers to innovate without creating suits that cross the line from maximising to enhancing performance.

Pursuits of scientific answers need to be targeted at the independent sector, not at experts already connected in some way to sport and to FINA or others who govern the sport. That principle would need to apply to any new approvals process that is agreed, if FINA is to avoid any suggestion of a sham.

As FINA gathers this week in conference in Singapore with coaches who are demanding action on high-tech suits, many of the suit makers they will all meet in Lausanne on February 20 are hard at work creating advanced versions of the kind of technology and "fabrics" that many now wish to banish from the sport.

Whatever the legal position is, there is an ethical one to consider. FINA is not in the business of pulling the wool over the eyes of anyone, we assume. To take money for the approval of suits that may well have no future in the race pool would be unethical. The answer is simple: if a moratorium is unpalatable (unfair to stop progress now you've allowed the LZR and the latest TYR and the X, Y and Z, suit makers say), then at the very least, FINA should suspend approvals until the end-March date for suits commission - at the earliest. That would allow discussions to take place in a less suspicion-charged atmosphere and provide a calm zone in which decisions can be taken on what will and what will not survive on the skins of swimmers.

Allowing another wave of new suits into the mix at this stage would further muddy already murky waters.