Guest commentator Forbes Carlile, veteran Australian coach, one of the fathers of sports science in the pool, the man who invented the taper and coached Shane Gould to the most impressive solo female performance ever in the Olympic pool, looks back at a tragic-comedy of epic proportions

La Commedia e Finita

Send in the clowns: the comedy is ended' were the final words in Italian composer Leoncavallo's  operatic tragedy, Pagliacci [Clowns]. The last poignant words signalled  it was time to cry.

In the context of where swimming finds itself today it is easy to cry but at the same time were it not for the "tragic" consequences of the suits crisis it is difficult not to laugh at the ridiculous, often  incomprehensible, actions of our swimming "leaders" as they stumble from one  stupidity and  misjudgment to another.

FINA, obsessed with the glamour of the "long suits" and with records (and with the financial implications), did not know how to put a stop to the "fast-suit" madness, which should have been ended before the Sydney Olympics in 2000 - and most certainly no longer than eight years later,  before the Beijing Games last year.

Then we heard the plaintive cry of coaches confirming FINA inaction  ..."we can't hurt the swimmers, wait until the Games are over."

FINA's mistakes, both of omission and commission, motivated by greed and pursued with arrogance, have been compounded by the compliance of others: FINA has been aided and abetted by many.

Towards the end of 2008, after the spectacular appearance of the new generation of buoyant and "slippery" suits at the European short-course championships, the FINA executive, as a consequence of the uproar that ensued, went into "damage control"  and came up with an elaborate  "3-phase  solution". This was a plan of delaying tactics, designed to suit suit makers and their balance sheets, which have precipitated the Roman circusin prospect.

When the writing was on the wall that urgent and substantial changes were required, FINA failed to move effectively. The executive, buoyed on by its cheer squad of true believers raised the curtain on its comedy of errors,  dubbed the Dubai Charter, which has done little if not to leave the swimming world in a chaos of uncertainty.

The "3-phase"  plan seemed basically to be hatched to leave the Speedo LZR suit, widely agreed to be responsible for the plethora of 2008 records, in the water - at least for the whole of 2009. "Trust us" we heard from FINA apologists ... "we all understand  the problem - FINA has found a solution".

"The LZR may be bad, but some of the others are worse" seems to have been the fatal rationale  adopted by the FINA executive. The fruits of the International body's endeavours are there for all to see.

Had the Executive committee bitten the bullet and moved decisively without what can now be seen to be a the sleight of hand "plan" of incongruent bylaws, the World Championships in July could have been swum with fair competition: with all wearing 2007-technology swim suits. Then there could have been an even playing field. FINA is still persisting in asserting that  with suits of all brands available to all competitors, all swimmers can  easily obtain the fast-suit of their  choice. I don't think so.

There is no escaping the fact that the  "Circus Maximus" in July  will have its tent pitched at the Foro Italico, where the  jewel in  FINA's firmament, the long-course World Swimming Championships, will make a   mockery of the once-pure sport of competitive swimming. There are few who need convincing that it will be the expensive, "exotic, high-tech suits", rather than swimming prowess, that will have greatest influence on results in Rome.

A good many swimmers and coaches will have an  excuse to offer. One cannot help but feel that as the FINA dignitaries parade to the victory dais for their big moment as medal-presenters, the crowd may not honour them with acclamation.

How did all this come to happen?

In March 2009  an imposing, now discredited,  "3-phase plan" of FINA executives, after "passing" the February Think Tank with flying colours, was rubber-stamped by the Bureau, together with a raft of supporting, new and ill-conceived by-laws. That became the infamous, high-sounding Dubai Charter. These flawed plans of  the executive served as delaying tactics for excising just part  of the "fast-suit" cancer from the sport.

Transparently, the interests of  chief sponsor Speedo were very clearly favoured (though that would come to backfire).

The executive's misjudgement in planning to call in the expertise of only one (Switzerland-based) scientific consultant for the small approval commission was enthusiastically adopted.

On February 2Oth that we read the revealing statement from FINA  that clearly signalled what lay ahead when FINA president Larfaoui spoke of the need for allowing  "evolution" in swim suit technology.  Evolution towards what, other than  aiding  performance?

The tragedy is  that  the results of FINA's hasty, ill-conceived actions, accompanied by flawed new bylaws, have grievously wounded the credibility and integrity of the  sport, and in so doing have, with studied delay, caused a considerable  waste of time, effort and money.

Many from the grass roots base of millions and from other levels of competition are being  driven from the sport by the expense incurred  by the manufacturers'-led competitive swim suit "revolution".

Now, fortunately, we hear that  the executive in a last desperate grand-standing pose of "statesmanship" (surely not contriteness), and is asking  national federations to indicate in a mail vote whether, after  1st January, 2010, they want there to be a FINA-directed return to swim suit  "normalcy": virtually  to  2007 technology  with  permeable,  non-buoyant textiles that do not ENHANCE performance.

The likely  "tragedy" (and comedy) of the 2009 World Championships could have been averted if some  bold individuals  within the  FINA circle had stood their ground early and insisted that FINA adhere to its simply understood  Rule SW10.7: prohibiting  devices that may aid speed, buoyancy and endurance. That surely includes, within the spirit of the rule,  any  devices or performance-aiding equipment which may be part of swim suit construction. This has not been FINA's interpretation.

Now is the time for national federations, in parallel with the proposal  for back-to-permeable-textiles, to be asked  whether they want Rule SW10.7  to be applied to all aspects of swimming equipment (as proposed by USA Swimming at one stage) - including  swim suits.

The likely "yes" vote will represent a very positive move in re-building  image and pride in swimming,  restoring its place in public esteem as a pure and wonderful sport. The tragedy, and the comedy, of the swim suit saga, once  we get through 2009, could soon be over.