Mr Dutton's popularity on the wane

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34133, 21 April 1976, Page 10

Mr Dutton's popularity on the wane

(By

RAY CAIRNS)

Roy Dutton has been a distinguished figure on the New Zealand cycling scene for 40 years: a long-serving member of the national council, president of the Amateur Cycling Association, and more recently elected a life member. He was also twice nominated for the Olympic Games — as fourth seed when three were sent in 1936, and No. 2 in 1948 when only Nick Carter was chosen. It is a subject Mr Dutton often mentions, sometimes more than once, to cycling people and to journalists. He indicates by his comments that this unfortunate history makes him more sensitive than most to the feelings of cyclists nominated for the Games. But Mr Dutton was the senior party to the most crass folly of the Olympic selection panel this year. He was the panel’s man on the spot when the 100 km time trial cycling team rode its second qualifying ride north of Hamilton, when it went 3| min slower than in December in Canterbury. He was the man on the spot who knew' that it was a poor course, unwisely chosen by the national coach. Willi Moore, and that the conditions on the day w'ere far from con-

ducive to a very fast time. He also knew, from listening to intelligent conversation, that the on-the-coad performance of the team was almost certainly better than when the team rode 2hr 12min 12.2 sec in December. To a person with his cycling background. this should have been all the information .Mr Dutton needed. The omission of the national champion, Blair Stockwell, can, perhaps, be attributed to Mr Dutton. The deliberations of the selection panel are in committee, obviously, but Mr Dutton was the one of the three who was in a position to make the most influential comments on the worth of the 100 km team. It is inconceivable that cycling’s advocates, Ted Hanaray and Moore, would not have pressed for the inclusion of the team. It is unfortunate that a person of Mr Dutton’s long standing in cycling should be remembered in his later years with something much less than favour. In his last year as a national selector, 10 years ago. Mr Dutton agreed to a request from the Commonwealth Games selector that Peter Robinson be dropped from a very high ranking on the track cycling list to the bottom. Robinson was subsequently — and foolishly — left out, Mr Dutton castigated. He refused to stand

again as a selector, and next featured — adverseley, as far as cycling was concerned — in 1973-74. By then a Games selector himself, he was party to a ridiculous dropping of Harry Kent, a Commonwealth champion, from the Christchurch Games, and as director of cycling for the Games was largely responsible for the poor presentation of sport. It is no secret that a large majority of technical officials were angry with the way their sport was displayed and taxed Mr Dutton on the subject at one of the early daily conferences. Mr Dutton did not attend any further such meetings, leaving the controller of cycling, Rob Sowry, to shoulder the criticisms. Immediately after being reappointed cycling’s executive member of the New Zealand Olympic and Commonwealth Games Association in 1974 — and its support as a Games selector — Mr Dutton resigned from the cycling council. He also severed all major connections with the sport, including resigning as cycling’s executive member on the N.Z.0.C.G.A., but retains his seat as an equestrian representative. Cycling has lost confidence in Mr Dutton’s authority in the sport; he is unlikely to command much support for a cycling nomination as Games selector again, even from the fast-shrinking number of old colleagues on the cycling council. Certainly no cyclist in New Zealand could again feel confident in the judgment of Roy Dutton.