AUSTRALIA: Stuart O'Grady

Australia - Stuart O'Grady

Though Phil Anderson can lay claim to the first significant Australian rider in the Tour de France, and Cadel Evans and his 2011 Tour victory obviously point to him as the most significant Australian rider, Stuart O'Grady holds a special importance in the growth and development of Australia's significant improvements in cycling over the past fifteen years. O'Grady's importance to Australia and Australian cycling can be seen through his successes at various major events, including gold at the Olympics and time with both the yellow jersey and with stage victories at the Tour de France. Most importantly, however, has been his leadership to the current generation of Australian cyclists, which make up a formidable global force in cycling for the first time ever.

Credit: ABC Australia
          Yellow Jersey won in 2001              















O'Grady's longevity, ability to battle through extreme pain and adversity, and the leadership he has provided for cycling and athletics in Australia are the reasons which he has developed such a strong legacy and has become a "household name" in Australia. And yet, as of his retirement less than two weeks ago, and subsequent admission to having used erythropoietin (EPO) prior to the 1998 Tour de France, there is an enormous elephant in the room when discussing his legacy:

As the founder of The Young Turks, David Koller, suggests, doping in cycling is already assumed. And before discussing O'Grady's impact in Australia, his impact must first be filtered through this lens. Though Koller's assertion is quite an unfortunate one for the sport of cycling, the notion that everybody was doping and that the playing field was level as a result does appear to be a common refrain. 

But how has he been viewed in Australia? Rather than constantly viewing athletes who dope as "rogue," some in Australia suggest that such an assertion makes us just as guilty by refusing to address the sport's issue and implicitly, thus, "propping up the system." Of course, zero tolerance bodies (such as the Australian Olympic Committee which has now stripped him of his Athletes' Commission Representative status) and individuals also exist and view everything he has ever done as tainted, this opinion appears to fall into a minority view, one lacking nuance and understanding of both the sport and O'Grady's place within it. 

More common are nuanced views, which see him as a hard, "honest" worker, as having paved the way for Aussies, but most importantly (in one particular viewpoint), that his admission was straight-forward as he has always conducted himself. Therefore, unlike long-time deniers like Lance Armstrong, it is wrong to disbelieve his sincerity. His official biographer, Reece Homfray, has suggested that once the dust has settled and tempers have calmed, O'Grady won't be remembered in the future with the same angry passion and disappointment that plagues him now. He has done a lot in his career outside of that fateful 1998 Tour de France, and he has done an incredible amount for Australian cycling. An effort was made to ask Reece Homfray about O'Grady, but he has yet to have responded to the question:
What impacts have Stuart O'Grady's Tour de France exposure and successes, but also his cycling career in general, had on the Australian cycling and sporting community, but also among the average Australian?
But, luckily, we can garner a very important insight into the importance of O'Grady to his countrymen and legacy of cycling in Australia when we look at the results of a poll very recently conducted by the Adelaide Advertiser, the city and O'Grady's hometown's biggest newspaper. The poll, with endorsement by Australia's Transport Minister, asked whether Adelaide's northern bikeway which follows along a freeway should be renamed in the wake of O'Grady's confession, and was met with the following results:

Without the analysis of somebody close to cycling in Australia, one must then extrapolate from the existing commentaries, mentions, and historiographically-oriented records of O'Grady, and not only the attention but the respect of the Australian public, as seen above, but also his riding compatriots, teammates, and other individuals involved in cycling:


O'Grady, though his admission of doping must have certainly disappointed a lot of people, including many in the cycling community, has commanded a great deal of respect for his career. He has respect for his durability and incredible pain threshold, his historic leadership and exemplary actions to the younger Australian riders, and he is, as long-time teammate Michael Rogers titles him, the "pioneer of modern Australian cycling." Thus, like the media and Australian public, one gets a distinct sense that even his fellow-riders would be able to believe his assertion that he doped just once, for a very short period of time, in 1998. His leadership and exemplary behaviour over a long career, and the sheer amount of respect that other riders have for him, especially younger Australian riders, suggest that this trust and respect is not one that could be easily breached. 

O'Grady's durability, perseverence, and pain threshold are almost universally cited as a point of respect among everybody from media, fellow riders, and his fans. Indeed, he transcended to legendary status in 2006 as he crashed early on in the Tour de France, fractured a vertebrae, and managed to finish the entire race. He endured various injuries, multiple broken bones, including a collarbone which he has reportedly broken at least three times in his career. On top of his long history of injuries, both race related, and otherwise, he has now completed the most Tour de France starts in the 100 year history of the race at 17. His threshold for pain while being able to persevere at a level high enough to be a major part of the Team Time Trial win in 2013, his 17th Tour de France, are a major reason as to why and how he is such an important part of Australian cycling, and indeed, Australian culture.

Credit: The Age, Australia
Finally, and most significantly to this project, O'Grady's role in Australian cycling, sports, and culture derives, more than anything from his role in leading and establishing Australian cycling on the world stage. One sees this at every turn-- his Tour de France successes; his Olympic gold medal in Athens; his world championship successes; his decision to sign with the first ever Australian world-stage professional cycling team, Orica GreenEdge, in a leadership and mentoring capacity; and being named to the Australian Athletes' Commission for the London 2012 Olympics. These accolades all speak to an athlete that had both the outstanding ability, but also a great deal of respect from his peers. Indeed, Charlie Walsh, long-time head coach of the Australian road cycling program, summed up O'Grady's contribution to the sport as such:
"Only much later in the mid 90s after Stuart O'Grady produced high quality road cycling performances as a former track cyclist did the doors start to open for Australian track cyclists to gain a career path with the Trade Teams. This meant our track endurance cyclists had an opportunity of earning an income and stay in the sport internationally. Stuart provided the opportunity for our track endurance athletes to continue in the sport and for them and us to remain competitive internationally at the international level."
                  -Charlie Walsh

In fact, if it had not been for the fact that O'Grady needed to perform in a road race at 10 am the morning after the opening ceremonies, he likely would have been Australia's flag-bearer at the 2012 London Olympics. Australia's Chef de Mission Nick Green cited O'Grady's six Olympic games, his four Olympic medals, and his performances at the Tour de France as reasons why O'Grady would receive strong consideration to be flag bearer.

Indeed, Stuart O'Grady has long represented both a talented and practically indestructible force in professional cycling. His outstanding leadership and drive to not only represent his country, but also help his fellow compatriots up to his level have left a very strong mark on both Australian cycling, but also Australian culture. He is a household name, and even though his doping admissions stain an otherwise unassailable career, it appears that his honesty, work ethic, and long-term body of work speak for themselves, and will indeed be what his teammates and fellow-Australians remember above all else.









2 comments:

  1. O'Grady only admitted as much as he had to and only after he was forced. His "admission" rings hollow like all the rest.

    Consider your Charlie Walsh quote. The late 1990s, when O'Grady "...produced high quality road cycling performances..." is exactly when he was doping. Where would Australian cycling be if O'Grady didn't dope? What Olympic spots did you steal from other Australians due to drug assisted performances? Would he have any role in Australian cycling if he had been caught then?

    This is the problem with doping. You may only do it once, or you may do it a lot, but your entire career is now tainted. Your Olympic selections, your financial support, your fans, are all built on cheating.

    Like many others, O'Grady lied for years, accepted things he didn't deserve. Not such a great legacy to leave behind.

    Cheers,
    Andrew

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your comment, Andrew.

    I've made some comments to you on Twitter, but will continue here:

    I tried to refrain from normative judgment in this project. But more than anything, my research suggests that O'Grady was highly respected by virtually everybody, and outside of really just the Australian Olympic Committee and a number of unaffiliated individuals, people have not lost a significant amount of respect for him.

    What my research suggests is that from the late 80s to the early 00s (and most likely longer in either direction) is that cycling was fundamentally sick, and that people today largely understand that, and place riders like O'Grady, Schleck, Contador (obviously among many others) and other generally well-respected riders in that context when discussing their doping.

    Moreover, I felt the need to consider O'Grady within a human context: it was not in his interest to admit doping until after he retired. He would have lost a large part of his livelihood, and he would have affected not only himself, but all of Australian cycling. If he'd admitted to doping around the turn of the century, he would've severely hampered his livelihood-potential. If he'd admitted doping later on, he would've harmed the ascendance of Australian cycling and the livelihoods of many other riders.

    I don't disagree with you that his legacy is tainted. 100%. But it has to be considered within the context and era that it took place. And it also has to be buttressed against the fact that O'Grady's confession was as up-front and honest as his public persona would dictate. Contrast that against the culture of "deny deny deny" of the vast majority of riders, and I think it offers a reasonable amount of credence to his claim that it was only prior to '98.

    And also, his legacy of developing Australian cycling and "putting it on the map" is absolutely a positive legacy, wading into the normative debate now, even if it was through doping. Similar to how Lance Armstrong's contributions to cancer research, regardless of his professional or personal integrity, is an exceedingly positive contribution to society.

    To end off, I personally think the most reasonable course of action is to presume his innocence outside of the '98 Tour, though with healthy skepticism. His reputation and work ethic, based on many years of cultivating relationships, need to be considered. If other reasons to doubt his honesty are brought to bear, that obviously changes. But also the fact that he so sloppily doped in '98 that they could find it in his urine (when people like Lance Armstrong's doping couldn't even be found in his blood until compared against samples much later) actually serves to corroborate his admittance that it was a one-time thing, based on fear and isolation, and that he was discouraged from ever doing it again.

    Thanks for taking the time to engage with me on this though, Andrew.

    Regards,
    Daniel

    ReplyDelete