Nick Butler: Agenda 2020 - light on substance but good rhetoric

If Rome's surprisingly definitive confirmation of its bid for the 2024 Olympics this morning is anything to go by, as well as the announcement of the United States contender due tomorrow, then the unanimous acceptance of the Agenda 2020 reform process in Monte Carlo has been taken as a breath of fresh air reverberating throughout most of the Olympic Movement.

Writing on the eve of the beginning of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Session last week, I was skeptical of how much difference Agenda 2020 would actually make, because, with the exception of the recommendation for an Olympic TV channel, the proposals were neither radical nor concrete, definite changes.

Having seen all 40 ideas being steamrolled through, despite the many questions from members, with the two times IOC President Thomas Bach mistakenly saw someone raise their hand the closest we came to any possible dissent - for the record, it turned out to be the hair of Russia's Alexander Popov and the pen of Indonesia's Rita Subowo - I am less convinced than ever about the merits of the process.

Writing after the conclusion of day one of the Session, my colleague David Owen observed how the process was less a "revolutionary" change and more a first step in a longer reform process of which the IOC now has the opportunity to proceed with, but will not necessarily do so.

The 40 Agenda 2020 recommendations were unanimously accepted by the IOC membership in Monte Carlo ©Getty Images

This is undoubtedly true, but on another hand, the process was groundbreaking simply because of the subsequent reaction.

As predicted, there was little interest in the wider world, with many journalists attending the Session seemingly more motivated by the latest raft of athletics doping allegations than Agenda 2020. But within Olympic circles, the reaction so far has been akin to a sea-change, with boundless potential for change and innovation.

With regard to bidding cities, the change potentially allowing more events to be held outside bidding cities has caused the biggest interest. When unveiling the Rome bid this morning, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi claimed the bid will take advantage of pre-existing facilities outside the capital, in Florence, Naples and Sardinia perhaps, in order to permit a "controlled" and sustainable bid.

In a similar vein, Hungarian Olympic Committee President Zsolt Borkai has also enthusiastically embraced the possibility of a Budapest bid, which could also include events farther afield in places like Debrecen, Szeged and Győr.

"The Agenda 2020 programme is a great and historic opportunity for us and other smaller cities, countries which are not easily able to bid under the previous system," he said. "Difficulties of providing infrastructure and subsequent use of the facilities goes away following the Agenda 2020 changes."

Other problems, such as the firm opposition expressed by Budapest Mayor Istvan Tarlós when the bid was first muted in September, seem to have evaporated in a puff of Monte Carlo-reform-tinged smoke. Audacious joint bids are also already being talked about, however unlikely, with a Los Angeles and San Francisco partnership and a Dubai and Abu Dhabi alliance two unlikely possibilities.

Rome's bid, outlined by CONI President Giovanni Malago and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi this morning, is one of many bids being considered following Agenda 2020
©Getty Images

But, judging by the number of questions on this issue from IOC members, expressing concerns on issues ranging from potential travel expenses and logistical pressure from small nations, I would be surprised if these ideas come to much.

Indeed, the stories about the IOC wanting sliding sports at Pyeonchang 2018 to be shifted outside South Korea, which emerged during the Session but have since been swiftly dismissed by patriotic Korean officials, can be taken a mischievous red herring more than a realistic proposal.

The same ambiguity is present when we turn our attention to sports on the programme. When the head of the relevant Working Group, Italy's Franco Carraro, fielded questions on the changes, he answered in such a way that everyone was left even more confused and in the dark than beforehand,

It even brought a rather wonderful line of "I may be being a bit thick here..." from Princess Anne, something you don't hear from a Royal Family member very often.

But there were murmurings afterwards that Carraro was being deliberately vague, and not giving much away to keep everyone on their toes so any future changes, ironed out behind closed doors in private meetings no doubt, remain possible.

Yet sport after sport has since circulated press releases expressing their happiness and joy with the proposals, and outlining potential room for manoeuvre as a consequence. Just today, there have been calls for mixed team archery at Tokyo 2020, along with the possible pioneering of relay and head-to-head races in flatwater canoeing.

Mixed team events in many others sports, from synchronised swimming to triathlon via table tennis, have also been muted. Others have come out definitively to protect under-fire events, such as athletics after the tantalising suggestion of IOC stalwart Dick Pound that the triple jump could be under threat.

Others still, including surfing and bowling as well as baseball and softball, have taken the Session as an opportunity to knock harder at the door of possible inclusion at some point in the future.

Sports, such as archery today, are falling over themselves to suggest new mixed team formats, something highlighted during Agenda 2020 as a positive step towards gender equality ©Getty Images

So, you could argue that Bach has produced a political master-class.

Although the changes do not in reality signify that much, the aura of change is far greater. Comparisons can be made with the distinction between the British Labour Party of the 1980s and the 1990s and the "New" Labour of Tony Blair, a change in rhetoric more than reality but one that resonated hugely with the public.

Agenda 2020 was indeed a classic political process in every way: right down to the individuals involved. Bach the President, with power and influence ostensibly greater than ever, the likes of Carraro and Bidding reforms Group chair John Coates the cabinet hunting dogs, sent out to deliver a message. And Pound, whose call for the 2022 Olympic race to be restarted was perhaps the Session's only break from the script, the backbench stalwart kept on the outside but an experienced and respected voice nonetheless.

But, neither can we heap too much praise on Bach at this stage. As Owen observed, and as New Labour ultimately found out to its cost, if change is promised it must happen eventually.

Yet if what was wanted was a proverbial kick-up-the-back side to reinvigorate enthusiasm among international federations and potential bidding cities alike, early signs are that it has had the desired effect.

Nick Butler is a reporter for insidethegames. To follow him on Twitter click here.