Historically, the Paris Olympics, which ended without a Finnish medal, have been a constant topic of conversation in recent weeks.
The discussion took more rounds on August 21, when Ilta-Sanomat published anonymous letters of four Finnish athletes.
In their letter, the foursome described the Finnish Olympic Committee’s Paris arrangements as follows, among other things:
In Paris, many athletes complained about the lack of togetherness and said they were left alone when they arrived at the competition village. Some were even so alone that they had cried from anxiety.
Many athletes were put off by the management’s lack of passion and apathy towards elite sports and athletes.
The culture of winning is not visible in the actions of the Olympic Committee or the management that was in Paris. For example, in Paris, the management and staff felt that entertaining the state leadership, other important guests or even their own families was more important. As a result, some of the athletes felt that they were left without the necessary help.
In the competition village, the accommodation facilities of the Finnish team seemed to be visited daily by politicians, civil servants, partners or other persons unrelated to the athletes’ competition performance – unlike in other countries. This could be acceptable if it did not affect the availability of basic things, such as healthcare. It is also great that the state administration encourages us athletes, as long as it is done with sports first.
Urheilu sent a questionnaire to each of the 56 Finnish athletes who competed in Paris. The main question was whether the above-mentioned descriptions corresponded to the athlete’s own experiences at the Paris Olympics.
The survey was conducted anonymously. The answer options were yes, no, partly and I don’t want to answer. The response time was a week. 31 out of 56 athletes responded, i.e. the response rate was 55.4.
Thirteen of the respondents felt that the experiences of the four who appeared anonymously did not match their own. Eleven respondents answered partially and seven fully signed the criticism. So 18 out of 31 respondents identified with the letter at least partially.
Attached are anonymous quotes from the athletes who answered the survey.
“The psychologists were not supportive, asked about feelings or well-being after the performance, and left them alone even before the race. The team had nothing in common, so no wonder if there was no common spirit. The doctor didn’t have time when I told him about the symptoms.”
“The Paris Games were only the tip of the iceberg, as it was written in the text (of the letter). The competitions were not so much the biggest problem, but the big picture.”
“The management didn’t necessarily know how the athlete had played or what might have happened in the competition event. On the other hand, I understand that on certain days it was not possible to follow every sport and their performances. I would have liked information on where, for example, doctors, muscle carers, psychological coaches are at any time – at the games, in the village or somewhere else.”
“It’s great that the state leadership is interested in sports and found time to come and encourage.”
In addition, Urheilu asked what school grade the athletes would give the Finnish Olympic Committee regarding the Paris arrangements. The answers of 31 athletes ranged from failed (4) to excellent (10), so that the average became 7.5.
Of the respondents, 19 or 61 percent felt that the Olympic Committee was successful in its arrangements, i.e. worth at least 8 as a school grade.
One wanted to speak by name
Urheilu also offered each athlete the opportunity to comment on the survey with their own name. Judoka Martti Puumalainen took the offer as the only one.
– I don’t belittle anyone’s experiences, but the letter was quite radical. It didn’t match my experience. For myself, I can say that it was really nice with all the people, says Puumalainen, who lived in the Olympic village for six days.
The judoka says that he gave the Olympic Committee a commendable rating for the arrangements, i.e. number 9. The Puumalainen, who was one of Finland’s biggest medal hopes, did not feel that the state and other invited guests interfered with his preparation for the Olympic tournament, which ended bitterly with a defeat in the opening round.
He says that the Prime Minister participated Petteri Orpon meeting voluntarily.
– It was an honor for me. I said For Roki (coach Draksic) that I say hi, shake hands and then go to nap. I wanted to be there out of respect, says Puumalainen.
According to Puumalainen, the operation of the competition village did not cost the team a single medal.
– Everyone probably has a place to look in the mirror to some extent. I guess no one can outsource their own responsibility. I don’t speak for anyone else, but my own performance was all up to me.
Puumalainen feels that the feedback discussion – both public and within the team – has been necessary. However, he hopes that in the future the focus will shift to developing the support received by Finnish Olympic athletes and sports federations.
– Now the action is too short-lived.
“Everyone’s experience is genuine”
Was the Finnish team leader in Paris Leena Paavolainen says that he considers the discussion of the last weeks important. He does not want to comment on the experiences of individual athletes.
– We had a wide range of athletes, experienced and first timers. Each team member’s experience is authentic. The beauty of the Summer Games is that we have a versatile team. Then it can accommodate very different experiences, says Paavolainen, vice president of the Olympic Committee’s elite sports unit.
– We always try to build an operating environment as safe as possible, so that every athlete can focus on their competition performance as well as possible.
The coach of one of the team members told that the corona restrictions introduced at the Finnish team’s premises during the games could have a negative impact on the athletes’ experiences in the competition village.
– It is obvious that everyone experiences common spaces differently. Various restrictions will certainly affect the sense of community and the atmosphere. Of course, the situation in Paris was not comparable to Tokyo and Beijing, says Paavolainen, referring to the two previous Olympic trips.
The Olympic Committee received 41 responses
After the Paris Games, the Olympic Committee made its own feedback survey for the team, to which 41 people answered, according to Paavolainen. In addition to the athletes, the number also includes other personnel of the team.
– We are just analyzing the answers to our survey. The board of the Olympic Committee will discuss the Paris feedback survey at the weekend. The final report will be completed by the end of September.
Paavolainen does not want to take a stand on OK’s survey to get a 7.5 school grade.
– All feedback and development suggestions are welcome. I don’t have anything to comment on my school grade anyway.