Livingstone knew and cared as much about sport as most of us do about the works of Karl Marx but he was an astute enough politician to become engaged in the Olympic process simply because he knew he could use some of the money being invested to help him improve the living standards of those in the east of his constituency who would reward him with their support.

It was Livingstone who decried the initial estimate of the Games' budget as "a guess" and there are many wearing the same coloured rosette as him who have their greedy eyes on the lorry loads of taxpayers' money heading for Stratford and the surrounding area.

Johnson, of course, can do the same, but being the new man on the case and a Tory at that, he now holds a unique position. The government are in effect calling the shots and running the budget for the Olympics and when government is involved there is precious little room for argument.

Derek Mapp discovered that when he was abruptly deposed as chairman of Sport England, the quango which allocates lottery money to sport. Mapp was – and still is – concerned that grass-roots sport will suffer as ever-increasing amounts of money, particularly Lottery revenue, is being diverted into the Olympic kitty and he is aghast at the lack of accountability in the distribution of that money.

Sport England, for example, has to provide £40m towards the building of the architecturally spectacular – grandiose even – Aquatics Centre for Games. That figure equates to 10 times Sport England's average spend on a swimming pool and these days, you will have read, a shortage of swimming pools round the country is causing major concerns. With the money diverted to the London centre of excellence – which will benefit only a few – we could have had 10 new pools dotted around the country.

Those in the warms seats of power will argue that the Aquatics Centre will be part of the oft-mentioned "Olympic legacy". Mapp begs to differ: "Designs good for the Olympics will be difficult to sustain in their future role," he says. "Who is going to pay to keep all these facilities open? It is going to cost a lot more to run these places." The implication is that the money will continue to come from Sport England – a further drain on funds which should be spread around the rest of England.

The departure of Mapp last November arose from a change of direction for Sport England under the instruction of the then Culture Secretary James Purnell. The ethos of the quango had always been to spread the benefits of lottery funding across the sporting spectrum: "Sport for All" was one of their better slogans.

Mapp stood by that and in doing so lost his job because Purnell insisted that with the Olympics coming all available funding not committed to building projects should be concentrated on sportsmen and women who might win medals, first in Beijing but much, more importantly, in London.

He was pitching for the short term at the expense of the future; the loss to Sport England of Lottery funds has already reached a total of £395m and that figure may be significantly larger when the final reckoning is made. Estimates now suggest that the loss to grass-roots sport could reach £1.6bn.

It would be expecting too much of Boris Johnson to close the sluice gates which are allowing Niagras of money to cascade into his manor when it should be used for the good of the whole of English sport but at least he brings a new pair of eyes and –hopefully – a brain to the Olympic debate. As mayor of London he has a vital role to play in the four years before the flame is lit at the new stadium and the action commences. A little old-fashioned common sense would not go amiss, starting with a look at some of the budgets which are not yet cast in concrete.

It may be that it is too late to halt the plundering and the profligacy but a voice of reason would be appreciated before we resign ourselves to paying for the upkeep of a herd of white elephants and a grievous decline in standards round the country.

Who knows, if Boris can bring a little discipline to bear he might even be doing his party leader a favour when the really important election comes round.


Why I'm lining up alongside chairman Bates


FEELING the temptation to agree with Ken Bates is a little like pondering whether, like those chaps in the circus, you really ought to put your head in the lion's mouth; you know you might regret it but the urge to find out what it's like won't go away.

So, from late on Thursday afternoon, the inner battle has been fought and still the sense remains that Leeds United have been appallingly treated, that the Football League have been responsible for an almighty cock-up and even that someone, preferably the chairman Lord Mawhinney, ought to lose their jobs if not their heads over the whole fiasco of the 15-point ban. In other words, Ken was bang right.

People previously thought of as friends have started to shake their heads in disbelief; some have even turned away and opened imaginary conversation when it was clear there was no-one else to talk to other than this poor soul who had apparently joined the Leeds United camp.

It would take rather more than a crass piece for football administration for that to happen, but the overwhelming feeling as the season-long debacle ended in shambles was that Leeds were indeed treated disgracefully. If it had happened to Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool or even Wigan Athletic the game would be in uproar.

All we hear now is silence and calming voices from Leeds saying the episode is over, that promotion via the play-offs will vindicate their stance.

That might be true, but before the last rites are pronounced it ought to be confirmed by the League that the first item on the agenda for their annual meeting will not be television revenues, dealing with agents, salary caps, international match tickets, or jobs for the boys but putting their house in order.

Forget the smokescreen of the League suggesting that Leeds had acted tardily in this abysmal affair. The whole issue of disciplinary procedures when clubs fall into – or leap willingly into – administration needs much closer examination than has so far been the case and a clarity of regulation which has been so obviously absent since last summer.

Independence has to be the key; how can clubs vote on such specific issues as the case of Leeds United when they have vested interests?

Points deductions of the size incurred by Leeds are almost always precursors to relegation, thereby leaving one less position in the drop zone open to the others in their division, who were allowed to vote on whether the punishment should stand.

Don't worry; the appointment with the shrink is booked for this morning…


Aussie rules spectacle can only damage the game

IT might not have been as bad as some of us had feared but the outcome of the International Rugby Board's critical meeting in Dublin last week was nevertheless a sad day for the game.

The IRB, at the behest of the Australians, fearful as ever of the threat to the union game's popularity of rugby league (a threat they seem unable to counter other than by wrecking a game it is now obviously beyond their will to play), and supported for purely selfish, financial reasons by New Zealand, South Africa, France and Scotland have tickled up our laws in an effort to make the game more appealing.

To whom it might appeal is a moot point. To TV companies, quite probably; there will be fewer phases in every game when the essence of rugby – the battle for possession of the ball using strength and skill in equal proportions – will be allowed to overshadow the "spectacle". To Australia's overpowering mothering culture no doubt; anything which puts Justin at risk of bruising himself has to be abolished. To those who find themselves overpowered by the opposition's pack, certainly; make them hand over the ball to us and we can all run in lots of jolly tries, exciting isn't it?

Some of the alterations are almost meaningless. Will calling a touch judge at a Third XV match Mr Assistant Referee instead of Bert make any difference?

Some are excellent, like removing the advantage of being able to pass the ball back into the 22 for a clearing kick to touch and the introduction of a five-metre offside line at the scrum.

Thankfully, some have been deferred for further discussion (that's IRB speak; they've been chucked) like playing the ball with the hands in a ruck.

But key issues have been lost by the traditionalists. Players are now free to collapse the maul (that could cause a few tears Down Under if Justin is squashed flat) and there is no restriction on the numbers taking part in a lineout above a minimum of two.

No doubt we will come to live with, if not love, the changes, just as we did when the value of a try was lifted first to four then five points, when an "adjustment" (a fumble to you and I) was no longer ruled a knock-on, when scrum-halves could work the touchline all afternoon and when "catch and take" was all the rage at the line-out.

But as we polish the old dark tan brogues we will be shaking our heads, reminiscing and perhaps looking ahead to the meeting of Munster and Toulouse in the Heineken Cup final; it could be the last game of real rugby we see. From September, for all of us, it's Aussie rules.


Ground for optimism despite setback

A FEW days of warm sun and just the occasional shower have at last announced that Spring has arrived but the change of season has come too late for Wetherby racecourse where a decision has been taken not to stage steeplechases over the four summer meetings.

The ground at the far end of the course, where work on improving the A1 to motorway specifications has been completed, has failed to recover sufficiently to allow racing to go ahead on the chase course so for the three meetings in May and one in June the fixtures will be restricted to hurdle and National Hunt Flat races.

The decision was taken after an inspection by the racecourse executive and British Horseracing Association official Chris Dennis with James Sanderson, Wetherby's chief executive and clerk of the course, saying afterwards: "We unanimously agreed that we did not have enough growth in the sward to kick on with chasing this summer.

"We will feel the full benefit when the winter season starts on October 15 after we have given the chase course a rest through the growing period. We thought it was much better to take a long-term decision now than carry on until June and then still not be happy."

The ground worst affected by the lack of growth takes in approximately two furlongs from the end of the back straight round the home bend to the entry into the finishing straight and more of the chasing ground has suffered than is the case on the hurdles course.

"Two furlongs might sound insignificant – it only amounts to 20 per cent of the course," added Sanderson, "but it only takes a few strides for accidents to happen in racing."

The width of the racing ground also affected the decision. The hurdle course is wide enough to allow the obstacles to be moved whereas the narrow chase course means the jumps have to stay in the same place, removing the option to use better ground.

Sanderson has no doubt that the decision will have an impact on crowds for the summer meetings, three of which are evening fixtures. "People want to see a mixture of hurdling and chasing and this will undoubtedly put some people off," he said.

"Crowds have been dipping across racing and our figures for the two meetings since March, which were both restricted to hurdle races, were down but we would be more concerned if we had problems between October and March rather than between March and October.

"Many National Hunt purists will have already moved on to the Flat for the summer – the quality of jump racing in summer is just not the same as during the traditional season - and we would rather have the ground in tip-top condition when they come back in October than try to force the issue now."

So the summer chasers will not be earning their corn round the only course in Yorkshire which concentrates solely on National Hunt racing but that does not mean that there will not be entertainment in plenty over the coming five weeks at Wetherby, not least at the Yorkshire Post Ladies' Evening on Thursday May 29 (first race 6.20).