Advertisement

Exclusive: British Gymnastics could be subject to legal action over Eddie van Hoof dismissal

Former British Gymnastics coach Eddie Van Hoof was sacked on Thursday - Getty Images South America
Former British Gymnastics coach Eddie Van Hoof was sacked on Thursday - Getty Images South America

British Gymnastics could find itself subject to legal action from Eddie van Hoof, the former men’s head coach who was sacked on Thursday, after he told Telegraph Sport he denied the allegations that led to his dismissal and was figuring out his "best course of action".

Van Hoof was suspended from his role in November and was dismissed on Thursday after a two-month investigation into previously unspecified allegations of misconduct.

Van Hoof, who was named UK coach of the year in 2016 after leading Britain’s male gymnasts to a record medal haul at the Rio Olympics, claims British Gymnastics are yet to show him the report from the investigation, which was carried out by an independent barrister, and have only given him “basic outlines” of the reasons he was dismissed.

He denies all allegations levelled against him and has instead claimed he may have been targeted in return for querying the World Class Performance Athlete Agreements that caused controversy last year. Those contracts went unsigned for months before finally being resolved shortly before Christmas. Van Hoof says that it was only last summer, after he complained about the opportunities they offered for athlete exploitation, that he began to hear concerns being raised about his coaching style.

Eddie van Hoof celebrates with Max Whitlock  - Credit: AP
Eddie van Hoof (left) had been hugely successful with British Gymnastics Credit: AP

British Gymnastics declined to comment but it is understood they would reject that claim.

“In the letter from British Gymnastics, I was informed that my dismissal had resulted from insubordination towards [performance director] James Thomas, bullying behaviour towards an (unspecified) employee and aggressive language or behaviour towards (unspecified) athletes,” van Hoof told The Telegraph.

“These allegations are basic outlines, with no clear detail or supporting examples, which make them hard to examine or challenge. Nonetheless, these accusations in no way match my own recollection of my behaviour or my contribution to British Gymnastics over the last decade.”

On the claims regarding the Performance Athlete Agreements he added: “My main concern about the Agreements was the way in which they were presented to athletes. There was a widespread expectation that athletes would simply sign the new contracts without question. However, the athletes had received very little explanation about the content and the heavy legal terminology caused confusion about the meaning and implications of the Agreements.

“After a long and unblemished career, I believe it may be more than a coincidence that a disciplinary process commenced so soon after I raised concerns around management issues at British Gymnastics, including the handling of the WCPP contracts.”According to the statement released by British Gymnastics on Thursday, the decision to sack van Hoof was taken before the investigation had been completed because “irreconcilable differences” between the coach and his employers had emerged during the process.

“The situation had become untenable,” the statement continued, “and it was best for all sides to bring matters to a close.”

Despite his exotic name, Van Hoof grew up training in Hendon, north London. He became head men’s coach in 2006 and presided over Great Britain’s development from rank outsiders into a world-class gymnastics nation.

A spokesperson for British Gymnastics said: “It is inaccurate to suggest that Eddie’s suspension or the investigation were a reaction to Eddie objecting to the World Class Performance Athlete Agreements.

"However, his comments in relation to the agreements are a reflection of some of the irreconcilable differences between Eddie and British Gymnastics that resulted in his dismissal. British Gymnastics would not support a contract that exploits its athletes.”