UK sporting bodies voice concern after UK Sport creates Sport Org
Leaders of Britain’s Olympic and Paralympic sports raised concern on 12 November 2026 after UK Sport established a new organisation called Sport Org, prompting an unprecedented 75-minute video conference to address widespread unease.
Sport Org evolved out of British Curling and now applies its leadership and expertise across curling, para-curling, para table tennis and squash, with plans to include bobsleigh and skeleton from 2030. UK Sport has proposed that Sport Org assume responsibility for GB Snowsport’s high-performance programme and oversee the allocation of £12.5m of lottery funding in the run-up to the 2030 Winter Olympics. One observer described that move as part of an “all-out war” between UK Sport and GB Snowsport, which left the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics with two of Team GB’s five gold medals and believes it should remain in charge of the elite part of the sport. The creation of Sport Org has prompted confusion and speculation among national governing bodies, according to reporting.
UK Sport’s chief executive Sally Munday convened a video call with the chief executives and chairs of every Olympic and Paralympic sport to try to allay fears. On the call Munday said: “I think the best rumour I’ve heard so far has been that UK Sport is intending to put all sports into Sport Org.” She added: “For the avoidance of doubt, that is a million miles away from the truth.” Munday and UK Sport’s deputy director, Simon Morton, outlined what they described as the efficiencies Sport Org could bring and argued it would provide greater access to performance expertise.
Not all attendees were persuaded and several asked whether Sport Org would act as a regulator. The head of one national governing body said they initially feared Sport Org would be “a bit like Ofsted”, to which Munday replied: “There is no intention for us to swoop.” Munday also told the group: “We’re not imagining a world where the majority of sports end up in Sport Org.” Delegates pressed UK Sport on governance questions, including why the chief executive role at Sport Org, held by former British Curling head Nigel Holl, had not been advertised and why the Sport Org board had not been reconstituted.
Since the meeting, the Guardian spoke to more than half a dozen sports leaders who expressed mixed views. “One or two of the chairs think it is a good idea,” one chair of a national governing body told the Guardian. “But generally people are either shit-scared that they will be next, or they haven’t got the bollocks to stand up to UK Sport.” A chief executive questioned cross-sport relevance: “What can curling performance staff really teach us about swimming, say, or archery?”
Other attendees drew attention to the dispute with GB Snowsport. One chair said: “Picking a fight with snowsport is madness given they have just won a bucketload of medals at the Olympics and have brought in a load of commercial income,” and when asked if he would be named he replied: “No, because there is an air of fear around this.” Another chief executive warned: “When UK Sport can pull the financial trigger you have to be careful.” Some sources accepted the need for efficiencies but questioned why UK Sport was prioritising efficiencies within elite programmes rather than shared services such as legal, comms and HR.
UK Sport cited early examples it says demonstrate Sport Org’s value, saying it has enabled public funding to flow to programmes in squash and para table tennis. Nigel Holl told the meeting that Sport Org had improved administrative processes, citing a coach who said the organisation had saved him four hours a month because it had a better expenses claim system. In a written reply to the Guardian UK Sport said: “Sport Org is a specialist, independent, multi-sport organisation established to operate performance programmes on behalf of national governing bodies where it is felt that this can enhance the performance, efficiency and resilience of those programmes. “The establishment of Sport Org is intended to strengthen the environments that surround British Olympic and Paralympic athletes, ensuring performance programmes have the expertise, resilience and resources they need to succeed. “This is an important part of the bold reform we believe the UK’s Olympic and Paralympic system urgently requires to protect and enhance the competitive advantage of GB’s athletes. “Sport Org will not replace national governing bodies, nor is it a model that would be appropriate for every sport. It provides an additional option where there is a clear rationale for doing so.”
Some sources noted the organisation’s origins and questioned its independence. Sport Org’s registered office at Companies House is listed as the National Curling Academy in Stirling, and while Sport Org has its own executive and board some asked whether it will be held to the same standards as other sports. “After the next Winter or Summer Olympics, every sport will be held accountable for its performance by UK Sport,” one attendee told the Guardian. “But for, say, para table tennis, UK Sport is going to be passing judgment on its own in-house programme. It is like asking Donald Trump whether he is a great president. Where is the independent scrutiny?”