OVER the past decade or so, British Cycling has established itself as the pre-eminent high-performance sports programme in the world. British Cycling’s methods transcended its discipline and such was its success, sports teams the world over were copying the British model in an attempt to replicate its success. From the marginal gains theory to the meticulous attention to detail, British Cycling was widely recognised to have it spot on when it came to producing a conveyor belt of high-performance athletes.

But for the first time, cracks have begun to show. On Tuesday, British Cycling’s technical director, Shane Sutton, was suspended before the announcement came a day later that he had resigned. His departure came on the back of accusations of sexism made by Jess Varnish and claims that he directed derogatory and bullying comments towards para-cyclists.

Sutton joined British Cycling as a coach in 2002 and was involved with the hugely successful cycling squad which returned from the 2008 and 2012 Olympic Games with seven gold medals each time. The 58-year-old Australian was made technical director in 2014 following the departure of Sir Dave Brailsford. Indications were that the team’s remarkable success in Beijing and London was unlikely to be repeated to the same extent in Rio but with the pedigree that British Cycling has, nothing seemed outwith the realms of possibility. But Sutton’s departure has now cast a sizeable shadow over the squad, coming somewhat morbidly on the 100 days to go landmark.

It was Varnish who lit the touch paper; dropped from British Cycling’s programme, she claimed that Sutton told her she was “too old", at a decrepit 25, and that she “should just move on and go and have a baby”. Varnish also says that Sutton told her that she “had a fat arse”. Varnish’s allegations were followed by claims that Sutton called the para-cyclists “wobblies” and “gimps”. Varnish was backed up by Olympic champions, Nicole Cooke and Victoria Pendleton while Laura Trott and Dani King, also Olympic gold medallists, were wholly positive about Sutton and their relationships with him. The Australian has refuted all allegations against him.

The revelations about Sutton raise the interesting question though – when does constructive criticism cross the line into bullying? Top-level sport is one of the most brutal working environments there is – an elite athlete exists in a bubble of criticism, pressure and ultra-competitiveness. The vast majority of feedback involves being told you must improve at something or other. At a rough estimate, for every one positive comment, nine will be negative, or if not overtly negative, referring to something that must be improved. Some of the feedback is constructive, some of it is just blatant criticism. Myself and other girls in my national squad were told we needed to lose weight, that we were too slow, and we were constantly reminded of areas that we must improve on. Was this sexism? I don’t think so. Was it bullying? Probably not. Almost all the comments were attempts by coaches to improve us as players, although they weren’t always delivered in the most constructive way. But much of that interpretation is down to how we as individuals took this criticism on board. The fact that I didn’t feel my place in the team was under real threat also helped.

The British Cycling situation seems very different. Varnish said that there was a “culture of fear” inside the organisation which prevented staff speaking out about sexism because they were afraid of losing their jobs. This sounds justified and it may be why so few similar accusations against Sutton have emerged in the past 14 years since he joined the organisation. Sutton denies mentioning babies to Varnish, or that he commented on her body shape but it seems a funny thing for her to fabricate from nothing.

Sutton has long been regarded as a straight-talker and to be a coach in elite sport, this is a necessary quality. At the top end, one per cent can be the difference between a place on the Olympic podium or not and so there is no room for pussy-footing around. Having said that, there is also no room for a coach deciding that it’s his way or the highway. The Guardian claimed that a source inside British Cycling compared Sutton to an abusive husband. He certainly seemed to favour a controlling coaching style rather than a collaborative one and it was a style that, if these allegations are true, most certainly crossed the line from straight-talking to bullying which is unacceptable and also detrimental to performance.

This episode is likely to disrupt the team’s Olympic preparations, although it remains to be seen just how great an effect it has on the athletes, and whether his departure 100 days before Rio is enough time to see any tangible difference in Brazil. By the sounds of it though, many of the riders will be glad to see that back of Sutton.