I HAVE copped a bit of flak about my decision not to march in the opening ceremony. Unfortunately, I have never been able to march in an opening ceremony because of the program with swimming starting the next day and the 400 metres freestyle being in the first session.

It is a privilege I wish I could take up, to march with other athletes from our country and around the world, but at the end of the day I have trained all my life to be a successful swimmer and I wouldn't do anything to sacrifice my performance.

To me that would be irresponsible to my country and everybody who has helped me get to this level in the first place.

To participate in the opening ceremony is a commitment of about eight hours, mostly on your feet, that ends after midnight on a day on which I would later have to race.

Could you imagine the reception I would get from the media if I decided to march and then couldn't perform at my best the next day?

I don't think anyone would be giving me or any other athlete a leave pass on performance and it is disappointing when people question your patriotism and commitment to the cause when by resting and not marching, that is exactly what you are doing — demonstrating commitment to the task at hand.

One journalist even compared my decision not to march to Cathy Freeman's honour of lighting the cauldron in Sydney, questioning what would have happened if she had chosen not to.

That question will never be answered, but I reckon if Cathy's 400 metres final on the track was less than 24 hours after the ceremony, not on day 11 as it was in Sydney, she, too, may have taken action so as not to sacrifice what she was there for — her best performance. It is common sense.