The big suit debate was described to me as a crisis for the sport this morning. Watershed, yes, and certainly a crisis soon if not kept in check - but not a crisis just yet.

Much hangs on the dialogue between suit makers and FINA this weekend, and much depends on the ability and willingness of the international federation - and there appears to be no resistance there - and the manufacturers to take one step backwards in order to take two forwards to a new beginning that recognises the impact of technology on the sport.

While some would like to see the LZR and other suits deemed to enhance performance put back in the packet - for worthy reasons - that it not going to happen. The money put into research by Speedo and the approval of its suit by FINA, followed by the number of phenomenal performances across the world since mid-February and coupled with the fact that the swimmers, by and large, love the new apparel, lead to one conclusion: the future is here to stay. It looks great, the clock is celebrating a new era of speed and far too many in the sport wish to embrace the new world for it to be sent back to the lab and placed in a jar marked 'before its time'.

That does not mean that there is no need to act. There is every need. So where is change needed? Here are some of the things that ought to be considered, not as recommendations for rules but as a list of some of the elements that should be part of the debate and response to the concerns that have spread through the world of swimming since the launch of the LZR Racer:

1. Independent testing

Independent testers should be hired as soon as feasible to run tests on the suit in order to confirm or reject the claims being made for suits by their makers.

2. Safety testing

Those independent testers should also consider aspects that the suit makers may not have taken into account. There are claims that compression alters organ response. Is it true? Is it safe? Is the sport happy with it?

3. Publication of data

All research and findings to be made public

4. Code for Suits

FINA must then draw up a code of minimum and maximum standards allowable for suits based on that independent research and analysis together with all suit makers. As is the case now, all would have a stake in the future, and all would have a responsibility to stay ahead of their game - as Mark Schubert, head USA coach indicated, there would be no room for whining by companies who invest less and produce less. The code should be written as tightly as possible in terms of openness to interpretation, which current rules appear to fall short on given the claims and counter claims of suit makers, some of whose complaining reflects genuine concern that some suits have gone beyond what some suit makers did not work for because they believed such things to be beyond the bounds of acceptability.

5. Timing of suit launches

No suit should be launched less than nine months (or a year?) before an Olympic Games. Athletes and the sport, as has been the case with the LZR, need a period of adjustment for any big breakthrough in technology.

6. Junior swimming and cost.

If one suit at $500 lasts an average of eight wears, as has been claimed, a young athlete and his/her parents are looking at $4,000 of costs a year or more, at least potentially. The very best will get their suits free. The majority will certainly not. Is the sport really happy to create a have and have-nots divide of its own making. Nature and the un-evenness life throws at us can account, to varying degrees, to a have and have-not environment. But a deliberate journey into asking parents to cough up thousands of dollars for suits a year for their developing talent is an exercise in market building that could weed out the less financially fortunate before true talent has had time to show itself. Not a good thing for the sport on a variety of levels. In conclusion:
a. should the sport bar bodysuits at all junior events
b. should the sport restrict the use of bodysuits to senior national and international championship level, at which the sport could almost certainly guarantee that all latest, acceptable, cutting-edge technology could be made available to anyone who wished to harness it. Such a move could, of course, increase the likelihood that major championships would see the lion's share of world records.

7. Contracts with suit makers

If suit makers wish to see a continuation of the current trend for building teams of athletes dedicated to their brand, then they will have to work harder to ensure that they develop a suit worthy of the athlete.

In such a world, no athlete or coach or national federation should ever sign a contract with one brand unless they are sure that that brand is the one that they wish to wear. Discovering later that your suit is inferior would not be a valid excuse under the new regime.
No contract signed between FINA and a partner should oblige athletes to wear a brand that force an athlete to forfeit a private contract. The framework of such a rule would be designed to avoid what we have seen in Manchester: Filippo Magnini, backed by Arena, in a Speedo cap given to him by organisers because he is obliged to wear a cap with "e;Yakult"e; on it).

There is more to be said and the issues are more complex that some would have it. But serious dialogue, entered into with intent to put in place a workable framework for suits - and fast - is overdue.