By Benjamin Conkey
February 5th 2009 @ 3:13am
Why do athletes have to be good role models?
It turns out that Michael Phelps, the man who captured eight incredible gold medals at the Beijing Olympics, can also smoke a bong. Wow, amazing! Thankyou News of the World. I feel so much better about myself now that I know an Olympic champion is on the wacky tobaccy.
Great for Phelps isn’t it?
It doesn’t matter how many world records he breaks in the future, someone will bring up the fact that he smoked weed at a party once.
If Phelps smoked weed during a swimming meet, I would agree with it being a news story. The fact he did it out of competition shouldn’t be a problem. It should be in the ‘who cares?’ basket, just like Stephanie Rice partying after her Olympic campaign.
It’s ridiculous celebrity news like this which makes me glad I failed to make it to the elite sporting level – at least in this day and age.
One only has to wind back the clock less than twenty years to remember the exploits of our former champions. David Boon scored a lot of runs and took that hat-trick catch off Shane Warne, but he also drank a half-century worth of beers on the way to England.
So why all of a sudden do athletes have to be role-models?
Being a role model should be like giving charity. It should be something you do naturally and not forced into.
Former tennis player Pat Rafter is naturally a role model, whereas Lleyton Hewitt is not because of their vastly different personalities.
The problem, of course, is that many generous deeds by athletes go unnoticed. It’s only the negative stories which seem to get published, skewing the public’s view.
A great example was when I played junior cricket in Wagga Wagga circa 1999.
The North Sydney Bears were in the city for a trial match at the end of February. They were staying at a Hotel just up from Bolton Park, where my team (South Wagga) was in action.
Rather than sitting back in their hotel room, a few of the players, including Jason Taylor, Michael Buettner, and Gary Larson, decided to come down and watch us play on their own accord without any media in sight.
They cheered so loudly it felt like there were 100 people watching. They signed autographs at the drinks break and chatted to us about cricket and football before retiring back to their hotel.
The team played that night and after the match had a few too many drinks and some of the players got into a fight. Needless to say, this made the headlines.
From memory, there were many angry letters from locals saying how disgraceful their behaviour was. It was a lesson to me in how harsh it is to be in the spotlight.
Yes, you make a lot of money, but there’s every chance your reputation will be damaged, whether it’s justified or not. All because you weren’t perceived as a role-model.
I guess that’s how Andrew Symonds feels right about now?
Michael Phelps photo by Vironevaeh
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(24)
Captain Random said | February 5th 2009 @ 6:51am | Report comment
Michael Phelps does not have to be a good role model for children because he doesn’t have any. I will condemn him when he smokes a bong on the starting blocks at London 2012, and not a moment before.
In any case, I remember reading stories about sports stars and their off-field indiscretions when I was a child and feeling that my intelligence had been insulted. Children are not stupid. They won’t mimic behaviour just because they see a multi-Olympic gold medallist do it. Not if their parents are setting good examples and boundaries anyway.
Remember, parents are the people that are supposed to be good role models for children.
dasilva said | February 5th 2009 @ 7:06am | Report comment
I do agree that role models is often overstated. I think it says more about us and society that we look up to sports stars for moral guidance then a particular failing of sports stars.
However I’m not too sure I like some of the direction this is heading with your reasoning about Andrew Symonds.
I don’t expect Symonds or any sports stars to be “role models”. Lot of stuff they do in private is there own business. However I do expect them to be Professional. They are professional sports people and should be judge by that standard.
If Symonds turns up to a cricket match on the booze or turns up to radio interview having drunk alcohol. It’s wrong not because he’ll be a bad influence to little children which is a bit patronizing if you think about it, it’s wrong because it’s unprofessional and he is not meeting his responsibility as an employee of Cricket Australia. IMO some of the things Symonds and other sports people do are enough for people to get fired from virtually every other occupation.
I think Andrew John’s article “The Top 5 sporting excuses that wouldn’t work at work” is quite relevant to what I’m saying.
sledgeross said | February 5th 2009 @ 7:33am | Report comment
I remember when Charles Barkley the basketballer was among the first pro sportsmen to ask why are they role models. He basically said he wasnt wasnt too smart at school, and anger issues and liked to drink and gamble. He couldnt understand why kids would want to be like him OFF the court. He added that role models should not be distant sports people, but closer to home, like parents, family, teachers etc. Sir Charles was raised by his mother and granny, so perhaps he did have a chip on his shoulder about male role models, but he does have a point.
It is a societal thing though. Having grown up in western Sydney, I socially would see young rugby league players out and about and mucking up. These kids are 17, on $50000 contracts and so dont pay any real attention to school. They know they dont really have to work too hard in the real world. People never say no to them so they have very little grounding in real life.
Brett McKay said | February 5th 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
Ben, I can see where you’re going with this and relating it to Andrew Symonds, and I do agree with you to a point, but dasilva also sums it up pretty well. They do need to be professional when doing their jobs and the peripherals that go with it…
It’s a cracking question you’ve raised though, and i wouldn’t mind betting if there’s suddenly a surge in new posters to The Roar, and to your article in particular, that it’s a flood of pro sportspeople using pseudonyms!! I guess it’s a sad reflection on society today that these type of unsavory incident takes up more column space than does a traditional match review.
The best example I can think of is how I supported Shane Warne – I only paid to watch him on HIS side of the fence, and so was very happy to call him the greatest bowler I’ve ever seen. But once he came back onto MY side of the fence, he was often just another tosser who I wouldn’t give the time of day. I used to say the same about Andrew Johns…
Spiro Zavos said | February 5th 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
I believe that all people in the public arena have a duty to set the best example, just as parents, teachers and so on have to behave in an appropriate manner in their lives to set an example to their peers and children. One of the pleasures of reading the obits in the SMH (aside from discovering that I’m not in them, yet) is to see the wonderful lives many ordinary people live, and the extensive and profound impact these lives had on the people who came into the orbit of these unobtrusive stars.
People in the public arena have a similar duty in a civil society to lead ‘good’ lives.
Andrew Symonds, in my view, has been poorly managed. There is that stupid Solo ad where he seemingly shoulder-charges a stupid chap dressed as a women to win a bet. What sort of message does this leave with kids who look up to him?
Then there has been the nasty incident at the SCG in the Test against India. Now the McCullum incident.
The point is that Symonds gets sponsorships and work in the media because of his celebrity, because he has created an interest in himself with his deeds on the cricket field. If he is prepared to take the money from sponsors, he must be prepared to live and behave in an appropriate way that does not offend the sensibilities of people concerned with ensuring that we live in a moral and civil society.
If you aspire to the fame game, you have to pay the price which involves civil behaviour.
Towser said | February 5th 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Spiro said
“If you aspire to the fame game, you have to pay the price which involves civil behaviour.”
Says it all for me.
pothale said | February 5th 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
Good on ya Michael. Another pothale in the making. We’re growing in numbers.
Hoy said | February 5th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
I can sit on either side of the fence here, and see both sides. I would tend to think that it is not the superstars fault that children act badly though. I would look a little closer to home.
1) These blokes are normal people who happen to be good at their sport/profession. If Bill from accounting is a whiz on the calculator, saves the company heaps, then goes out and gets gassed, passes out in a pool of vomit, who cares? Why should it really be any different for a normal person who is good at sport?
2) Because they are on TV that makes them one up on Bill from accounting I suppose. Young people do want to be like their heroes there is no doubt. I used to always be Dean Jones when I played backyard cricket. When, for instance, Phelps does something illegal (like smoke pot), and is not punished by the sport, what does that say about right and wrong when you are a superstar? You can do anything you want.
Young people these days are pampered far too much, and this, more so than their sporting heroes would affect their behaviour I would think. They can’t even get marked with red pen anymore, because it is damaging to their psych. Well maybe a little right from wrong when they are young by those truly important like parents and teachers goes further than a role model they have never met.
sunshinecoaster said | February 5th 2009 @ 11:54am | Report comment
Roles models no,thats a parents job
Should they be decent humans? yes,should they be able to show a bit of class,yes
Andrew Symonds none of the above
Phelps is still a decent guy from what we know,just made a bad mistake
sunshinecoaster said | February 5th 2009 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Spiro said
“If you aspire to the fame game, you have to pay the price which involves civil behaviour
Thats a great quote Spiro
Tim said | February 5th 2009 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
The stock reply, ’sports stars aren’t role models, parents are role models’ is, quite frankly, utter nonsense. Children are not influenced by a single source, but a variety of them. Anyone who seriously thinks that a parent should be the only individual to hold away over his or her child has never had children.
@Hoy – The difference between Bill from accounting and your archetypal sports star is that the only reason why the sport star commands the hefty salary that he or she does is BECAUSE people take an interest in him or her – both on and off the sports field. Professional sports are businesses that rely on the marketability of their stars in order to generate revenue, and that means trying to make them appealing to the common populace. Being a role model comes with the job; any public figure is going to be an influence on some.
Papa Romeo said | February 5th 2009 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
“The best example I can think of is how I supported Shane Warne – I only paid to watch him on HIS side of the fence, and so was very happy to call him the greatest bowler I’ve ever seen. But once he came back onto MY side of the fence, he was often just another tosser who I wouldn’t give the time of day. I used to say the same about Andrew Johns…”
Brilliantly put!
Spiro, I take issue with a couple of things. Parents and teachers have to behave in an appropriate manner because they are authority figures and are entrusted with bringing up good little human beings. There is no parralel there with sports people, as sportspeople don’t make a choice (such as parenthood, studying to be a teacher, etc) that is intrinsically wrapped up in the obligation to set a good example. As to whether or not they should nonetheless be obliged to set a good example…
“If you aspire to the fame game, you have to pay the price which involves civil behaviour.”
Now see this is an interesting one – and for the record, I am NOT (unfortunately!) a professional sportsman going into bat for my own kind, Brett McKay, tho good pick-up – coz I argue (generalisation that it is) that you don’t become a top sportsperson FOR the fame. You ONLY become a top sportsperson if you have the TALENT and ABILITY to do so. “I’d like to be famous….hmm, might become a rugby league star then!”. Doesn’t work like that, does it.
Why exactly should someone who finds themselves thrust into the spotlight coz they just happen to be blessed with preternatural ability in a sport that is widely followed? You’re the world’s best archer? No worries, you can do what you like in this country coz no-one will notice you. Worlds best cricketer (etc.), sorry mate, you ‘ve gotta be a saint. See the double standard?
It’s sorta odd that no such saintly behavious is sought from those who genuinely strive for fame (for fame’s sake), eg contestants on Big Brother. In fact poor behaviour is expected as par for the course.
“If he is prepared to take the money from sponsors, he must be prepared to live and behave in an appropriate way that does not offend the sensibilities of people concerned with ensuring that we live in a moral and civil society.”
I don’t want to sound too much like an economic realist (ahem) but the sponsorship money that top sportspeople are paid is not to behave properly. Nor does payment imply an obligation to do so. They know (or at least should) that they are paid because of the extent of their particular pulic image and the product provider wanting the commercial benefits of association. They also (should) know that if that image deteriorates, the dollars dry up (eg Kate Moss, who was deserted by those she had contracts with – only for a tactical week or so, mind – when she fessed up to an inclination towards Columbian marching powder). It’s a commercial contract, not a moral one.
I could go on, having only lightly scratched the surface, but I’ve got a 2 o’clock meeting…
But hey Spiro, thanks heaps for providing a forum, and a well-moderated one at that, for such discussion.
Oh, and completely concur that that soft drink ad demonstrates a stunning lack of judgement on the part of anyone and everyone involved in putting that together. Symonds inclusion isn’t even particulalry relevant to the ’story’, it’s almost an tacked-on after thought. Baffling on all counts.
Benjamin Conkey said | February 5th 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
Some great comments guys. Re: Symonds. I was just putting it out there how much the game has changed when you compare him to Boon, Merv Hughes, and even Kerry O’Keefe..who freely admits to being hung over in his debut test. Surely that was 10-times worse than Symonds being drunk on radio. Perhaps these former larikins were Symonds role-models? Unfortunately he was just born in the wrong era..if he was a bit older and retired he’d be up there with Boony in status.
“You’re the world’s best archer? No worries, you can do what you like in this country coz no-one will notice you. Worlds best cricketer (etc.), sorry mate, you ‘ve gotta be a saint. See the double standard?”…I think you’ve hit the nail on the head Papa Romeo.
sunshinecoaster said | February 5th 2009 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Tim said
The stock reply, ’sports stars aren’t role models, parents are role models’ is, quite frankly, utter nonsense. Children are not influenced by a single source, but a variety of them. Anyone who seriously thinks that a parent should be the only individual to hold away over his or her child has never had children.
tim
Of course children are influenced by more than a single source we all are but a parents job is to teach there children how to judge and interpret people no matter who they are.The reality is that if a parent carry’s on like a bogan feral then the kids will too,you ,just have to go to the mall to see that.
You have to make it clear to your kids that there just sportsman and hammer it home all the time,the problem is to many parents out there act like bloody kids around these sports stars,pinning to them and putting them up on pedestals.
Captain Random said | February 5th 2009 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
The flip side to all this is that there is a lot less emphasis in the media on the type of sportsperson who is loyal, disciplined (on and off the field), does lots of community work, i.e. the sort of person who should be a role model for the nation’s children. I know it doesn’t sell as many papers but that’s still a sad state of affairs IMO.
Hoy said | February 5th 2009 @ 2:47pm | Report comment
Tim, you will notice I said I was blowing both ways on this one.
As I mentioned, the difference between Bill the accountant and sportstars is that sportstars are on TV (read famous).
No, I don’t have children, but I would like to think that parents are responsible for MOST ethical and moral guidance more so than the local soccer player fighting at the pub etc.
What does it say about society when we start blaming children’s bad behaviour on Roy et al? Again, I don’t have children, but I would like to think that parents can control their children, or at least have enough influence over them to point out that the sportspersons bevahiour is wrong, rather than just say what a bad role model he/she is…
I also agree with Papa about the worlds best archer. He could be a royal bastard, we wouldn’t know.
Another thing to think about is how blown out of proportion are these indescretions? I know Phelps has to be taken at face value, but I can imagine when these sportspeople go out they are the subject of all sorts of shit. Witness a yobbo yelling racial stuff at a cricket game. The player yells something back, and he is fine. Yet if a drunken fellow yells obscenity at him when he is out eating and he replies, then he was in an altercation, he was out at a pub, horror he must have been drinking and now has a problem.
Benjamin Conkey said | February 5th 2009 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
“Another thing to think about is how blown out of proportion are these indescretions? I know Phelps has to be taken at face value, but I can imagine when these sportspeople go out they are the subject of all sorts of shit.”
Exactly Hoy, I’ve seen it before. People think they can just abuse sportstars when they go out. To be honest I don’t know why sportstars continue to go out when they know there will be idiots trying to start a fight.
Also some media, especially in the UK pay people to go and get sportstars in uncompromising positions.
Captain Random said | February 5th 2009 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
Good points Hoy.
Say that your kid was mucking up and saying something about following Andrew Symonds’ example. Would you walk away thinking “Andrew Symonds is really compromising my authority as a parent. I don’t know what to do about this.”
No, of course not. You’d sort it out. It’s only a problem if you let it become a problem.
BTW, I’ve always wondered about the gap between what fans can yell at players during games and what players can do in response. Best example: the chant of “Posh Spice takes it up the a***” that used to be sung when David Beckham was playing for Man Utd. On the other hand, Teddy Sheringham kisses the badge on his shirt after scoring a goal at Highbury and gets reported to the police for “inciting violence.” It’s not fair at all. Not that you can do anything about it.
Jennie said | February 5th 2009 @ 5:33pm | Report comment
I can contribute this. In almost every survey of ”who would most care to be like” conducted among young men, 86.2% said Darren Lockyer/Stephen Larkham/Don Bradman/Rod Laver- etc etc. All modest, humble young men,blessed with the courage and fortitude to match their talent. Why then today, are we working so hard to promote skites and showmen as idols??
sheek said | February 5th 2009 @ 6:22pm | Report comment
Spiro,
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
Nug said | February 5th 2009 @ 6:52pm | Report comment
I think that the athletes/sportsmen of today have three problems with regard to role models. One, they have very bad managers who believe the more publicity they can achieve for their sportsman etc, the more money they can make. Number two is that the media/papparazi are greedy for a story to lift their ratings.and are ready to print/photo anything. Number three is that the Boards etc who control these sports haven’t a clue about what happens at the coal face and are incensed with their own public image. They didn’t even try to assist Andrew Symonds when he had trouble with the Indian Cricket team, they hung him out to dry. Now every newspaper in the country is out to cruicify him for anything he does just to get a good story. Please get off his back and report something useful, not degrade a great Australian who has his country at heart.
onside said | February 5th 2009 @ 10:07pm | Report comment
There is only one rule,’thou shall not get caught’.
Perhaps they should drug test sports commentators, listen to them, do those guys arc up.
I am not trying to get up their nose, but some commentators really hyperventalate,and its
likely caused by more than just two cans of Red Bulll.
Phelps would have fitted in well with the West Indies cricket teams a few years back,and
he would definitely get an invite to lunch by Ian Botham.
jools-usa said | February 15th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
Sitting here in the US I’m no longer surprised by the double standards we have towards pro atheletes.
Major Leaque baseballers can lie under oath to Grand Juries, ingest “performance enhancing” (banned) steroids so they can break records & win muti-million dollar contracts, & they say no-one cares – the fans just want to see drama.
Phelps, as far as we know did what he did WITHOUT any enhancements, made a record that will never me matched.
Yet he “inhaled”, (unlike some US President).
Spare me the drama.
Jools-USA
SDLINESa
boofhead said | June 8th 2009 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
For me the more interesting aspect to this is that these top athletes smoke and drink yet it doesnt (always) seem to have such an impact on their performance – it would contradict some of the anti drugs messages and provide a great advert for drug use. If Michael Phellps can smoke bongs and still win eight gold medals it would seem pot doesnt descrease motivation as much as we might have thought! Ditto Symons – a long term alcoholic and still be one of the best fielders of all time. Rod Marsh – one of hte greatest ever weeket keepers. etc …