- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
aussie supporters at the olympics. Photo by Elizabeth Chapman
So golf and rugby sevens are one step closer to be included in the 2016 Olympics. The response from the public has been mixed, with the majority of the criticism directed at the inclusion of golf. What constitutes an Olympic sport just got a lot more confusing.
The IOC claims a sport must have youth appeal, universality, popularity, good governance, respect for athletes and respect for the Olympic values.
Fair enough.
But how are they applying these guidelines in their decision-making?
What strikes me most in this debate is the lack of coherency and consistency in the IOC’s choices.
Why golf?
Does it really have youth appeal and will golfers who make millions in prestigious tournaments throughout the year have respect for the Olympic values and give the Games the respect it deserves?
The fact that softball and baseball were back in the running for inclusion, having been shown the door, shows the IOC isn’t even sure of what it wants.
So what constitutes an Olympic sport?
Is it a sport that reflects the ancient origins of the Games and represents the Olympic motto of Citius, Altius, Fortius – Swifter, Higher, Stronger?
So how does synchronised swimming fit into that motto?
Are they sports and disciplines that are under-represented in the wider sporting world, therefore giving its athletes the global stage to compete on?
So why golf, tennis and football then?
The problem with these sports as Olympic fixtures is, ultimately, players would trade an Olympic gold medal for a place in a World Cup final, a Wimbledon title and British Open crown.
It damages the meaning of the Olympics if athletes don’t necessarily care about them.
One reason why rugby sevens was deserving of its consideration was the International Rugby Board’s promise to do away with the Sevens World Cup so its Olympic competition becomes the pinnacle event of the code.
It’s a smart move, emphasising its desire to be part of the Games.
While rugby sevens inclusion makes sense, golf has been heavily criticised as an Olympic sport despite the obvious attractiveness for the IOC.
It will bring high profile stars to the Games, yes. Imagine Tiger Woods competing for gold in Chicago, 2016 Nike and co will be lining up to get on board.
But why golf?
Why are the likes of baseball and softball suitable one moment and then ignored the next?
What about a sport like netball, one of the most popular sports in the Commonwealth Games which is played in over 70 countries?
It seems the IOC aren’t even sure what constitutes a suitable Olympic sport.
The IOC recognises the likes of bridge, tug of war, chess, orienteering and, strangely, powerboat racing, which appeared in the 1908 London Games, and yet they shun motor sport, despite its worldwide popularity.
In the end such choices are subjective and up to the eye of the beholder.
But the conflicting and confusing decision making of the IOC is eroding the prestige of the Olympics.