- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
During the week, it came to my attention that FIBA, the governing body for international basketball, will ask the International Olympic Committee to include 3-on-3 basketball as a medal event at the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Games.
As far as ideas go, this ranks up there with fly screens on submarines, subprime mortgages and mid-strength beer.
You’d be hard pressed to find a bigger basketball fan than me, so if I think this idea is terrible, I can’t wait to hear what the average punter thinks about it.
I can understand the push for T20 cricket to be included as an Olympic sport.
Cricket is popular and played in numerous countries around the world now, and I think it has a legitimate case to have a presence in the Olympics like football, basketball, tennis, etc.
And if it is to be included, I believe the shortest form of the game is a feasible way to introduce the sport into the Olympics, because the truncated version of cricket fits better with the Games’ two-and-a-half week length than the 50 over and Test formats do.
However, I’m not so keen on the idea of 3-on-3 basketball also becoming an Olympic sport.
Firstly, there is the very obvious point that basketball is already represented at the Olympics. The sport has a long and proud history at the Games, in the form of the traditional 5-on-5 game.
So why should basketball be given two formats at the Olympics? Especially when there is the perception there are already too many sports at the Games.
Yes, it’s true that swimming, shooting, sprinting, etc. all have more than one ‘event’ at the Games. But at least they consist of different skills. The basketball on show in a 3-on-3 tournament would be exactly the same as what you witness in a normal game – just with fewer players on the court.
Actually, it would be worse.
Unlike T20 cricket, 3-on-3 basketball isn’t a great spectacle. It wouldn’t be more exciting than the traditional form of the game. In fact, it would be extremely boring.
Perhaps that’s my subjective point-of-view. I’m sure there are some people in the world that enjoy watching 3-on-3 basketball. But should we really include it in the Olympics to appease those seven individuals?
Tactically, you don’t need to be Phil Jackson to figure out how to win 3-on-3 basketball, for it isn’t rocket science. In a nutshell, the game-play is: beat your man, and if help rotates quickly enough, you pass it to the open man for the shot. If the defence doesn’t rotate, you shoot it yourself.
That style of play certainly won’t please the purists. Nor is it exciting enough to gain new fans. Sure, it sounds like fun to watch for a possession or two. After that, it would just become a great cure for insomnia.
There are also some logistics to consider. Do players compete in both the 5-on-5 and 3-on-3 format? Wouldn’t that be too much basketball for said individuals, considering the already packed Olympic schedule for the traditional game?
And if they don’t compete in both formats, then suddenly we’re not even watching the best players. Surely that will erode the credibility of the tournament?
FIBA Secretary-General Patrick Baumann argues that 3-on-3 would allow more countries to experience the Olympics and therefore help FIBA expand basketball’s global popularity.
I personally have my doubts about the validity of that strategy. Surely injecting money into grassroots basketball in smaller nations would be more effective than handing out token Olympic spots?
To be fair, it’s arrogant and irresponsible of me to doubt FIBA’s strategy without being privy to all the facts, statistics and plans. But even if their strategy is sound, surely it’s not the IOC’s responsibility to grow the global popularity of basketball?
3-on-3 basketball does have its place: it’s a great way for perimeter players to work on their passing and cutting.
In other words, it’s a fantastic training drill. To put that in context, it’s the equivalent of a cricket net session being included as an Olympic sport.
I have no problem with T20 cricket earning a berth as an Olympic sport, but I’m far from sold on the idea of 3-on-3 basketball being added.