The Olympics, insert company name here...Part One - by Apollo
Sports and patriotism seem inexorably linked, whether we like it or not. Usually if there's some sort of organized competition of some kind, before you know it, somebody will figure out where all the competitors are from and develop it to the point that it no longer is Team A vs. Team B or Athlete X vs. Athlete Y. Instead, it will be Canada vs. Russia or America's Michael Phelps vs. Australia's Ian Thorpe. It's a way to capture the public interest. Media and fans pay more attention to the event. We don't view the competition as some guy vs. another guy, now it's us against them or this entire nation vs. that entire nation.
The Olympic Games are the epitome of international competition. Athletes must earn the right to represent their countries in their chosen sports and in countries such as Canada, public funds are paid towards supporting athletes in their quest to bring home an Olympic medal. This of course leads to a lot of debate over issues that have very little to do with actual sport or competition. You could have an athlete who is one of the best in the world at a given sport, but if she doesn't qualify at her national olympic trials, or doesn't meet her national federation's standards, she doesn't go to the Olympics. Before I go on, who was the genius in Russia who decided Maria Sharapova didn't qualify for the Olympics. What's the point of naming your Olympic team before Wimbledon anyway? I would love to have heard this guy say "Let's go ahead and name the team. It isn't like any of our women will win Wimbledon anyways."
Let me first say that I love the Olympics. While I may not understand all of the sports, I am a proud Canadian and enjoy watching the competition. Sure, I may not be the biggest curling fan in the world, but every four years I'll watch it intently to see how Canada does. I'm not one to run to the nearest pool and start practicing my synchornized diving, but if it's Canada's first Olympic medal, I'll give my support for it and Blythe Hartley and Emilie Heymans, the women who earned it.
However, too often when the Olympics roll around, there's far too much focus placed not on the athletes but on the process and manner in which these athletes reach the Olympics. Canada, which compared to the United States or Australia spends a rather meagre amount on its athletes, is always scrutinized for its funding of amateur athletes. The pro-athlete lobby will say that Canada does embarassingly little to support amateur athletics. Meanwhile, many wonder why their tax dollars are spent on athletes at all. Why should we care about somebody in Saskatoon or North Bay who has aspirations of becoming the next great Canadian sprinter, they'll say. If he can make it on his own with sponsors or through some other means, then great, but don't give him a penny of our tax dollars when there's homeless people on the street and our health care system is supposedly in shambles. So goes the argument. Athletes contribute to Canadian society answers the rebuttal. The nation is drawn together and Canadian pride is put on display when we see our athletes performing on a world stage. These are people who sacrifice normal lives to train year round all in the hopes of carrying Canada's colours on the world stage. Give them more money! Fund them enough so they don't have to go to American colleges to train, so they can stay closer to home and develop their talents here. And the debate rages on.
Personally I don't mind funding amateur athletics. I also don't mind funding the arts, fisheries or a plethora of other government programs and services that I either don't use or derive very little tangible benefit from. Canada after all, is about the collective population providing services for the greater good of the country as a whole. If we only paid for what we used, we'd be a far different country that's for sure. Perhaps some people would prefer that, but not me. There after all has to be some reason why I stay up at 3am in order to watch the preliminary rowing heats from Greece just because there happens to be a Canadian boat involved.
People can generally talk in a very cavalier fashion when everything is done in the abstract. It's quite easy for someone to voice an opinion when nobody calls them on it, or asks them to support their view. You can yell out "USA Basketball sucks" all day long but try telling Lebron James or Allen Iverson or even worse, an educated American why they suck and you'll have a much more difficult time. Although, if the latest version of the Dream Team keeps playing they way they have been, that argument will become much easier. Meeting an Olympian or any athlete for that matter and delving into what their life is like makes it much harder to voice any kind of derision on amateur funding, in my opinion. This isn't like objecting to a lottery to support Canadian NHL franchises. Most amateur athletes struggle financially and try and get by on government grants and some private sponsorships if they can find them. For those athletes who train and compete in obscurity, they're probably depending more on family for both financial and emotional support than any supposed goldrush from the government.
As for the common call for private sector companies to step up, this is again an idyllic dream but not so much a reality. While there are several high profile sponsors in Canada, it isn't as though the Royal Bank or Visa is really going to pick up the tab for every aspiring amateur athlete out there. Private money is to amateur sports what public money is to healthcare. Everyone wants more of it, but nobody knows exactly how to go about paying it out properly and equitably to all those who need it.
In Atlanta in 1996 for the Summer Games, the Coca-Cola company was notorious for its advertising influence. Being based in Atlanta, Coke was everywhere, signs, posters, billboards and even a massive coke bottle were set up. The usual protests about the commercialization of the Olympics rained down, likely from the same people who call for more private money and corporate sponsorship of amateur athletics. Sometimes it seems people are in such a hurry to offload a cost that they don't really think about things clearly. The thinking usually is 1) my tax dollars should not go to amateur athletes; 2) stop funding them; 3) I don't care who does fund them; 4) how about [insert company here]? For the sake of all of us, I hope the Ministry for Sport and the Canadian Olympic Committee are a bit more far sighted than that.
Of course, in 2010 the Winter Olympics will be held in Vancouver and Whistler, which will probably lead to people complaining about funding for athletes, then complaining about Canada's lack of success at an Olympic Games in its own country, followed shortly by complaining about funding for athletes again. I'm willing to debate why Canada doesn't enjoy the same international and Olympic success as other countries, but I grow quite bored of talk about athletic funding. We fund amateur athletics in this country...get over it already. Not my most eloquent argument ever, but the level of funding that is actually paid to these athletes is really disproportionate to the amount of fervour raised on this issue.
For now, and at least every couple of years when another Olympics roll around, I'll be cheering for the Maple Leaf as always. And for those athletes who toil and sacrifice and went out and won a silver medal in aerials for this country, only to hear about how they shouldn't get any more funding when they get home, you can have your piece of my tax dollars anyday.
