If you win the Olympics in track, or swimming, or ice-skating, then mostly likely you have reached the pinnacle of your sport. To win takes a combination of years of hard work, dedication, and focus. To win an Olympic gold in soccer, tennis, or boxing is nice, but in no way shape or form have you reached the pinnacle of your sport. Few of the top players enter the tennis competition, only three 23+ players can play in the soccer team, and for boxing, well, you are still an amateur. The criteria for Olympic sports is complicated and subjective. For some it's the be all and end all, for others it's just another competition. Sports massive in their respective countries (baseball in the U.S and Japan and netball in the U.K) are not deemed suitable for the games. There are also certain races within sports that have been dropped to meet with scheduling. Now to me, no-matter the popularity of the sport worldwide, if a sports pinnacle isnt the Olympics, then it can make way for a sport where it would be. The amount of people who can name the 2006 soccer world cup winners would be far higher than the number that could name the Olympic champions. I myself am a huge soccer fan, am not sure who won the Olympic title. Same with tennis. I think the Olympic commitee should value more what the Olympics means to the sport, and not would the sport would mean to the Olympics.
Paul Fawcett Kin.332i
No comments:
Post a Comment