In an earlier post I mentioned that
I do not watch much sport anymore and said I would return to that topic at some
point. Today’s revelation that Maria Sharapova has been on the 'juice' seems like a good incentive to turn my writing
to that topic.
Background
My self-image used to be that of a
sportsman and more particularly a sprinter.
From about age 6 or 7 years old I was faster than the average kid and
won school sports day sprint races. Into
my teens I competed at 100m until I had reached the limits of my ability using
the fast twitch muscles I was born with.
I then turned to the 200m and 400m, where training for speed endurance
and the pain of lactic acid build up in the home straight made the events less
attractive to the untrained folk.
The reason for this lengthy
autobiography is not to boast, but to explain that I should love sport and I
used to. Not only competing but watching
as well. I would watch rugby, football,
swimming, tennis and cycling as well as my number one love, athletics or track
and field as our American friends would say.
When I was living in the UK I would
get the ferry over to France to catch some of Le Tour, such was my love. I would go to soccer and rugby and Crystal
Palace, the UK home of athletics before 2012 was my cathedral. OK – so you get the picture.
No More
In my opinion there is no longer any
point to watching most professional sport. I find it hard to be entertained when I know the
results are subject to change. Thus results do not count and so the only reason
to watch is to admire the (enhanced) athleticism.
Cheating is not new and it has been
growing for years and years. As sport
became commercialized and became a firm part of the entertainment industry, so the
reasons to cheat increased. In some
sports that was easy as the administrators were either from a bygone era who
really did not (want to?) understand, or they understood what this
was about very well and were key players in the corrupt game sport had become.
When I was sprinting in the late
1970s and early 1980s there most certainly were those doping. I knew two people ‘on the juice’ for sure and
they claimed to know other and bigger names.
I cannot name them here for legal reasons, but they are some of
the names in UK sprinting at the time who continue to deny to this day.
The problem in my opinion is the
false "ideals" behind sport, the almost deliberate refusal to acknowledge that it is
just entertainment and business and the idea that it is something more noble
and righteous. I am not sure in fact
that it has ever been that, for when one actually starts to even look at sport
in ancient Greece, there are many examples of cheating and fixing.
There are those in the Olympic
movement and in football and tennis who like to look down on the popularity of
professional wrestling and the likes of the NFL. Yet to me that is just to deny that
ultimately they are in the same business.
They want the sponsorship deals, they want the full stadiums of
screaming fans and the big TV audiences.
The scandals in the governing bodies of FIFA, IAAF and the Olympic
movement make that clear, in fact to me they are more corrupt that the owners
of a wrestling franchise or an NFL team.
At least we are pretty clear about what they are.
The Dirtiest Race in History byRichard Moor is a great read that looks at the 1988 men’s 100m in Seoul, when
the dirty little secrets of athletics exploded across the screens of the world. I really do feel for big Ben Johnson (that is
why you will see he is a friend on FB) and actually I have
loads of respect for his coach, the late Charlie Francis, who after the event told it as
it was, but nobody really wanted to listen. His book, Speedtrap is also an excellent read and if it had been taken notice of when it was published, then Lord Coe might not be in the mess he is now in athletics. In short, there are just too many conflicts of interest.
My disgust is actually with some of
the holier than thou prima donnas in that famous race, who were just as guilty, as history would
prove. Five of the eight finalists ened up with a PED conviction. However is that really the dirtiest race? Perhaps that title should go to Le Tour in cycling? Or how about the women’s 100m in 2000 at Sydney where no gold medal was actually awarded in the end! That is because after Marion Jones was disqualified, the silver medalist was Ekaterini Thanou, also a drug taker. In fact if you go through the finalists, just like the mens race in 1988, five of the eight finalists ended up with bans for the use of PEDs. So 12 years after Johnson and the same situation.
That brings us to the women’s 1500m in the London Olympics 2012, which currently looks like this! Another 12 years and still the same.
There is no point in this is there? If the results are going to always be open
to question and medals re-awarded, sometimes to athletes who later
turn out to have doped themselves and then not awarded at all.
What is the point?
So what is to be done? I have some pretty radical solutions but as
this already is too long and the longer the post the fewer readers I have, I am
going to stop now. This is now over a
1000 words and I am just getting warmed up!
As well as a possible solution, I will look at other aspects of sport that have turned me away from viewing and our strange attitude towards drugs.
Ironically, this post has been
written while waiting for my daughter who is – playing tennis, and there is the
rub!
Good post, Dude. No real surprises as you and I have talked about this many times over the years.
ReplyDeleteI guess I just want to reiterate my position that sports have systems in place. If the results were valid according to the system in place at the time of the race, then they cannot be retroactively invalidated. Competitive individuals will compete at the very limits of what is possible. Just because we later say that it should not have been possible doesn't mean they weren't following the rules at the time.
The big problem as I see it (in my admittedly underinformed opinion) is that we are confusing legal and ethical/moral judgments. Setting down rules and following them is the legal side. We live in a law-based society and thus all other things are judged. If we then make an ethical/moral judgment about what the athletes should have been doing, we have every right to vilify them. However, we can't legally apply an ethical/moral judgment ex post facto to make a legal decision.
This is what I believe happened with Lance Armstrong. He met all legal requirements in winning all those races. However, ex post facto evidence was brought to bear that he did not meet some tenuous ethical/moral standard. Then a legal action was taken to remove his legal titles. Which I believe he still legally holds despite the actions of those courts of jurisdiction which have decided otherwise.
This is true, in my opinion, of any sporting titles. Unless they were caught by the processes in place at the time, they should stand. If it is determined that the processes to uphold a standard are inadequate - or if the standard can never be adequately supported by a process, then the standard itself needs to be abandoned.
On a tangential note, I believe that if there was money involved, these titles would not be reversed. For example, if event organizers and television networks were required to refund money to people who paid to see the events if the events were found to be corrupted, we would quickly find all judgments coming down on the side of legality. Ethics and morals have no place in business when it impacts the profits of the faceless powerful instead of the reputations of relatively powerless individuals.
Thank you for your comment Dr. Slowbow.
ReplyDelete