There needs to be a “step change” in sports policy so children inspired by Team GB’s gold medals become future star athletes themselves, the British Olympic Association chairman has said.
What Lord Moynihan is proposing is the government spending more of our money – well, plus ça change there, then. This is a prime example of how we can enjoy a smaller state – get the government out of everything that is not essential and sport is not essential. Those who want to participate and watch it, pay for it. Those who don’t, don’t. Either way it is nothing that should be any concern of the government and it is certainly not something the government should be picking our pockets to fund.
Megan, commenting below the line on this risible suggestion – not once presented with a contrary argument by the Beeb, mind – says it all:
Sport is a hobby.
The state does not fund my hobbies. Nor should it.
Why should it fund yours?
Quite so. Although I would point out that as the state does not have any money, that should be “we” fund it, and we most certainly should not. Unless you are happy to dig deep in your pocket to buy me a new motorcycle? Nah, didn’t think so…
So, why were all those school sports fields sold off? What are you going to do, knock down all the houses built on them?
A grass field is of limited use for anything other than team field games or rough-and-ready athletics – and football is already thriving courtesy of the vast number of junior clubs and the trickle-down of kit etc from the professional game. In any case, far more sports fields than were ever sold have been lost over the intervening decades to car parking and overspill classrooms.
If you want to look for somewhere to lay the blame, try mass childcare for the under-5s. At an age when they are learning to walk, run and jump, huge numbers of children are penned in from 8am to 6pm, 5 days a week, up to 48 weeks a year; does anyone ever ask about the amount of physical activity that takes place at nursery?
Most kids aren’t inspired by Olympic sports. They’re inspired by football, rugby and cricket players. The only people who care about canoeing, rowing and track cycling are a tiny number of fans and the sort of jingoistic morons who would cheer on someone winning a gold medal in one-footed monopoly.
Go and see how many people turn out to see a national athletics or rowing competition. They can hardly half-fill a national event at Crystal Palace which has a capacity of 20,000. If kids are inspired by these sports, there aren’t many of them turning out to see them when the opportunities are given to them. And sports like athletics and velodrome cycling survive on subsidies. Lottery funding of athletes, free use of facilities.
Of course, the BBC constantly promotes this idea that athletics is a big sport (probably because they cover athletics).
The whole thing of winning Olympics medals is just about political propaganda. The lottery funding of athletes is all about winning podium places and medals (which of course means that we end up winning all the easier, more obscure medals).
Go and see how many people turn out to see a national athletics or rowing competition. They can hardly half-fill a national event at Crystal Palace which has a capacity of 20,000.
Exactly!
National and International too! I hate the way the games are promoted as though it is a once-every-four-years opportunity for them to compete whereas in reality the probably do so throughout the year.
Yup. There’s a whole European circuit where the likes of Bolt and Farah compete quite regularly.
In fact, you are more likely to see a world record outside the Olympics because there are large financial rewards for getting one at one of the events.
I always think official exhortations to take part in sports have something of “Kraft durch Freude” about them.
As you say, it should be a matter of individual choice. It is not for government to tell us how to live our lives.
The government wants us all to pay for something that a few people do of their own free will (because they enjoy it) since it brings in money for the government ?
Say it ain’t so… 😐
Just referring back to the uppermost comment (I refrain from calling it “top comment”, in case people get the wrong idea) on the BBC site:
“Maybe less than 1% go on to stardom but their are wider benefits.” Such as better knowledge and understanding of English might be a good start.
“Better health so less spending on NHS and keeping kids off the streets to name a couple.” For the first point: what are the statistics for sports related injuries in casualties? The second is a moot point, as a lot of the sports are “street” sports; certainly, many of them involve training on the public roads; however, I suppose the point trying to be made is that the sports-engaged person has a reason for pounding the cobbles, rather than just random time-killing.
Tim Almond, I suspect that the only reason people are “inspired” by football, cricket, et al players is not because of the sport – it is more likely to be about the money, the fame and the kudos. Those who truly are inspired will not need tax-payers money to fund their passion; but they will need tolerant and supportive parents and teachers.
All that said, I do find a person who has pursued their passion and harnessed their talent to such degrees as is seen in most of the Olympics (I still cannot accept football or tennis as being in the Olympian mould) quite inspirational.
When I was younger, my passions were swimming, cycling and karate. The swimming may have been subsidised to some extent because the facilities are expensive and I suspect that the entrance fee to the swimming baths didn’t cover the costs of building and maintaining them. Cycling was completely self funding because I didn’t compete but just used my bike for transport and commuting, presumably saving the environment in the process. Karate was largely self funding but I suspect it dipped into the public purse once it started to move from church halls to leisure centres. I suppose that the question is, would these activities have been impossible without at least a small amount of public funding? I would suggest not, where there is a will there is a way. If karate types weren’t having half of their income taken from them in tax they could probably afford to build their own purpose built dojo and hand it on to future generations.