Governments and their relationship with sports
Published: Sunday | February 19, 2012
Jamaica's Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller.
Tony Becca, Contributor
The problem, or whatever it is, of governments interfering with sports has been as old as the Blue Mountains, each day the problem gets bigger, and, to tell the truth, it will never end.
Because of what sports stands for, because of the egos of most of the men and women in sports, it will always want to be autonomous and untouchable, and because of its nature, because of what it represents, governments will always want a say and a hand in it.
Sports is supposed to be lily white, it is supposed to be spotlessly clean, and it is supposed to be the human endeavour in which whether the contestants are black or white, rich or poor, catholic or protestant, American or African, bright or dumb, they have an equal chance of winning.
In other words, no one can or should be able to pull a string to assist one or the other.
Governments or politicians, are known for doing things, for pulling strings to suit themselves or those close to them, and that is why, basically, the big boys in sports do not want the governments getting involved in sports, and that is why, probably, the governments want to get involved.
No to tainted sports
The people in sports do not want sports to be contaminated, at least not by outsiders, and certainly not by politicians.
But what does sports mean by governments' interference?
According to the International Olympic Committee and International Federation of Association Football, the big boys of international sport, and the International Cricket Council, who have moved to fall in line with the two, interference means two basic things.
The first is that national associations, in accordance with modern sporting governance, should be autonomous and free from interference in the administration of their affairs, and that in turn means that members elected to sport bodies should be elected by the membership of the association in a free and fair process or be appointed from outside by the executive body, and that no one can be removed by government officials.
The second is that governments should not be involved in the selection of teams, coaches or other personnel, they should not get involved in the day-to-day decisions of sport such as fixing dates of matches and disciplinary issues, and they should not have the right of approval or ratification, recommendation, veto or appointments.
In other words, the decision on matters of sport should be reserved for those in sport, to those who should know about sport, and I have no problem with that. In fact, I totally agree with it.
I also agree, totally agree, however, with what the government can do or is free to do in sport and according to sport.
The government is free, obviously, to provide financial assistance for sport and to attach conditions to that assistance which do not contravene the rules dealing with interference with games, and since it can provide financial assistance, since it is the government of the land, the elected government, it has the right to investigate a board in order to ascertain whether its laws have been broken, whether any criminal offences have been committed.
As the ruler of a country, elected by the people so to do, sport also gives the government of a country the right to deal with national associations which are dysfunctional, obviously not only in their own opinion and quite rightly so.
No sports association, regardless of which one it is, regardless of how big it is, domestically or internationally, should be bigger than the government of its country, the elected government of a country.
Regulating sports
If a government is elected freely and fairly to run the affairs of a country, if a government can deal with any of its citizens who has broken the law of the land or can decide, in one way or the other, what people can eat or drink depending on the cost or can decide what the level of taxation should be, it must be able to deal with sports and with sportsmen and sportswomen, just as it deals with other professional bodies, just as how it deals with doctors, lawyers, teachers and nurses.
The difference is how it deals with sport, especially the popular sports, the people's sports, and how it uses its power to deal with sports.
Sports should not and cannot allow politicians to run sport, competitive sport, for the simple reason that sport could become too politicised and most likely would become too politicised.
Sport should not be politicised, but it does not seem that legislation is the way to go, not in the world in which we live, not in a world of rich, very rich, and poor, very poor nations, not in a world in which sport, almost by necessity, is funded by the poor nations and in which sport is self-sufficient in rich countries and can do their own thing, allowed to do their own thing in the rich nations, and not in a world in which the rich nations will always get what they want and the poor nations forced to follow and to comply.
The big problem, therefore, with governments and sport is the size of one and the size of the other, the power of one over the power of the other.
Sport, the big sports, the big international sports, is massive, it involves the entire world or almost all of it, it makes money, huge sums of money. It turns people into stars and into legends overnight, and nobody can touch the big boys in sport or say anything to them.
A country, like Jamaica, is a small country, a poor country, and while it is big at home, while it talks big, it is not so big abroad and has little clout internationally.
Sport, however, is big, really big, whenever it talks, people listen, whenever it rules, people either follow or they are out, and no one wants to be out of the Olympics or the World Cup, or in the case of the West Indies, out of Test cricket.
Part of the conflict of sport, of the international sport problem with governments or government's problem with international sport therefore is that while a government can deal with its own sport, it cannot deal with international sport which is big, really big, like the Olympic Games and the World Cup of football.
International sport is bigger than each individual government, it has to find common rules to govern international sport, and the common rules do not necessarily fall in line a country's way of doing things.
Sport, like or not, must include government interference, and therefore, the key, the challenge, is to find a fair and just way to do so.
It seems unfair to say to a government, like Jamaica, who is elected to run things in Jamaica, who is expected to fund almost everything thing in sport, not to get involved in sport, especially when, according to the people in sport themselves, sport is so important to the people, and when the sport is the big sport of the country, is the sport of the people, and is important to the psyche of the people.
It will be even more difficult to stay away, not to interfere, if and when sport becomes a major industry in a country, a big money spinner in this country.
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/2...7cB4k.facebook
Published: Sunday | February 19, 2012
Jamaica's Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller.
Tony Becca, Contributor
The problem, or whatever it is, of governments interfering with sports has been as old as the Blue Mountains, each day the problem gets bigger, and, to tell the truth, it will never end.
Because of what sports stands for, because of the egos of most of the men and women in sports, it will always want to be autonomous and untouchable, and because of its nature, because of what it represents, governments will always want a say and a hand in it.
Sports is supposed to be lily white, it is supposed to be spotlessly clean, and it is supposed to be the human endeavour in which whether the contestants are black or white, rich or poor, catholic or protestant, American or African, bright or dumb, they have an equal chance of winning.
In other words, no one can or should be able to pull a string to assist one or the other.
Governments or politicians, are known for doing things, for pulling strings to suit themselves or those close to them, and that is why, basically, the big boys in sports do not want the governments getting involved in sports, and that is why, probably, the governments want to get involved.
No to tainted sports
The people in sports do not want sports to be contaminated, at least not by outsiders, and certainly not by politicians.
But what does sports mean by governments' interference?
According to the International Olympic Committee and International Federation of Association Football, the big boys of international sport, and the International Cricket Council, who have moved to fall in line with the two, interference means two basic things.
The first is that national associations, in accordance with modern sporting governance, should be autonomous and free from interference in the administration of their affairs, and that in turn means that members elected to sport bodies should be elected by the membership of the association in a free and fair process or be appointed from outside by the executive body, and that no one can be removed by government officials.
The second is that governments should not be involved in the selection of teams, coaches or other personnel, they should not get involved in the day-to-day decisions of sport such as fixing dates of matches and disciplinary issues, and they should not have the right of approval or ratification, recommendation, veto or appointments.
In other words, the decision on matters of sport should be reserved for those in sport, to those who should know about sport, and I have no problem with that. In fact, I totally agree with it.
I also agree, totally agree, however, with what the government can do or is free to do in sport and according to sport.
The government is free, obviously, to provide financial assistance for sport and to attach conditions to that assistance which do not contravene the rules dealing with interference with games, and since it can provide financial assistance, since it is the government of the land, the elected government, it has the right to investigate a board in order to ascertain whether its laws have been broken, whether any criminal offences have been committed.
As the ruler of a country, elected by the people so to do, sport also gives the government of a country the right to deal with national associations which are dysfunctional, obviously not only in their own opinion and quite rightly so.
No sports association, regardless of which one it is, regardless of how big it is, domestically or internationally, should be bigger than the government of its country, the elected government of a country.
Regulating sports
If a government is elected freely and fairly to run the affairs of a country, if a government can deal with any of its citizens who has broken the law of the land or can decide, in one way or the other, what people can eat or drink depending on the cost or can decide what the level of taxation should be, it must be able to deal with sports and with sportsmen and sportswomen, just as it deals with other professional bodies, just as how it deals with doctors, lawyers, teachers and nurses.
The difference is how it deals with sport, especially the popular sports, the people's sports, and how it uses its power to deal with sports.
Sports should not and cannot allow politicians to run sport, competitive sport, for the simple reason that sport could become too politicised and most likely would become too politicised.
Sport should not be politicised, but it does not seem that legislation is the way to go, not in the world in which we live, not in a world of rich, very rich, and poor, very poor nations, not in a world in which sport, almost by necessity, is funded by the poor nations and in which sport is self-sufficient in rich countries and can do their own thing, allowed to do their own thing in the rich nations, and not in a world in which the rich nations will always get what they want and the poor nations forced to follow and to comply.
The big problem, therefore, with governments and sport is the size of one and the size of the other, the power of one over the power of the other.
Sport, the big sports, the big international sports, is massive, it involves the entire world or almost all of it, it makes money, huge sums of money. It turns people into stars and into legends overnight, and nobody can touch the big boys in sport or say anything to them.
A country, like Jamaica, is a small country, a poor country, and while it is big at home, while it talks big, it is not so big abroad and has little clout internationally.
Sport, however, is big, really big, whenever it talks, people listen, whenever it rules, people either follow or they are out, and no one wants to be out of the Olympics or the World Cup, or in the case of the West Indies, out of Test cricket.
Part of the conflict of sport, of the international sport problem with governments or government's problem with international sport therefore is that while a government can deal with its own sport, it cannot deal with international sport which is big, really big, like the Olympic Games and the World Cup of football.
International sport is bigger than each individual government, it has to find common rules to govern international sport, and the common rules do not necessarily fall in line a country's way of doing things.
Sport, like or not, must include government interference, and therefore, the key, the challenge, is to find a fair and just way to do so.
It seems unfair to say to a government, like Jamaica, who is elected to run things in Jamaica, who is expected to fund almost everything thing in sport, not to get involved in sport, especially when, according to the people in sport themselves, sport is so important to the people, and when the sport is the big sport of the country, is the sport of the people, and is important to the psyche of the people.
It will be even more difficult to stay away, not to interfere, if and when sport becomes a major industry in a country, a big money spinner in this country.
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/2...7cB4k.facebook