Two new sports added to the Olympics.

Introductory

At the meeting of the Executive Board of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in Berlin on 13 August, 2009, two new sports were proposed for inclusion in the Olympic programme with effect from 2016 - the Host City of that year's Summer Olympics is still to be decided and announced. They are: golf and rugby-sevens; and were chosen from a shortlist of seven sports - already demonstration sports - competing for the honour. The other five contenders were: baseball; karate; softball; squash and roller sports.

The proposal to include golf and rugby-sevens in the Olympic programme will be submitted to the full IOC Session for a final decision at its meeting in Copenhagen on 3 - 5 October, 2009. Each of the seven sports gave presentations to the Executive Board at its last meeting in June, 2009; and an extensive evaluation was conducted by the IOC Olympic Programme Commission of the potential added value to the Games from each of the seven sports on the shortlist.

Background

The Olympic Games programme consists of 33 sports, 52 disciplines and nearly 400 events. For example, wrestling is a Summer Olympic sport, comprising two disciplines: Greco-Roman and Freestyle. It is further broken down into fourteen events for men and four events for women. These events are delineated by weight classes. The Summer Olympics programme currently includes 26 sports; whereas the Winter Olympics programme features only 7 sports.

Athletics, swimming, fencing, and artistic gymnastics are the only summer sports that have never been absent from the Olympic program. Cross-country skiing, figure skating, ice hockey, Nordic combined, ski jumping, and speed skating have been featured at every Winter Olympics program since it began in 1924.

Current Olympic sports, like badminton, basketball, and volleyball, first appeared on the programme as demonstration sports, and were later promoted to full Olympic sports. Some sports that were featured in earlier Games were later dropped from the programme.

All the Olympic sports are governed by the International Federations (IFs) recognized by the IOC as the global supervisors of those sports. There are 35 IFs represented at the IOC.

There are also a number of sports recognized by the IOC that are not included in the Olympic programme. These sports are not considered Olympic sports, but they can be promoted to this status during a programme revision that occurs at the first IOC Session following a celebration of the Olympic Games. During such revisions, sports can be excluded or included in the programme, based on a twothirds majority vote of the members of the IOC. There are recognized sports that have never been included in an Olympic programme in any form. Some of these include tug of war, chess and surfing.

In October and November, 2004, the IOC established an Olympic Programme Commission, which was charged with reviewing the sports in the Olympic programme, as well as all non-Olympic recognized sports. The goal was to apply a systematic approach to establishing the Olympic programme for each celebration of the Olympic Games.

The Commission established seven criteria for determining whether a sport should be included in the Olympic programme. These criteria are:

* history and tradition of the sport;

* universality;

* popularity of the sport;

* image;

* athletes' health;

* development of the International Federation that governs the sport; and

* costs of holding the sport.

In addition, there is a requirement that the sports in the programme must adhere to the World Anti Doping Agency Code.

Five recognized sports emerged as candidates for inclusion at the London 2012 Summer Olympics: golf, karate, rugby, roller sports and squash. These sports were reviewed by the IOC Executive Board and then referred to the IOC Session in Singapore in July 2005. Of the five sports recommended for inclusion, only two were selected as finalists: karate and squash. Neither sport attained the required twothirds vote of the IOC members and, therefore, not promoted to the Olympic programme.

The 2002 IOC Session, limited the Summer Games programme to a maximum of 28 sports; 301 events; and 10,500 athletes. At the 2005 IOC Session, the first major programme revision occurred, resulting in the exclusion of baseball and softball from the official programme of the 2012 London Games. Since there was no agreement in promoting two other sports, the 2012 programme will feature only 26 sports.

Comments

As mentioned above, in deciding which sports qualify for inclusion in the Olympic programme, the IOC must take into account the value that the sports add to the Olympic Games. But what is meant by 'value'? Is it sporting value? Or is it commercial value? Or is it both? I suspect that now that the Olympics are a multi million dollar money spinner for the IOC, the emphasis is more on what commercial value the sport concerned can bring to the Olympics in general and the IOC in particular! To continue the financial theme: it is interesting to note that, when Avery Brundage retired as President in 1972, the IOC had US$2 million in assets; eight years later, the IOC coffers had swelled to US$45 million, largely due to a deliberate policy by the IOC of attracting corporate sponsorship and also the sale of television rights. This upward trend in the financial fortunes of the IOC has continued, not least under former IOC President, Juan Antonio Samaranch, with his avowed intent to make the IOC financially independent.

Also, the criteria mentioned above, generally speaking, are rather vague and again cost comes into the equation. It would seem that it is a case of minimum financial effort for maximum financial return. Nice if you can get it! As Dick Pound has recently remarked, the IOC has been known over the years to come up with some strange decisions and it is, therefore, difficult to understand or predict its corporate mind and how it has reached these decisions!

What golf and rugby will actually contribute to the Olympic programme remains to be seen, bearing in mind that both sports have their global money spinning events - the Open and three other major competitions and the Rugby World Cup respectively - and, therefore, their 'stars' are likely to concentrate on them rather than participating in the Olympics!

Rather than extending the Olympic programme, is it not time to reduce it. In my view, the Olympics have become too big and, to some extent, unmanageable - at least financially. Take the 2012 London Games, for example, they are already several billion pounds over budget!

As a traditionalist that cares for safeguarding the integrity of sport, is it not time that the Olympics got back to their Ancient Grecian grass roots and that only running, jumping and throwing sports were included in a slimmed down Olympic programme? At least, this would be more in keeping with the philosophy which inspired the founder of the modern Olympic Movement, Baron Pierre de Coubertin, when he revived the Olympics in 1896 in Athens, in which fewer than 250 athletes took part! His philosophy is still encapsulated in the Olympic motto:

"The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well."

Nowadays, this motto is more honoured in the breach than in the observance. Where winning amongst the athletes is more important and success amongst the sponsors of the Games is measured in purely monetary terms! The excessive and quite obscene spectacle of commercialism of the Centennial Games in Atlanta - quite rightly dubbed the 'Coke Games' largely through the sponsorship of Coca-Cola - is still fresh in the memory!

Again, to reduce the costs of staging the Games and to provide a permanent legacy of them, is it not also time to provide a permanent venue for them? In this connection, a body of opinion to hold the games in Greece - perhaps in Olympia or Athens - is growing all the time and not, in my view, without some justification. Such a move would also add credibility and integrity to them, which they are seriously in danger of losing!

Is it not also time to get back to amateurism? Boxing is the only Olympic sport that is practised by amateurs! As far as Coubertin was concerned, the Olympics were always for amateurs and not professional sportsmen and women. He drew his inspiration from the English Public School system, which subscribed to the belief that sport formed an important part of education; an attitude summed up in the saying mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body. In this ethos, a gentleman was one who became an all-rounder, not the best at one specific thing. There was also a prevailing concept of fairness, in which practicing or training was considered tantamount to cheating. Those who practiced a sport professionally were considered to have an unfair advantage over those who practiced it merely as a hobby. Are these ideas and values too alien for the mores of the twenty-first century? I think not! In any case, at least the IOC has dropped the requirement of amateurism, which had become hypercritical, from the Olympic Charter and with it the 'shamateurism' of earlier years, which did not bring much credit on the Olympic Movement and Olympism and all that they are supposed to stand for!

Conclusion

The Olympic Games are in danger, as mentioned above, of becoming a victim of their own success! It is high time to reassess the organisation, the size and the costs of staging them in the interests of sporting integrity.

But will the IOC heed such calls? Probably not, because money - as usual - will be the determining factor. But watch out - for as someone once said: 'money is the root of all evil!'