Squash in the Olympics: Are we on the wrong tack?
In Alex Plimmer’s excellent recent article on http://www.crunchsports.com regarding Squash’s lack of inclusion in the Olympic Games, he follows an entirely logical and reasonable train of thought, citing the undoubted assets of Squash and comparing them with other sports that have achieved the ultimate goal of inclusion in the world’s premier sporting celebration.
But what if rather than ‘ Citius, Altius, Fortius,’ the real key to inclusion is ‘Argentum, Pecuniam, Dinarius?’
I am not suggesting that this is definitely the case, but with the recent spectacular meltdown of FIFA and considering how people that are desirous of being upwardly mobile like to use positions of national focus as stepping stones to other political and personal financial successes, one wonders if powerful governing bodies such as FIFA and the IOC need to be demonstrably more transparent in all of their dealings and decision making?
Should lobbying for inclusion only be done through presentation, with no personal contact allowed between the petitioners and the decision makers, with interactions being carefully monitored?
Hospitality is a bit of a grey area when it comes to persuasion. Just ask Dominique Strauss-Kahn. It’s ruined his life.
And after a transparent campaign, perhaps the results of all deliberations should be delivered in sealed envelopes like the Oscars, with a clear accompanying rationale so that those of us who spend our lives dedicated to building a Sport that is probably more reflective of the true requirements of human survival/success than any other, can stop scrambling around in a confusion of darkness as to why we aren’t welcome at the party.
At least we would know that it wasn’t because we couldn’t afford to tip the bouncer.
June 13th, 2015.