Only the strong survive in international sport
As one peruses the daily news from around the world one is compelled to think that the adage, ‘only the strong survive’ rings true. Close analysis of the world of sport appears to confirm that this is perhaps even more valid than is the case in the broader society.
In the past several years we have seen some international sports organisations flex their muscles which is in large measure based on the strength of their respective financial bases.
Often, one gets the impression that while much is made of values in sport, they are, more often than not, sued as a guise to support action when it suits the pride and purposes of the leadership of the organisations involved. There is an overwhelming tendency, in such cases, to ignore the past intransigencies of those who are now wielding their awesome sporting power.
Inevitably, the north-south and rich/poor divides in sport are the same as in other aspects of life in the global environment.
While, admittedly, it behoves us all to speak of change, those in control, those wielding power in every aspect, especially financially, have grown adept at ways in which the system reflects the other aspects of societies around us.
IOC – world’s sports Police
Over the past several years the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has increasingly adopted the role of acting as the global sport police, making statements at an international level as if totally in control of the global sport and therefore, determining its direction.
Boxing
For some time the IOC, custodian of the Olympic Games, has identified boxing’s international federation, AIBA, as something of a sort of pariah.
Of course, over several editions of the Olympic Games, many observers have had good reason to question numerous decisions in respect of matches between opponents.
The first major challenge to the way boxing conducted its affairs at the Olympics came when Roy Jones lost in a decision that may well have cost him the gold medal. Amazingly, the criticisms may well be accredited with AIBA voting him the outstanding boxer of the Games despite having been cheated of the gold medal.
More recently, there have been reports of match-fixing at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro in 2016. An Associated Press article dated 1 October 2021 stated, “Investigator Richard McLaren… appointed by the International Boxing Association…found AIBA officials selected referees and judges to ensure that bouts could be manipulated in Olympic qualifying and at the Rio de Janeiro Games. He also found signs the 2012 Olympics in London were affected.”
McLaren also noted, “Key personnel decided that the rules did not apply to them,” and that there was a “culture of fear, intimidation and obedience in the ranks of the referees and judges.”
Internally, AIBA also appeared to have descended into a quagmire of corruption. Challenges for the leadership of the organisation eventually led to some heated arguments and there was a feeling that some wealthy individuals were in control.
The IOC stepped in, using Boxing’s desire to remain within the fold of sports on the Olympic Games programme as leverage.
On Wednesday 26 June 2019 the Independent newspaper carried a sub-head that read, “International Boxing Federation has been suspended by the IOC after failing to reform following the emergence of links to criminal organisations.” The article further stated, “The International Olympic Committee on Wednesday officially took over the boxing qualification and competition for next year’s Tokyo 2020 Olympics and suspended international boxing federation AIBA following a vote at its session.
“The IOC voted unanimously to implement a recommendation of its executive board to oust AIBA from the Tokyo 2020 Games over issues surrounding its finances and governance and suspend the body until the issues are resolved.
“AIBA has been in turmoil over its finances and governance for years with the federation $16 million in debt and an ongoing bitter battle over the presidency that has split the body internally.”
Weightlifting
The sport of weightlifting, one of the original sports on the programme of the Olympic Games since their reintroduction in 1896 in Athens, Greece, has recently been facing challenges posed by the IOC, the world’s sports police, it would appear.
News 18, in its online document dated 9 August 2021, explained, “Reports say that unhappy with its functioning, especially its ability to crack down on alleged doping, the IOC had last year warned that weightlifting would be removed from the Games unless IWF introduces wide-ranging reforms, including rigorous drug testing norms. Already, for the 2020 Olympics, IOC had slashed the number of lifters to 196 from 260 at the 2016 Games and will bring it down further to 120 at the next Olympics, in 2024 at Paris.”
There were some issues when it appeared that the IOC initially refused accreditation to some members of the IWF. The matter was resolved on the eve of the Games in Tokyo.
Following the conclusion of the Games in Tokyo, there has been much back and forth between the IOC and the IWF with the latter working to satisfy the wishes of the IOC to stay on the sports programme of the Olympics.
Football
In 2015, the football world woke up to what many believe has been its sporting intransigencies all along. Several members of the leadership of FIFA were arrested in an operation in Switzerland and many are still mired in legal troubles attendant to their arrests back then.
FIFA itself would perhaps not have taken any decision in respect of the corruption that has been unearthed. Indeed, the operation that led to the arrests and subsequent exposures of corruption within FIFA, was occasioned more by the accusations of some powerful football nations in respect of the awareness of World Cup bid successes to Qatar and Russia respectively.
Long-serving FIFA presidents Joao Havelange and Sepp Blatter, have both been accused of unsavoury behaviour during their respective tenures at the helm of the organisation.
The arrests in Switzerland and the subsequent revelations have served to highlight that it appears as though FIFA has systematically crafted and nurtured a culture of corruption and that many of those responsible emerge largely unscathed since they retain their large financial benefits.
Interestingly, writing in the Bleacher Report dated 26 October 2010, Roberto Alvarez-Galloso noted that when then IOC President, Jacques Rogge, commented on the FIF scandals over the bids for the World Cup, he “said that FIFA can learn from the experience of the IOC when it was affected by scandals during its recent bids. He also recognized that while reforms would be made to reduce corruption or irregularities, such corruption would not go away completely because of “human nature.”
The latter part of Rogge’s comments is most interesting. Maybe he knew something that the rest of us in sports do not know. That, in and of itself is not new to the IOC. Rogge’s predecessor, Juan Antonio Samaranch, whose own history concerning the political philosophy of and apparent support for General Franco remains a cause for concern, appealed at the end of the last centennial, for consideration to be given to the termination of all existing world records and start afresh with new world records in the new millennium. Here again, many continue to ask whether Samaranch was aware of something about existing world records that the rest of us in sport, seemingly naive, do not know.
Richard Pound’s startling revelation
“Independence can have its price, as was the case with the Salt Lake City investigation.”
The foregoing words came from the mouth of Canada’s long-serving IOC member, Richard Pound in an exclusive interview with Liam Morgan of Inside The Games.
Pound essentially stated that the stunning and highly objective investigation that he led into the Sat Lace City Scandal, actually cost him any chance he may have had to become the president of the IOC after the retirement of Juan Antonio Samaranch.
Morgan quotes Pound as saying, “When I chaired the Ad Hoc Commission that investigated the conduct of IOC members in relation to the Salt Lake City bid for the 2002 Winter Games, I was investigating IOC members who would be voting in the upcoming presidential election… “It was, in my view, more important to save the IOC than to try to curry favour with the members under investigation and I knew that rigorous independent investigation finished any realistic possibility that I could become President.”
One way of interpreting Pound’s remarks is that he has been very much aware of the people who have been sitting around the IOC’s table with him such that they could not have been expected to treat him as he deserved for having acted in a manner consistent with the highest standard of ‘good governance’ that the IOC promotes.
Pound’s statement suggests that some IOC members, all of whom were at the time selected by the membership itself, may well have been preaching the fundamental principles of ‘Olympism’ but perhaps were not prepared to see it in action within the organisation when it was forced to examine the corruption that had been found within its core.
Pound’s statement is a stinging indictment of the IOC and we dare add here, its role as the world of sports’ police officer, extolling the values inherent in the Olympic Movement.
It is a stinging indictment on an organisation where many of today’s existing members were among the membership of the IOC at the time Pound conducted his investigation. What have they got to say, now that Pound has made his views known?
Raw power
While it is good to know that some organisations and individuals insist on adherence to the principles of fair play, integrity, transparency and accountability in sport and the promotion of the positive values attendant to sport, it does not always appear that there is consistency even amongst organisations that abrogate unto themselves the power to determine who should be targeted at any point in time.
Given the very chequered history of the IOC, one wonders whether it possesses the right to determine for itself and perhaps, in its own best interest, which international federation it will target at any given point.
Had the international media not brought the shady dealings amongst several IOC members at the time, would we ever have learnt of what became known as the ‘Salt Lake City Scandal?’
It was during the follow-through of the coverage of the aforementioned scandal involving the IOC that more revelations emerged about monies paid to IOC members for their votes for the Olympic Games of 2000, when Sydney, Australia, emerged victorious over Beijing, China.
Many believe that corruption has always been an integral part of the way the IOC conducted business. It was that a good job was done, hitherto, to keep the truth from emerging.
It was also the case, as some Australian Olympic officials declared by way of justification for their actions, that at the time the IOC’s rules did not forbid the payment of IOC members and/or the presentation of ‘gifts’ to them, in exchange of their votes.
The aforementioned references to Richard Pound’s view of the consequences of his investigation into the Salt Lake City Scandal raise more questions about the mode of operation of the IOC, but perhaps more importantly, of the organisation’s seemingly eager adoption of the role of the police officer of the world of sport.
Indeed, it must be considered something of a travesty that John Coates, the current Vice President of the IOC and Head of the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS) was one of the aforementioned Australian officials.
It, therefore, seems more than a little inconsistent for some highly placed sports officials to appear to be rewarded even though their sports administration history reveals their seeming indiscretions, while others are made targets by the same IOC when the former sit in judgement over them today.
The concept of there being a level playing field or that the IOC is working towards the provision of such an arena in respect of good governance, appears at best remote when one analyses sport in the global environment today.
