Family or Community?

How many sports refer to their participants, officials and supporters as being a part of ‘a family?’

This has become a modern trend. Rather than being a sporting community we are now told that everyone is part of ‘a family.’

A ‘family’ in basic terms implies that everyone is descended from the same ancestor. Which is stretching the envelope a little. In today’s world a ‘family’ is often described as being ‘a group of two or more persons related by birth, marriage, or adoption who live together; all such related persons are considered as members of one family.’

Since 1930, the definition of family on the census has remained the same, and this definition includes those who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption.

So is ‘family’ in its basic explanation the correct way to describe those involved in sport?

It may well be that the various sporting bodies are trying to give off the feeling of ‘family,’ as often this is a place of comfort, a place to feel safe; although not always.

‘Family’ is believed to be important because in a healthy and loving environment a family can help us get through the most disastrous times as well as the best times. Family is seen as being important because they frequently offer support and security, coupled with unconditional love. Families will in the main always look to see and bring out the best in you even if you cannot see it for yourself.

This explanation of family seems to be far more in line with a team or a club than a governing body or those collectively looking after a sport.. After all it is often the coaches we have as we are developing as a player that we put our trust in, who bring out the best in us. Even when players have established themselves at a certain level, it will often be someone from within their club who invests extra time and encourages them to believe that they can go further, and helps them achieve either more than they dreamed possible, or helps them fulfil their dream.

Once again if one looks at the characteristics of what is perceived as a healthy family, one has to ask if these align with a governing body at local, national or international level?

Key factors identified as being within a well-functioning family include: support; love and caring for other family members. The provision of security and a sense of belonging are also important. Along with open communication; making each person within the family feel important, valued, and respected. Once again one feels that this is far more achievable within a club than in a sport as a whole.

In sport today there is a fundamental issue that makes one believe that as a whole it most definitely is not a family, or if it is, it is one from a period that no one wishes to revisit.

The writing was on the wall at many clubs years ago when their junior participation numbers far outweighed their senior players. In most cases the revenue generated by the junior programs supplemented the senior program.

As players in a variety of sports are now demanding more money than many deserve based on their ability, the pressure has become greater on remaining viable as a club. What has happened is the junior fees have risen astronomically in order to once again offset the costs. The inflated wages in the professional game have had a knock-on effect at the semi-professional level and even amongst the amateur ranks, where certain players believe that they are entitled to now demand a fee to play. The clubs all claim that they need to pay this money to remain competitive!

Exacerbating the situation is that Government funding allocated for junior development is rarely reaching the youngsters it is designed to help. It is being pocketed by the administrators or the coaches. Think about that in a family context, an employer pays one of the adults at the head of the family so that they can support and put food on the table for their children, yet before they can do that the money has been spent.

The Government has admitted that they do not have the resources to check that the money given to the various sectors in sport is spent correctly. Many of the sports know this, and so do not worry where the money is spent, or the fact that it never went to its intended recipients.

Higher up the tree there is an issue where the big clubs in some sports, especially football, are signing children in their early teens to attend their academies in the hope that they will one day make it to the top and then they will reap a reward for that investment.

The situation sees parents given cars, or even paid money for that child’s signature. It is almost like sport is taking people back to an era where teenage boys and girls were put out to work to help support their families. In many cases these children are bringing in more money than their parents, and they have not even made it to professional level yet. Some will never get there, simply because they do not mature as players. Some will suffer burn-out and fall out of love with a game that they previously played for fun, and enjoyed playing. Now it is no longer enjoyable, it is a chore, after all they are still children. Then there are those who realise that they have become the breadwinner in their family and simply cannot cope with that responsibility at such a young age.

As various sports bodies focus on the development of players, rather than leaving the clubs to develop the next generation of talent, the issues remain, because the right structures were not in place when they were set up. In other words they had the money in place to develop all talented players at no cost to the individual or their parents.

Once again we witness them put their hands out to Governments for money to develop the next generation of International players, telling ill-advised politicians that they know best, and these politicians hand over the money without doing any homework on how many of the players that came through these systems actually end up playing at the highest level, let alone for their country.

How many athletes in a variety of sports have made it to the top because of their parents investment more than anything?

How many State representative teams in sport are reliant on the parents paying for flights, meals and accommodation when these young players are selected to wear the colours of their state, district or county? Surely if you are selected for such a team your parents should not be expected to pay? As a result are the best players being picked?

As one state body countered “how can we be expected to fund so many under age teams to compete in national competitions?” Is that not part of your remit? Surely good governance, just like good housekeeping in a familial situation is if you cannot afford it, you go without?

Do many of these sports require so many underage teams? Surely most are a complete waste of time until players reach the age of 17. New Zealand has looked at this and made the decision that it is in fact detrimental to sport, as the best payers end up being selected and not the best players. Those with talent whose families cannot afford for them to travel miss out, and in time when they are continually overlooked walk away from the sport. Often meaning that an inferior player will take their place. Would they have ever played at that level if the other child had been picked?

Having gone back and looked at some under 15 and under 16 teams in the past ten years. It was not surprising to see that only the odd player had gone on to a career in sport. In most cases none had.

It was also interesting talking recently to a player from yesteryear, who happened to come from a large family. They were selected to represent their state in a national competition. This was well before we had all these different age groups. They stated that they could not afford to pay for themselves, and their parents could definitely not afford for them to go. Which implies that nothing has changed, but you would be wrong. This individual explained that the club that they played for made a promise to all its players that if they were selected for a state team they would make sure that they were able to play. The club took pride in that player’s achievement and was determined that they should be able to take up that opportunity. Once again it was the club that was proving to be the organisation that was fulfilling the role of a family, not the sporting association.

In one country it was explained that all the parents with children wishing to play paid a nominal, non-refundable fee at the start of the season; to cover registrations and kit. After that each week those selected, and only those chosen to play were charged a match fee. No match fee, no play. Remarkably this built a great team spirit between the children and the parents. As one advised, one father had lost his job. The family were doing it tough and he explained that his son was going to no longer be able to play because they needed every cent. The other parents did not want the child to suffer, they also believed now more than ever he needed the team and his team mates. Each week the other parents chipped in to cover the match fee. The boy kept playing. The team stayed together, and the other parents pulled together as a community, or was it as a family?

Sadly today many clubs simply cannot afford to give such support, as more and more expectations and costs are being foisted on them. Some are struggling to keep their heads above water. With volunteers in short supply the last thing clubs need is to be made to bring in more people who in turn want payment for their time, such as Technical Directors. While it is all well and good to want clubs to be more professional, many of these do not have the resources of a business, and therefore it is left to a dedicated group to keep their club or family together. These selfless individuals are the parents who work three jobs to give their children the best that they can offer. They are the individuals who have the right to claim that their club is a family.

If as we are being led to believe by many sports that participants and fans are part of ‘a family’ it would appear to be a very paternalistic family. Where family life is authoritarian. One cannot help feeling that a more maternalistic approach would reap better rewards. As covered in A Failure to Ask For Input Can Prove Costly sometimes asking the opposite sex, or others from within the community for input will result in far better outcomes than an autocratic approach.

Some would go so far as to say that many of the sporting ‘families’ are dysfunctional. There is a strong argument that says they are more like a family affected by divorce, and where alimony payments made are not adequate for the ‘family’ members to survive. Or the alimony payments have in fact stopped being paid completely.

Sport cannot possibly survive by having the youth pay for those at the top. The money must come from the head of the ‘family’ or the head of the organisation. History has shown the outcomes when the financial burden falls on the youth.

It was the English writer George Orwell who wrote the following words after the second World War, “A family with the wrong members in control; that, perhaps, is as near as one can come to describing England in a phrase.” Many sports could substitute ‘England’ with the name of their sport, would they be right?

Sport is not ‘a family.’ It is a community. It is an activity that brings together people from all different backgrounds, walks of life, religions and ethnic backgrounds. It is a place where all come together to participate in an activity that they all enjoy and are passionate about. It is a place where barriers can easily be broken down by the game itself. There is no need for creating match days to correspond with causes that are supposed to unite participants. Sport has the ability to do that one it’s own, if we recognise that all who play are part of a wider community.

Being an Aboriginal in Australia has been hard for many. It was especially hard prior to the 1980’s. So when Aboriginal activist Charles Perkins wrote “That was where I first felt free, when I began to play soccer.” This was a big statement. Did he feel a part of a family? That is unlikely, but did he feel part of a community that even if some in that community only recognised him as a footballer, and a good one for 90 minutes, it was a start.

It is time that sports stopped trying to promote a familial atmosphere, where everyone has their hand out wanting pocket money and money for house-keeping, and went back to creating a community which in which players, coaches, officials and fans thrive. Leave the family stuff to the clubs, whose job it is to educate, nurture, encourage and support players and if the time comes, move people on. Having each sector of each sport undertstand their role in the development of the sport that will ultimately improve society.

.