There is a reason that for centuries sport has been an analogy for life, because sport like life can at times be unfair. It can be cruel, yet it can also give you unforgettable euphoric moments.
There is an unattributed quote that says “The mark of a champion is the ability to make the most of good luck and the best of bad.” That is true in sport and in life.
For some reason we now want to change all of that.
It started in our schools, then the workplace and is now infiltrating sport.
In sport no longer do the spoils go to the victor. We see trophies handed out to children simply for turning up each week and playing, irrespective of their performances. We have witnessed prestigious international awards reduced to a popularity contest. We see the highest wages not always going to the best player, but to the one who is the most marketable, who can give their club or management the best financial returns.
Despite striving to be the best and even becoming one of the best, there is no longer any guarantee that you will receive the rewards that justifiably should come your way.
On the flip-side if a player is dropped following a bad performance the coach now must tread a fine line as to how they share that information with the player. No longer can they simply be honest and tell the player they had a shocker, and so they have been dropped. This may damage the player’s confidence. Yet this is supposed to be a competitive environment, one in which the best players vie for selection, and then compete to be the best team or individual in the competition. However, just because one individual believes that it is their right to be in the team, everyone else has to approach them with kid gloves.
Just as in the workplace, where it is now very hard to remove someone who is simply not up to their job, clubs now find it equally difficult to remove players who have a negative impact on those around them.
Probably more worrying than anything is the fact that the competitive environment of sport is being used to promote issues that are seen to be publicly popular. As a result of this we are seeing quota systems coming into the world of sport. We are even seeing some of the best in some areas pushed aside so that we have people of both sexes involved. This is promoted as gender equality, but is it really? As one wag put it how long will it be before all teams and competitions are mixed gender?
Of course if both individuals are the best there is no problem if they are not and either one is appointed purely due to their gender where is the equal opportunity in that? This simply builds resentment. Surely this is simply another example of a quota system? With any quota system there is always a risk that the wrong people are being rewarded with a position for all the wrong reasons.
Former South African rugby player turned commentator Owen Nkumane said many years ago that being promoted to the Springbok squad as part of the post apartheid quota system was detrimental to his career as a player, as he knew that he was not ready to play at that level at that time. It put untold pressure on him, as well as expectations that he was not ready for at that point in time.
Rather than sport uniting, now it seems to be dividing people. Why? Because no longer is it about being the best, or being the best in that position. Other factors have come into play that should have nothing to do with the competition as long as there is equal opportunity for all. That up until the time that the teams are picked or individuals are selected, each has had an equal opportunity to be assessed fairly. Surely as stated previous it is equity that sport needs rather than equality? (Equality or Equity, Which is Really Going To Carry Sport Forward).
Only the truly naive will believe that selection will always be judged fairly, as like life not everything is fair. There will be bias as well as unconscious bias that will come into play. Sometimes individuals will not be judged under the same parameters. For example imagine a selection process for a sport such as cricket where players were judged over five matches. For some players two of those five matches were called off. Yet those selecting the team judged all the players as if they had played five games. Needless to say some of the better players had performed well in the three games they played but when judged over five games the figures did not stack up. Once again, like life this could be perceived as unfair. What it actually proved was how shortsighted and stupid the selectors were as their methods meant that they missed out on more talented, or possibly players in better form than those they actually picked.
We are also witnessing young players being selected based on their parents employment; as they could prove to be potential sponsors. Is there any equity or even equal opportunity in that? Yet the organisations advocating such a policy are the very same that boast of their commitment to equality.
Previously in team sports, where places were won on merit, the majority would make an effort to get to know each other no matter how different they were, all for the good of the team. You did not have to like each other, but there was a shared respect and purpose. Now there is resentment, and an even greater belief amongst many that they are superior to those playing alongside them.
Back in 1962 the Boston Celtics were the first National Basketball Association side to have an all-black starting five. Those at the club have said they had not realised this until a newspaper pointed it out. Needless to say it became a story. There was no bullshit line from the coach that this was affirmation that the club believed in equality, which would no doubt be thrown out there today. No, their outspoken coach Red Auerbach told the media, “I wasn’t making any statement. I was trying to win games! Those were my five best guys. It was no big deal.”
While this was clearly not a big deal within the sporting club it was outside of it, as society thrives on differences between people. They make the interesting stories. We all fall into the trap of reading them. Just as we all have views on issues, and biases that determine who we are. Yet the key thing is not to let them determine your actions. Which is sadly what we are seeing in sport today.
In order to try and combat any accusations that there may be any bias those at the helm are doing all they can to dispel any such thoughts with actions that are actually harmful to the whole fabric of sport. Rather than just focussing on trying to be the best, as invariably that is when everything falls into place. When a group with similar goals and values come together and work as one to achieve those goals. What we are witnessing are career-minded administrators more interested in doing what appears right and ticks a box on their KPI’s rather than doing what will be best for the sport and all concerned. Putting some issues that effect a minority of people as a main focus and giving it too much oxygen means that key areas are being neglected, and will in time build resentment.
Many players on many of the great teams have had differences. It can be the colour of their skin, their religious or political beliefs, where they came from, what they eat, there is a never-ending range of differences in a group of human beings when they come together, but the key issue is not necessarily trying to make each individual understand those differences, but it is essential that they learn to respect those differences. That they respect that the man next to them in the locket room may be a completely different character to their own, but that this becomes irrelevant, as ultimately they are both there to do a job together for the team, and as long as they each fulfil their role, and do that job well there is nothing else that matters.
Think back any of you who have been a part of any success at work or in sport. When that success was achieved was there any discussion about differences? What was it that brought everyone success?
So many in sport today are actually promoting differences. What is more they then fail to take the time to educate their members, players or clubs about that particular section of the community. What they are actually doing in many cases is promoting division. While they preach equality, would they not be better off teaching and promoting respect? Respect someone’s choice to be different. Respect them for what they do as a coach, or a player and judge them on that alone. Respect does not mean that you have to agree with another person’s views or beliefs, but it means that you are prepared to accept that they have the courage to stand by those beliefs, when many would not. Respect is a feeling that comes from recognising another person’s abilities, qualities, or achievements. These may all be different to our own, but can still warrant respect.
One of the Boston Celtics players back in the 1960’s was Bill Russell. While not being the first, Russell is regarded as the first black player to achieve superstar status in the NBA; The Celtics did in fact draft the first African-American player to a NBA side when they picked Chuck Cooper. Bill Russell was a five-time NBA Most Valuable Player (MVP) and a 12-time NBA All-Star. He was a key cog in the Celtics dynasty that won 11 NBA championships during his 13-year career.
At that time it cannot have been easy being a black man in a sport when there were not many playing. Yet this did not stop Russell being outspoken on civil rights issues. On one trip to Charlotte he and his fellow black players were placed in a seperate hotel as there was segregation in the town. He called his coach and told him that this was unacceptable. As he stated in his book he said, “It wasn’t about pride or ego or creating conflict. It was about principle, trust and respect.” On this occasion he aired his opinion, stayed, and played the game.
When a few years later the team was sent to Lexington, Kentucky for an exhibition game, and the hotel restaurant refused to serve the black players on the team. Offers were subsequently made to try and placate the players, but they decided that the situation was not acceptable, and told the coach that they were flying home. They did not go to the press and make a story out of the situation, they quietly left, and when the game was played their absence was noticed. It had a far greater long term impact on the town of Lexington, which suddenly looked at why these players were not playing.
The key part of this story is that their coach Red Auerbach after listening to their side of the story understood why they felt that they should leave. He respected their decision and point of view. What is more he went to the airport with them and made sure that they were able to get on board flights home with no trouble.
Understanding the position of his players and openly and genuinely supporting them was far more powerful than any public statement.
Respect is fast becoming an outdated word in a world full of entitlement. A world where people believe that their story is the one that should be heard above all others.
Principles are also questionable, as we are witnessing with the FIFA World Cup in Qatar. We have seen the Australian Socceroos make a video talking about human rights, Denmark are going to wear black shirts instead of red for the same cause, and captains of some international teams will be wearing a rainbow armband to highlight the rights of homosexuals in a country where it is illegal. Are these just gestures to win public approval or are they genuine?
While these gestures may be admirable, whether we like it or not there are rules/laws in every country that you visit and it is respectful and wise to adhere to those rules/laws when you are a guest in that country; even if you do not agree with them. As has been stated, if the footballing world feels so strongly about these issues then they should have stood against FIFA and its executives who made the decision for Qatar to be given hosting rights in November 2010. Many of these protests seem to be coming long after the horse has bolted. Hence why many feel that this is simply posturing by the players.
Do all of those taking part really feel strongly about this, are they principled enough to say, no I cannot support such an event? So far not one player or one team has pulled out of the event because of their principles.
What does this really say about where sport is today? Does sport still reflect life? Maybe it now is more a reflection of society, where statements are proven to be hollow as they are not backed up by actions. Words and statements are spewed out on social media, and in a media full of their own agendas, and no one is held accountable for those words or asked to back them up with actions.
It will come as no surprise that Bill Russell was one of many black athletes who came forward and supported Muhammed Ali’s decision to not be drafted for the Vietnam War. Yes, he was militant at times and ruffled feathers, but fighting for what you believe in will always upset some.
One of the key messages that Russell, who passed away in July this year always believed, which was passed down to him by his father, was that “minorities have to understand the majority to survive, but not the other way around.”
Wise words, and many in sport should remember them. As currently pandering to minorities is undermining the whole pretext of competition.
