Late last year a friend told me he reads Sport inc. each Thursday to understand the dirty politics inside sport and then restores his love of the subject by watching it at the weekend. Well, I make no apology to him for the welter of commentary on all things grubbily Olympic that I’ll likely churn out in the run-up to Paris 2024 as I’m sure the Games themselves will (as ever) set his sporting heart - and yours - pounding this Summer.
The question of Russian and Belarusian athlete participation in Paris is a contentious one. The conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza has only added to its moral and practical complexities.
The International Olympic Committee would have the world perched with it on a fence of non-judgmental neutrality, not so much blind to wars as believing that its Games can rise above them in some happy-clappy extra geo-political dimension - at least for a fortnight every couple of years. Its solution is to strike out Russia and Belarus but allow the countries’ sportspeople to compete as ‘neutrals’. Provided, that is, that they are neither connected to the military, nor have declared support for the war in Ukraine.
“From the reactions [of Russia and Ukraine], Bach concludes that neither side is satisfied. ‘That means we have obviously found a good middle ground,’ explained the IOC president.” Die Welt website, 23 December
Not all sports have followed the IOC’s guidelines. World Athletics has (admirably I believe) taken the toughest stance, deciding not to open the neutrality door. Others have effectively blocked athletes from the aggressor nations by virtue of their systems of sporting qualification for the Olympics. In many cases, qualifying competitions have been and gone without Russian involvement.
As of December, the IOC stated that of the 4,600 global athletes already qualified for Paris, only eight are Russian and three Belarusian. More than 60 are Ukrainian.
To my mind, just a single Russian - even if deemed and badged neutral - is one too many. The rights of the innocent individual are all very well, but do we need the risk of that athlete being drawn to compete head-to-head with a Ukrainian and the propaganda opportunity that would afford Vladimir Putin? Think too of athletes from the warring nations finding themselves side-by-side in the dining room at the athlete village, training in the gym or on a bus to a competition venue. Why inflict discomfort on those from the invaded nation?
Ukraine might yet choose not to send a team to Paris if (as is almost certain) the IOC persists with its compromise solution. Volodymyr Zelensky’s choice will likely be driven by his own propaganda strategy. Withhold his team and the IOC’s grubby stance is highlighted every time a ‘neutral’ Russian competes against an absence of Ukrainians. But enter and the narrative of the nation’s struggle is repeated every time one of its athletes takes to the field of play.
The war in Ukraine looks set to grind on to an eventual truce borne of mutual exhaustion. Whether that is months or still years away is unclear. Governments and businesses around the world took early stands that are largely unchanged almost two years into the conflict. The same is true of sport. In time there will be a recalibration of all these relationships, such is the geo-political reality.
Now though, with the Olympics only months away, is not the time for sporting bodies to soften their resistance to Russia. The IOC does not appear to do shame, but its members - sports federations and nations - should do what they can to call it out for its backdoor appeasement of Putin’s regime. And encourage Ukraine to take part, for that is the route to maximal propaganda benefit.
What though of Israel and Palestine? The former had 90 competitors in Tokyo, winning four medals; Palestine fielded five having been a member of the IOC since 1995. If the conflict in Gaza stretches on for months, will Israel deem it too frivolous to send athletes? Or too dangerous? And will the Palestine Olympic Committee prove able to organise a team?
It might seem inappropriate to some to evoke the memory of the massacre of Israeli athletes by Black September at the Munich 1972 Olympics, but this will be central to the thinking of those planning Paris 2024. True, never a Games goes by without concerns about security, but current events in Gaza and Ukraine mean the threat levels will be as high as the organisers’ scales allow.
Quel athlète!
Amazon is said to have chosen not to renew Mud, Sweat and Tears. I wasn’t even aware of the existence of its docuseries about Premiership rugby, but the report sent me scurrying to my remote control. The streaming giant has made the right call it seems. Formulaic and bland.
The rush to concoct such content is further evidence of the TV industry’s propensity to herd mentality - witness the fads for quizzes, talent shows, antique hunts and celebrity contests. Not much sports output, though, matches up to Sunderland ‘Til I Die or the first couple of series of Drive to Survive.
Too much editorial control (for which read airbrush-wielding) handed over to the subjects opening themselves up to scrutiny? Or maybe many in sport are simply too dull to watch as they go about their daily work? The producers then try overly hard to make something of very little. Watch Tour de France: Unchained and you’d think pile-ups are a constant of the race. (And, by the way, don’t view it dubbed into English as the translators suck out their subjects’ Gallic emotion).
Occasionally, though, it all comes together in exhilarating fashion - even if you do know as a viewer that you’re being massively played in the edit. I’ve an interest in the business phenomenon that is the NFL but have very little experience of actually watching American football. But goodness me, Netflix’s Quarterback is something else - and specifically its star, the Kansas City Chief’s Patrick Mahomes. What an athlete! Top broadcast pick of ‘23 for me.
My primer for the docuseries producers? Binge watch some quality drama first to see what it really takes: Succession, The Last of Us, Slow Horses, Hijack*, Happy Valley, Vigil or even a few episodes of Corrie. This is the entertainment business, after all.
I did watch one episode of “Mud...” and it was awful. I can highly recommend one sports docuseries though: “WEC Full Access” - a look behind the scenes of the FIA World Endurance Championship. It makes no attempt to dramatise a sport that is already far more dramatic than F1 (on the track anyway).
Ed, of course you will not be surprised that I agree with both your analysis and position on the participation of Russian athletes in the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Your opinion that 'the war in Ukraine looks set to grind on to an eventual truce borne of mutual exhaustion' may well be borne out but it will be important that Ukraine is in the position whereby Russia has to come to the table to accept terms that are acceptable to Ukraine otherwise it is not easy to see how NATO can maintain its credibility as a force for deterring aggression and Russia over time will recover and rebuild its military machine. In the context of your article, all nations who participate in the games have a moral obligation to defend peace and to condemn Russia's war crimes and genocide in Ukraine. For their athletes to be seen competing against Russian athletes bestows a sense of normality which should be abhorrent to all of us.