The value of sports

For two weeks, the 30th edition of the modern Summer Olympics in London will bring to the forefront the diversity of sports. Much of the focus will be on those sports whose broad popularity affords their highest-level participants the luxury of practising them professionally: track and field, swimming, gymnastics, tennis, basketball and so on.

But many other Olympians are amateurs, taking part at some personal cost because their disciplines do not attract sponsorship and other sources of revenue.

Much as we may marvel at the exploits of such athletes as the sprinter Usain Bolt or swimmer Michael Phelps, and be inspired by the courage and determination of South Africa’s Oscar Pistorius, we must also admire those who make great personal sacrifices in time, money and training for the love of less fashionable sports.

As South Africa experienced two years ago, when the country hosted the football World Cup, an international sporting event brings together people from all over the globe in what is mostly a spirit of good will.

For Pope Benedict, events such as the Olympics are important not only for world records and medal tables, but especially as a way of giving the international community “a valid example of coexistence among people of different backgrounds in the respect of common dignity”, as he put it  before the Olympic Games in China.

Sports, he said, can represent “a pledge of brotherhood and peace among people”, by athletes, functionaries, spectators and hosting residents.

However, some realities of modern sports organisation and competition run counter to realising the pope’s high hopes. The Olympic Games, like many high profile sports, are marked by a mercantile cynicism that is corroding sport’s moral foundation.

Corporate sponsorship and broadcast rights have seized spectator sports from the people as an expression of leisure pursuits. Much of professional sport has become an entertainment industry in which peripheral matters tend to be exaggerated for the benefit of “talking points”. This can distort perspectives, especially if fierce loyalties to athletes or clubs cloud good sense.

English football has lately provided a pertinent example of this with the recent trial of Chelsea captain John Terry for the alleged racial abuse of an opponent, Anton Ferdinand.

The complaint that led to the trial – in which Mr Terry was found not guilty – was laid by an off-duty policeman, not by Mr Ferdinand. Nonetheless, much angry abuse was directed at Mr Ferdinand by some supporters of Mr Terry and his club.

When athletes, and other celebrities, are subjected to vindictive abuse, they are being treated as dehumanised commodities. This cannot be tolerable.

Sports fans will have their favourites and are always keen to make their loyalties and rivalries known. It is acceptable that the competitive emotions such loyalties arouse find expression, within reason, during a contest. They must not, however, compromise good sense when the athletes leave the pitch or the court.

The Olympic Games, with their festival atmosphere and abundance of athletes who embody the traditional “Olympian spirit”, can provide an antidote to the encroaching corruption of sporting values.

The Christian churches in rapidly secularising Britain have done much to promote these sporting values. Through an inter-denominational initiative called “More Than Gold”, the churches have worked to tie the OIympics to social justice, hospitality and volunteerism as part of a wider pastoral care programme.

Special events have been staged to underpin the true sporting values, such as respect, discipline, cooperation, camaraderie and pleasure. In an age when sporting endeavour is measured by celebrity, income and sponsorship, these values are worth fighting for.

May the Olympic Games – the aggressive hype, branding and corporatisation notwithstanding – be a time when sports can be an influence for the common good.