Sports cash cows killing the meaning of rivalry

Have you ever seen a film where there are two characters, each pushing their own agenda, whose paths are destined to collide because it is just so? It’s a popular story arc in fictionalised works all over the world, since it gives a clear distinction between sides. Once the reader or viewer can see who represents what, they will figure out which side they relate closest to. From there, they become another soul linked to the fate of their would-be champion. Everything their hero of the vicarious goes through, they feel it as well, and sometimes at twice the depth.

Today’s sports fan is the very embodiment of this blessing and chagrin. While sports itself isn’t essential to life on this planet, the pursuit of the human spirit and the quest to satisfy that spirit’s hunger for something to believe in is something that, if channelled in the correct way, breathes life into the mundane. It escalates the unremarkable into a contest of mores, which serves to satisfy our need for human connection or more appropriately, our need to be part of something. You do get those lone wolfs out there who prefer isolation over homogenisation, but to be part of one’s own wolf pack is a very human thing to strive for.

Sadly, the modern world of professional sport has done much to remove the needle and downright antagonism between opposition players and teams in different sporting codes. Once there was blood on the floor when beating the other guy really meant something. Ali versus Foreman. Borg versus McEnroe. George Bush versus Saddam. (And the sequel, where George W seeks to avenge his father.) These are grudge matches that defined an era, drawing a metaphysical line in the sand when it came to talking about their respective places in pastime’s pantheon of history. The George W reference was inserted to stress this point … and I like making fun of the former American president.

Rugby Union once had the tour, which is thankfully returning, where a whole country would need to be conquered before any honour could be claimed. Remember the last All Black tour in 1996, before the Tri-Nations became fact? It was a marvellous occasion, with the All Blacks playing tour games all over the country and getting to fully experience a Test tour in South Africa. They won that series 2-1, the first All Black side to ever do that on South African soil.

Now, we get a yearly dose of the All Blacks (along with the Wallabies … and let’s not even go there). All Black Tests are still great games today, but there is always that feeling in the back of the mind that if the Springboks don’t win this year, they can win next year. We are reaching the point where a visit by the All Blacks is just another All Blacks Test. Purists will disagree of course, suggesting that regardless of the context of the game an All Black/Springbok affair will always be a tempestuous affair.

That may be so, but the economic principle (very loosely applied) that less is more, where the rarer a commodity the more precious it will be seen, should be something that sports administration bodies should be mindful of when planning that next fixture list. The international season, which the Springbok/All Blacks Tests exist in somehow, is so jam packed with Test rugby and intercontinental rugby that distinguishing between which Tests and Super games (if we can even go that far) are actually important is becoming harder and harder.

This trend can be seen in internet media, where the explosion in voices hasn’t necessarily resulted in an improvement of news coverage. Actually, it appears to be the opposite. There is so much news (and so many different versions of the same event) that finding the quality stuff is always getting harder. Mediocrity breeds mediocrity, and while we haven’t fallen that far, the constant treadmill of international rugby has seen the games more honoured rivalries converted into cash cows.

International cricket knows this phenomenon very well. Frequent readers of this blog will know the level of distaste I hold for the International Cricket Council (ICC) and Board for the Control of Cricket in India since neither party should be trusted with the game’s crown jewels. They would seriously consider selling them for quick cash. Though certain economic realities need to be addressed with India representing the biggest market for the game (the core of the holistic problem, which I will get into a bit more below) the level at which they heavy-hand everyone else in the world game is quite startling. They don’t give a fig if it isn’t in their interest, usually, with the reduction in teams to 10 for the 2015 World Cup, a very silly joke that isn’t funny at all. The ICC want the game to grow yet cull the opportunities non-traditional powers have at being seen on the world stage. It’s laborious thinking and treachery to the game’s highest principles, but again, no one seems to care.

Tennis is fortunate to be a sport that is one of the ultimate one-on-one contests, where it’s all mano-a-mano and the mercy rule is for wimps. The world game is also benefitting from there being incredible talent in the men’s game with two of those players, Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal, having being engaged in an almost endless struggle of wills for nearly half a decade. That is not to exclude the likes of Andy Roddick, Novak Djokovic and dare I say it (we’ll start hearing the media tsunami when Wimbledon approaches) Andy Murray, who is Scottish by the way. Their rivalry has pushed their opponents to get better, otherwise it would just be the Roger-Rafa show year in, year out, which wouldn’t be unfamiliar. For the record, it would be way more interesting if Federer and Nadal didn’t seem to fall all over one another when talking about how good the other guy is. A bit of McEnroe rage wouldn’t go unmissed.

The woman’s game on the other hand has been going through more number ones than Bafana Bafana has coaches. Once again, another blonde is getting all the attention. Her name this time is Maria, and unlike her predecessor, Anna Kournikova, she has actually won something. The same can be said for Ana Ivanovic, but both these players make more money from endorsements than actually winning tennis matches. Priorities, priorities. Dane Caroline Wozniacki is the current world No 1, but like Dinara Safina before her, she hasn’t won a major. Will we see a repeat of Safina’s misfortune, who reached three different Grand Slam singles finals and somehow managed to lose every single one? Perhaps, but we will know more about that this coming Sunday at the Australian Open.

The point I’m making is that sport is turning into a treadmill of mediocrity and the land of saturated media coverage — the “edge” that makes a clash of equals so spectacular (to those that care) is slowly disappearing. It’s no wonder that some of the best events are those which are only hosted every four years, such as the Olympics and various World Cup tournaments (cricket for one is slowly killing the golden goose of T20, along with India playing Australia in Tests a little bit too often). Since we only see these events every four years, people and the athletes involved actually give a bit more than usual, in turn providing some of the most thrilling moments a sports watcher can see.

The problem with modern media is that most of it is a load of garbage and has no value within the media’s supposedly important democratic role in informing the electorate. Though newspapers such as the Daily Sun and Herald Sun (are the “Suns” just a coincidence?) here in Australia are very profitable ventures judging by their high circulation, in terms of readability and quality, they are awful additions to the canon of printed media. Sport is going the same way, with the proliferation of meaningless clashes and money-grubbing officials looking for every opportunity to squeeze every penny from an event. Some have perfected this, such as Sepp Blatter, the Tony Soprano of world football, and others such as Lalit Modi, who got sold out before he could do the same to his enemies.

Sport is a contest, and without it containing meaning for both the competitors and the fans, what is the point of it all? A pastime can be defined as an activity that helps a person pass time pleasantly. The way things are going, that is about as far as we are going to get.