Olympic Squash? Just Maybe...
By Will Carlin
|
| |
 In August of 2002, squash was issued a death knell by the International Olympic Committee. A sub-committee called the Olympic Programme Commission conducted a “Review of the Olympic Programme” (the ‘programme’ being the sports in the Games). They established certain criteria to categorize sports and decided to make some decisions about those sports. They offered suggestions for which current sports might have their numbers cut, which current sports might be eliminated entirely, which prospective sports might be placed “under further review” (very good), and which prospective sports might no longer be considered at all (very bad). On this last list, there were four categories.
First, there were sports that did not meet the standard for global participation, which says that “only sports widely practised [sic] by men in at least 75 countries and on four continents, and by women in at least 40 countries and on three continents, may be included in the programme of the Games of the Olympiad.” That meant good-bye to roller sports, polo and surfing.
Second, the Commission decided against any sports that depend primarily on mechanical propulsion. So, no auto racing or water-skiing.
Third, they finally decided that “mind sports” were not a viable Olympic competition. I say “finally” because for a while there, believe it or not, bridge was doing the best campaigning of any potential sport. But the Progamme’s decision meant no to chess, no to backgammon and no to bridge.
What about squash? After all, squash more than meets the criteria (men and women both have over 150 countries that play, and it is present on every continent), it has no mechanical propulsion, and it is not a mind sport (our claim to being physical chess, notwithstanding). Well, there was one other category: those sports that the Commission decided were not right for inclusion. Notice the absence of hard criteria; these are the sports that they just didn’t like. This was the list that we were on.
Unfortunately, this list had staying power (the list of current sports they thought should be axed, for example, turned out to be too much of a political hot potato). The publishing of the list officially ended any chance for squash to get into Beijing in 2008 (though, realistically, it wasn’t going to happen, anyway). But more importantly, it also was thought to be a list that would carry weight on a going-forward basis—that is, the sports on the list stood virtually no chance of being included in the Games.
But things have changed. This past summer, the Commission released new findings with the 2012 Olympics in mind. And squash, instead of being in the “not right for inclusion” list, squash was one of five sports that will be “under further review” for 2012 (along with rugby, karate, golf, and roller sports).
This is an enormous accomplishment, and one for which the WSF deserves high credit. In particular, past-President Susie Simcock has done wonders with her worldwide travel and politicking. It is an enormous accomplishment. Particularly when you consider that we really haven’t been at this that long.
I know this sounds counter-intuitive, but even though squash is a little over a hundred years old as a sport, it was not until 1967 that the World Squash Federation (then named the International Squash Rackets Federation) was even formed. Believe it or not, it wasn’t until the late 1980s that anyone did anything about trying to get squash into the Olympics. So, when you look at it in terms of Olympic quadrennials, you are only talking about three or four Summer Games where we have tried to get in. In other words, it hasn’t been as long as some think.
As a side note, many of you may wonder why then sports like rhythmic gymnastics, synchronized diving, and beach volleyball get in so easily. It turns out that there is a loophole that allows sports that are a “discipline of an existing sport” to have its path streamlined. Rhythmic gymnastics is a discipline of gymnastics, synchronized diving is a discipline of diving and beach volleyball is a discipline of volleyball. Just so you know, squash has tried to get in as a “discipline” of tennis. It didn’t fly.
But there still is work to do: squash needs to show that it can pull in the crowds and can make a lot of money. By our standards, squash has grown in popularity a lot, but in comparison with high revenue sports, whether the sport can find a worldwide audience isn’t clear.
And as the scandals involving IOC members have shown, there has always been a cocktail party circuit aspect to getting things done with the IOC, and—quite frankly—until the past few years squash has not played the cocktail circuit all that well. With the IOC publicly trying hard to lower the number of athletes in the Games and focusing on decreasing the number of lower profile sports, we need to continue our efforts.
Five years ago, I wrote an article for a now-defunct issue of the New York squash newsletter about the chances for squash getting into the Games, and I was resoundingly negative. So many factors conspired against our sport that when we were issued the death knell two years ago, it almost seemed the logical conclusion. But one thing squash players know is that many a match has been won when all has seemed lost. So, I now say, maybe. Just maybe.
|
| |
|
