By Amy Boytz
Illustration by Willy Montano
| |
Since 1984, 11 sports have found their way onto the Olympic program while the sport of squash has been lobbying for inclusion without success. Despite fulfilling all of the stated requirements of the Olympic Charter, squash has been passed over time and again, a situation that has been all the more painful this year as nearly 11,000 athletes from around the world descended upon Sydney, Australia, for the Games of the XXVII Olympiad. Although squash is extremely popular in Australia, the organizers of the Sydney Games chose to add triathlon and taekwondo rather than squash, leaving millions of squash fanatics worldwide wondering if the Olympic flame will ever burn brightly for them.
*Note: This article originally ran in Squash Magazine, October 2000. Since then, it was announced that squash will not be added to the 2004 Olympic Games program. Also, the International Olympic Committee has selected Beijing, China, to host the 2008 Games.
PRIOR TO becoming an International Olympic Committee (IOC)-Recognized sport, squash faced challenges in defining its status. Outside of the United States, the game was considered an open sport, meaning anyone could play in any kind of tournament. “It didn’t matter whether you were amateur or professional—you were just players, and you played,” says Ted Wallbutton, Chief Executive and Secretary General of the World Squash Federation (WSF). If a player accepted money, he or she did not jeopardize amateur status because he or she had none to lose. Because the Olympics are intended for amateurs only, this issue had to be resolved. (In the States, this technicality differed, as there has always been a strong division between amateurs and pros.)
The pursuit to get squash in to the Olympics began in 1984. At first, concentration was on becoming an IOC Recognized sport which squash accomplished in 1986, taking “the first and vital step to the Olympics,” says Wallbutton, who has assisted with squash’s Olympic Movement for 10 years. In a nutshell, being Recognized means the sport meets all of the requirements of being an Olympic sport, but it does not compete in the Games and does not receive as much financial support from the IOC as do Medal sports. The next logical step, says Wallbutton, is to become part of the Olympic program. A Games committee was formed in 1987, with the intent of reaching this goal (the first potential year for inclusion would have been 1992). So far they have not been successful, despite attempts to get on board every Olympiad (four years).
For 14 years the process seems to have been stuck—squash resides in an Olympic purgatory of sorts, unable to vault past Recognized status. In 1996, current Squash Magazine contributor Will Carlin wrote an article in the Metropolitan (NY) SRA newsletter discussing the topic of squash in the Olympics, and why the sport was not yet in the Games. One of his main conclusions centered on the relative youth of the organized sport. He pointed out that squash’s history in terms of Olympic years did not stretch far. It has not even been 100 years since the sport has been organized—the USSRA, the world’s first squash association, wasn’t formed until 1907. And the WSF, our sport’s first international association, didn’t get itself together until 1967 (it was formerly known as the International Squash Rackets Association). It was around this era that the sport truly took off worldwide, which means there have been approximately only 40 years—or 10 chances at the Olympics—of popularity and organization.
HIGH HOPES surrounded the squash community in the mid-1990s when Sydney was chosen to host the 2000 Olympics. Sydney seemed a natural shoe-in for the sport, given the immense popularity of squash down under. “We thought it to be the biggest chance that we could ever have,” says Wallbutton about getting into the Sydney Games. “But it didn’t happen.” The WSF and others don’t have a logical explanation for why squash was not selected. “We obtained a letter from the president of the Australian NOC supporting squash—and then the support disappeared,” Wallbutton says. “Why? Good question.”
Usually, the host city of the Olympics can choose two sports to put on the Olympic program; however, this is an informal rule for the IOC. But typically, if the Host City wants to feature two new sports, they will be approved. Naturally, the sports chosen by the Host City tend to be those in which that country excels. “Sydney chose triathlon & taekwondo—and they will win medals in both,” Wallbutton said, just prior to the Sydney Games.
Theoretically, squash’s next shot for the Olympic program are the 2004 Games in Athens, Greece. However, rumor has it that Athens has requested only one new sport— waterskiing—if they add any new sports at all. The Athens Olympic Committee (AOC) is behind schedule in many areas, such as building facilities and establishing transportation. Due to such major obstacles, adding new sports for the program may sit low in priority. According to the AOC’s website (www.athens.olympic.org/gr), a list of scheduled events shows that no new sports have been added. The list, dated 1999, schedules which sports will compete on which days—formal enough to look as though nothing will be squeezed in. Despite this, as of press time, Wallbutton says there has been no official word about the roster of sports for 2004. In other words, squash still has a chance, slim as it may be.
“Getting included in the Games is highly political and boils down to who can bring money to the movement for the IOC.”
-Craig Brand, USSRA Executive Director
Were it purely a matter of meeting the requirements of the Olympic Charter and applying to be on the program, squash would easily be accepted. But there are numerous considerations (see Required Infrastructure for Olympic Inclusion, p. 28). The program is currently too big (in the 1996 Olympics there were approximately 11,000 athletes; 1000 over the Charter’s maximum). And it takes time. There are sports that have been attempting to get on the Olympic docket for ages, and they still have not succeeded. One such sport is rollerskating, which has been applying for admission since 1945. Looking at such an example should make squash fans feel a bit better. “If it was just a matter of being there and asking, we [could] have done it,” Wallbutton says. “They [rollerskating] have been trying for 55 years and they haven’t made it yet. We shouldn’t feel too discouraged.”
AFTER SIFTING through all the hierarchies, establishing international conduct codes, and spending countless hours meeting Olympic requirements, one might ask why the fuss? What is the end benefit of becoming an Olympic sport versus remaining an IOC-recognized sport?
One clear issue is money. There is a huge financial jump from being an Olympic-recognized sport to being an Olympic Medal sport. Currently, the WSF receives $10,000 for being an IOC-Recognized sport; if squash were an Olympic Medal sport, there’s the possibility of receiving several million dollars, Wallbutton says. (Ed. Note: This is the standard for all Olympic vs. Recognized sports.) In the US, there also exists a leap in available grants from Pan American sports (which squash currently is) to Olympic Medal sports. “[The] USOC have a massive support program for Olympic sports compared with non-Olympic sports,” says Wallbutton. The USSRA has received approximately $99,000 annually from the USOC since 1997, and it is projected that they will receive the same amount for 2001. But after that, funding is uncertain, due to changes in USOC leadership and the revamping of USOC programs (see “USOC Considering Funding Cuts” sidebar).
Revenue comes from things like TV rights’ fees. The money is then given from the IOC to the National Olympic Committees (NOCs) and also to the International Federations (IFs), such as the WSF. From there, it is up to the organizations to distribute the money to wherever it needs to go, such as to coaches and training programs. In addition, at the end of profitable Olympic years, Olympic sports can benefit from profit sharing.
Financial benefits also exist for the athletes. Though the athletes cannot make money directly off of their competitions within the Games, there is the very real possibility of endorsements. “There’s no doubt that it has a knock-on effect in endorsement and sponsorship so they receive, in many countries, money from their NOC,” says Wallbutton. According to an Associated Press story from August 2000, all participants on the US Olympic gymnastics teams will be offered a position on a 40-city tour following the Games. The athletes have the possibility of earning $180,000 in the course of two months from the tour—serious cash. (Whether squash players could net the same amount of money post-Olympics is, of course, unknown.)
“Carrying the Olympic flame [on its way to Sydney] reinforced my determination to keep striving to achieve our Olympic dream.”
-Susie Simcock, WSF President
In addition to money, there is recognition. Olympic sports hold clout by the fact that the Games are recognized as the peak of athletic competition. Spectators view the participants as the world’s top-caliber athletes. Athletes do the same. “It’s exposure, it’s international competition, it’s all of the prestige of being an Olympic sport,” says Wallbutton. Susie Simcock, current President of the WSF, says they will continue to pursue the Olympic program because it is “the ultimate dream of every competitive squash player.” And Peter Nicol, World No.1, is quoted in an article on the PSA’s website: “I would love to play in the Olympics. It’s the pinnacle of any sportsman’s career to be involved in the Olympic Games.”
Such international exposure and top-notch competition can do wonders for promoting sports in other countries. This means raising attention to squash in places where it is currently not as popular, like China and Eastern Europe. “Instead of being a sport that is not part of their National Olympic Committee that they don’t put any resources behind, suddenly they become a core sport and huge funding flows into the sport in that country,” says Wallbutton. Television coverage of the Games also helps bring sports into the homes of potential players.
Tennis, historically, had success before being in the modern day Olympics (the sport rejoined the roster in 1988, after leaving in 1924). Such big-name tournaments as Wimbledon and the US Open earned winning players respect and big money. But being a part of the Games has nonetheless been rewarding. “The Olympics should be an important part of a professional’s career if they have an opportunity to play,” says David Brewer, Director of Pro Tennis at the US Tennis Association. “If a sport is a ‘world sport’ it ought to be in the Olympic Games.”
Jay Barrs, a US Olympic archer, also cites funding and recognition as benefits to being an Olympic sport. Archery was featured on the original Olympic program but was then dropped from 1920 until 1972. Barrs participated in both the 1988 and 1992 Games, earning a gold medal for the individual competition and a silver for the team competition—both in 1988. As a medalled athlete, he did not receive millions of dollars in endorsements, but his sport’s NGB, the US National Archery Association (NAA), benefited. “It would financially be quite a blow [to not be an Olympic sport],” he says. More than money, however, is the prestige and publicity that comes with being an Olympic sport. “We have world championships, we have all that stuff. But the Olympics are the Olympics—our one chance every four years to get on the world stage,” he says. The NAA says membership in their organization has increased by about four times since the sport was admitted into the 1972 Olympics.
“The biggest disappointment is that we have not succeeded—and that every squash player in the world cannot understand why we have failed to deliver what appears to be an easy task.”
-Ted Wallbutton, WSF Chief Executive and Secretary General
IT IS NOT as though nothing new has been added to the program. During the course of the 16 years that squash has tried to get on board the Olympics, other sports have been accepted. Sports like table tennis and badminton have joined the Games, as well as rhythmic gymnastics, mountain biking, baseball, and beach volleyball, among others. Of these new sports, several could be categorized as disciplines of existing Olympic sports. (For example, cycling added mountain biking; gymnastics added rhythmic gymnastics.)
These offshoot sports typically gain Olympic status faster than an outsider does. “The biggest pressure on new sports getting into the Olympic Games is coming from sports already in the Olympic Games adding new disciplines,” says Wallbutton. “That is the first priority, and the sports in the Games are elbowing ever outward and keeping out the new sports.” The offshoot sports may not have as high of participation numbers as squash, but they make it in anyway. “We’re a lot stronger in participation terms both in number of athletes and in number of countries playing than some of the sports which are already on the Olympic program,” says Wallbutton. “There are many more squash players than fencers or modern pentathletes, or women skeet shooters. I mean, there must be 28 women skeet shooters in the world, but it’s on the Olympic program,” he says, somewhat sarcastically.
The possibility could exist of squash going into the Games on the tennis ticket, by the fact that both are racquet sports. However, the chance is slim, and a good shot at this route has likely passed. Athens houses the only joint tennis and squash federation in the world, the Hellenic Tennis Federation. The WSF worked with this federation for the 2004 Games and were able to climb up the ladder at IOC meetings quite quickly because of such contacts. But, with 2004 approaching, it is increasingly unlikely that squash will be added.
Another challenge is the way in which the IOC selects sports for the Games, a process conducted secretly. Though the IOC follows the Olympic Charter as its guideline on how to select sports, some view the hush-hush process as a way to get around the rules. “The biggest problem is that there are no rules,” says Wallbutton. “There’s no formal vote, there’s no formal procedure, there’s no forms you fill in and no forms you get back. It’s done behind closed doors by some process that nobody knows.” In addition, the committees involved tend to be elusive. “The usual scenario is that the IOC say they will accept your sport if it is requested by the host city. The Host City say they will accept your sport if the IOC decide. You constantly bounce between these two rocks,” he says.
Yet a third obstacle is media coverage, or lack thereof. Squash is not easy to televise, though it has been improving dramatically. Despite efforts being made by the PSA to introduce a larger “television ball,” courts are typically dimly lit (by video standards), making it difficult to see the players. And Average Joe would likely lose the ball while trying to watch a match on TV. “The most important thing to remember is that squash is first and foremost a players’ sport, not a spectator sport,” Wallbutton says. “Most of the Olympic sports are spectator sports.” In other words, most Olympic sports require little knowledge of the sport to captivate the audience, whereas squash can be confusing to the uninitiated.
Golf, at first blush, would also seem to be difficult to televise in terms of holding the viewers’ interest. But it has seen a huge increase in TV airtime in the last 10 years. Both squash and golf consist of a player hitting a small ball—one difficult to discern by TV cameras. Golf balls can travel upwards of 250 yards at a time—difficult to show. But the media have found a way to televise golf. They set up cameras on each of 18 holes, cutting from one player to the next so that there is constantly something to watch, and they have incorporated helicopters to give the television audience a fly-over of each hole. “In any rational analysis, squash is as good on TV as golf, tennis, curling, or darts,” says Wallbutton. “But for some reason it does not capture the audiences. PSA have done everything they can to improve coverage, but it is still minute. We continue to try and new developments are constantly being trialled,” he says.
If only a few people (relative to the masses) watch a particular sport during the Games, the advertisers won’t reach their target numbers and therefore won’t advertise during that segment. So the sport isn’t aired, except in the highlights of the Olympics for several seconds. “[The Games are] wonderful for the athletes, and it’s for the athletes they’re theoretically run. But the money that comes from it comes from TV rights, and the more that a sport contributes to that fund by massive TV coverage, the more successful it will be in getting admitted,” Wallbutton says.
WHAT IF squash doesn’t make it on the Olympic program for 2004, 2008, or beyond? Will there be harmful repercussions? The time and energy spent on the Olympic movement seem to be a worthy cause, regardless of the outcome. Critics may say that spending great amounts of time jumping through hoops to meet IOC/NOC standards could be detrimental: by focussing on such requirements, attention to the game and its grassroots development could be ignored. Wallbutton disagrees, claiming the end-all goal of the WSF is to support the sport in any way possible: “The WSF’s overriding objective has always been the growth of the game at all levels. Especially grassroots development. If anything has suffered it has been the Olympic campaign, not our major priority of health and welfare of squash as a participant sport,” he says.
Assuming that squash will not be added to the 2004 program, the next shot is 2008. The Host City for the 2008 Games will be decided in July 2001, and which city is selected can then determine the chances of squash being added to the program. If a city such as Toronto—where squash is popular—is chosen, the sport has a good chance of being admitted, but if it is Beijing—where the sport struggles—the outlook is not so good. (All of this is assuming that the elected Host City will, in fact, select two new sports for the program. The other candidate cities are Istanbul, Osaka, and Paris.)
In addition to crossing their fingers for 2008, the squash organizations must continue to fight. The WSF and (possibly) the PSA must promote a clear and consistent message and business plan that strives to reach the goal, according to Craig Brand, Executive Director of the USSRA. “You must lobby at every level with as much of a unified message as possible, presenting oneself as clean, tidy, in charge, a sport on the move, contemporary in all aspects and ready to deliver significant value added to the Olympic movement,” he says.
Some may see the WSF as failing in their pursuit of the Games. Players and spectators alike express frustration that the sport has not yet achieved Olympic Medal status, despite the mass participation numbers worldwide. “The biggest disappointment is that we have not succeeded—and that every squash player in the world cannot understand why we have failed to deliver what appears to be an easy task,” says Wallbutton.
But despite not being in the hunt for Olympic Gold, squash is making improvements and holding steady participation numbers worldwide. One example of the sport’s growth is professional tournaments and tours. Since 1987, the number of WISPA tours has more than doubled, and the total prize money has steadily grown, reaching more than $650,000 for 2000. Also, squash will again be featured in the 2002 Commonwealth Games in Manchester, England, after having debuted in the 1998 Games in Malaysia, and it was featured for the second time in the Pan Am Games in Winnipeg, Canada last year.
Getting into the Olympics is just one more step on the ladder. Officials have been trying for the last 16 years to get it on the Olympic program, and it could be another 16 years or more before they succeed. Panning for Olympic Gold has proven difficult, frustrating, and, at times, elusive. But as with the sport itself, this may be a battle of attrition that squash players are accustomed to fighting.
USOC Considering Funding Cuts
Despite the obvious benefit of money, financial support could smartly slap us in the face. In an Associated Press wire story from April 2000, current USOC Chief Executive Officer, Norm Blake, talks about drastically cutting funding for NGBs of sports that do not, or are not likely to, produce medals. He says: “There are certain sports that are not indigenous to the United States, so the available feedstock of potential athletes is limited, the amount of support available in the US from a fundraising standpoint is limited, and we are therefore disadvantaged. Do we want to throw money at a sport that, frankly, would not have the means to ever medal or to make America proud? And how much money is that?” Blake goes on, quoted as saying “there will be strings attached” in regards to the money given to sports by the USOC. How will such statements affect the possibility of adding new sports? Craig Brand, Executive Director of the USSRA, notes that it is too soon to tell what kinds of changes may be implemented within the NGBs, but he is alarmed at Blake’s statements regarding funding. He says the comments “have caused some grave concern among the NGBs” and that “the whole focus of the USOC is medals, so much so that it sometimes clouds their vision.” The USOC claims to “be the custodian of the US Olympic Movement and is the moving force for the support of sports in the United States that are on the program of the Olympic and/or Pan American Games, or those wishing to be included” and that they have a “mission to provide opportunities.” If such is the case, how can slashing funding and creating negative energy help foster US sports?
Required Infrastructure for Olympic Inclusion
In order to be considered an Olympic sport, candidate sports must meet several strict qualifications. Theoretically, a sport must be IOC-Recognized before it can become an official Olympic Medal sport. Several hierarchies must exist within the sport’s organization. The Olympic Movement, as the infrastructure is called, consists of International Sports Federations (IFs: the World Squash Federation), National Olympic Committees (NOCs: in our case the USOC), Organizing Committees of the Olympic Games (OCOGs), national sports associations, clubs and their members, and athletes. The first step is for the IOC to recognize that a sport’s IF operates in adherence to IOC guidelines. The IF of each sport establishes eligibility and competition rules for the sport, as well as selects teams and sets schedules. The IFs then approve a National Governing Body (NGB) for the sport in each country. The NGB is directly affiliated with the IF, and it must also meet IOC guidelines. For the US, our squash NGB is the USSRA.
The National Olympic Committees for each country are responsible for governing Olympic affairs within their country. They help to select, train, and enter teams into the Games; however, they have no direct role in choosing sports for the Olympic program. NOCs and NGBs operate independently of one another.
In addition to the hierarchy, candidate sports must meet participation requirements. Men’s summer sports must be played in at least 75 countries on four continents; women’s summer sports must be played in at least 40 countries on at least three continents. (Winter sports require less worldwide participation; however, to be considered a winter sport, it must be played on snow or ice.) Squash far surpasses these standards, being played by 131 countries (15 million people) on all continents. The Olympic Charter states that each summer Olympics must include at least 15 sports; however, there is a cap on how many athletes are allowed—10,000 (although that number has been surpassed in recent Games). |
| |
|
