"Pssst... wanna buy a medal?"

If Canada as a country and its politicians were truly serious about funding athletes it would not just be presented as lip-flapping, self righteous rhetoric every 2 years or so, pre- and post- winter and summer Olympic Games.

If this was truly more than just so-called jingoistic nationalist pride, we would not only be talking about it on a much more regular basis, but steps would be taken to actually effect change much sooner rather than later.

Why must we also believe that it is up to various levels of government, specifically Federal, who “must” find the funds to initiate programs at early ages and then continue to foster these athletes every step of the way as they, perhaps, might one day make the National team in an Olympic event? If a corporate sponsor wishes to fund the next 10 years of so of track and field development in this country, why not allow it? In some ways it’s occurring now (Visa, anyone?) but perhaps it is still being done in such a way that it is condoned.

Hey, why not increase GST to 6% and take that 1% national sales tax and use that to assist in funding apparently much needed athletic programs?

Why is it that we don’t seem to make the same amount of noise pre- and post- Commonwealth or Pan-American Games for that matter?

People point to the US, to Australia and yes, to China as examples of what happens when money is put behind athletes as they are nurtured to their potential – natural or otherwise. Look at the medal haul of Great Britain these past couple of weeks. An increase over four years ago. Exponential? Perhaps. Coincidence that in four years time they will be hosting the next summer games? Again, perhaps. Can you imagine that their programs were not artificially inflated and funded by whatever means possible as a pre-cursor to the London Olympics in 2012?

But where might it all end? Does it then come down to the country, the government or the corporate sponsors that inject the greatest amount of funds that will “win”?

And for what?

The notion of Olympic athletes being true, unpaid amateurs was shattered long ago. The Redeem Team? Give me a break.

And this fuss over athlete’s ages? In gymnastics, they must be 16 years or older during the year of the games themselves. So why is it that a 14-year old diver from Great Britain is allowed to compete with nary an indignant squeal?

Oh yes, find me the lobbyist that managed to persuade the IOC that BMX bikes and their athletes should be considered as an Olympic sport? That ungodly noise you may have just heard are thousands of Greeks attempting to roll over in their graves at the notion of that being considered a sport, never mind one included in the Olympics.

I’m beginning to digress.

Hypocrisy. Frankly, that’s really what the underlying theme here likely is. And it’s a shame.

The best natural, amateur athlete may actually never see any world class athletic competition in their or even your lifetime. And in that regard I’m not just talking about Canada. What about a country like Ethiopia? Not exactly a world–beater in most any category and yet they have the ability to magically produce distance-holic automaton runners at the drop of a hat. And they are considered an underdeveloped nation. How can this occur? Do you think that government bureaucrats in countries like that might decide to pick the best of the best bare-footed athletes tending to goat herds on rugged hillsides, offering them and their families food, shelter and clothing – and for what? Glory on the world stage in front of an audience of over one billion people? Two days after the event, how many people will remember that athlete’s name?

How many of us know about Michael Phelps? Usain Bolt? Not to take anything away from either gentlemen, but it’s all just so hypocritical, isn’t it?

At the end of the day, the real “winners” are the marketers, the agents, the managers and, let’s not forget the chemists. The athletes themselves are merely shells, vessels to be used by their governments and sanctioned checkbook training programs.

So, what’s my point? Too many contentious issues here to make but one. At the end of the day, why not just tell it like it is? What would happen if one of two things were to occur?

1) Have an event that avoids any contact with raging consumerism and commercialism and have only athletes participate that have regular day jobs – no marketers; no consultants; no supplements; no chemicals; no endorsements… Nada. Nothing. Zilch.

Or,

2) Take it to the extreme and use any and all advantages, natural and otherwise and use unlimited dollars to supercharge all athletes and events.

Either way, create a completely level playing field and then see what happens. And the chances of anything like that ever happening?

Ever see a little movie called “Chariots of Fire”?