11 Trends in sports development

In this article, the Norwegian professor, Hans B. Skaset, identifies 11 trends in the development of sport and predicts that in the future sport will be privatised, disengaged from its values and anti-doping has been made obsolete by gene technology.

Before I look to the future, I would like to take in a short visit to the 1981 IOC Congress in Baden-Baden where both the doping problem and the rules governing amateurism were given much attention. At the meeting, the newly elected President Samaranch said

"Right from the start the IOC has concerned itself strongly with developing a uniform testing system. We are delighted to note that the special international organisations and the Olympic committees are coming out strongly against the development of "artificial" sportsmen and women."

Today, this statement makes extraordinary reading. As the following 20 years showed, only a small minority of the international Olympic organisations and national Olympic committees did anything at all to prevent doping. These organisations feared, among other things, losing their "market share" to other sports. The fear was that an effective fight against doping could give an advantage to rival sports in terms of prestige and media coverage - meaning less money in the organisations' bank accounts.

At the same time, the meeting at Baden-Baden signified the definitive break with the values of amateurism. Above any moral idealism, the pursuit of the "best competitor" was confirmed as fundamental to the organisation's mindset.

At the time, the middle distance runner Sebastian Coe made headlines in the world's press with this attack on doping: "Doping is considered by us (competitors) as the most shameful abuse of the Olympic ideals. We demand a lifetime ban for those competitors who break the rules on doping. We demand a lifetime ban for those trainers and so-called doctors who procure these types of reprehensible resources."

Doping could have been controlled in the 1980's
In 1980, the international sports organisations were presented with a real opportunity to control the doping phenomena and limit the hysteria surrounding prize money and sponsorship. This chance was completely missed. Since then, sports leaders' chances of affecting the development of doping in sport have altered dramatically.

On the fringes of today's elite sport are many people and interests connected to the media, sponsors, competitors and arrangers as well as "consultants" of all categories. Top sport, - that is, sport of a real international nature - is, to use EU terminology, part of the "free market".

The elected leaders of sports organisations are well on their way to becoming puppets that risk legitimising a development in sport, which they themselves do not have any control over. In many cases, they are not even aware of where their support is coming from.

From the 1950's to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, East Europe's sports leaders helped their counterparts across the world retain a type of responsibility.

In East Europe, top sport was a state-run concern under the political control of the centralised communist system. We in the West had much to say about state control of sport, and, at the same time, felt its effects at home. In spite of everything, the sporting leaders of the communist blok - who opposed commercial influence - held more decision-making power than many of their western counterparts do in today's free market.

11 trends in top sport in recent years 
Let me carefully summarise my thoughts on the development in top sport in recent years:

1. The pursuit of the best performance continues

Despite boasting branches in up to 200 nations, the 35 Olympic sporting associations and approximately 30 other non-Olympic organisations do not have the capacity, the will or even the opportunity to prevent ingrained doping practices. The search for performance-enhancing resources and methods will continue. This is sport's "cast iron law".

Entertainment value, and all the prestige and money that goes with it, is today linked directly and inseparably to the "presentation", or level of performance. No one buys or pays to view "out of date" performances, regardless of the presence of morally incorrupt and thoroughly healthy competitors.

2. The IOC has plotted the course

After keeping up the facade and screening off international sporting organisations for over 20 years, the IOC has now altered its course 180 degrees. From its original stance of rejecting any state interference, the IOC now claims that doping is "society's problem" - a problem that sport alone cannot take responsibility for.

3. The price of success

With varying motives, official and semi-official national sports organisations have allowed themselves to submit to an IOC-dominated anti doping-organisation, the World Anti Doping Agency, or WADA. A majority of these national representatives know little about either the system of power in sport or a doping problem which they themselves have become partly responsible for.

Furthermore, many countries' political leaders cannot afford to let WADA function successfully. Most leading states have strong interests in top sport. Regular disclosures regarding doping are, therefore, not an attractive option. This is the IOC's trump card. The participation of states reduces the IOC's economic and political costs, while at the same time, through "staged disclosures", ensuring that the "show goes on".

In this way, public trust is maintained without reducing competitors' level of performance. By supporting this limited solution, top sport carries on as though its doping problems are under control. Thus, a sense of "business as usual" is maintained.

4. Narcotics as an excuse

Politicians' lack of ability to deal with general drug problems, both nationally and internationally, will to a growing degree be cited as a reason for reducing the pressure on sport. The question will increasingly be asked: why should sport be forced to live with its own requirements, which are different and stricter than those of society as a whole?

Over the next ten years, there will come a point at which the hidden discussion amongst international sporting leaders will become public. Namely, that as long as society has a drug problem - be it narcotics, doping or stimulants - then the fight against doping should not be the responsibility of sports organisations alone. Politicians must set the standards within top sport using the same yardstick as they use for other businesses. Sports performers should be treated in a similar way to other performing artists.

5. Liberal narcotics policy

Narcotics policy will become more liberal. The use of soft drugs will be decriminalised and the heaviest sentences will be meted out to the producers, smugglers and pushers rather than the individual users. The use of doping will not be criminalised, but the illegal import and distribution of performance-enhancing substances will be investigated, pursued and punished. The distributors will be seen as international criminals dealing in black market drugs and medicine.

6. Sport disengages itself from values

Top international sport will cut itself free from its historical norms and values. After working without clear a clear moral basis for many years, sport in 2008-2010 will become accepted as a leading genre within popular culture. Not, as it was formerly, a model for health, fairness and honourable conduct.

This development will have few negative consequences for the business of sport. Media and sponsor interest will continue, as viewing figures will remain relatively unaffected.

7. Gene technology makes anti-doping obsolete

An essential factor in sport's new status will be the acceptance of gene technology. Competitors' existing power of performance will be "modified". The ability to identify genes with individual performance-enhancing characteristics will considerably lessen the significance of earlier doping-detection methods, making the fight against doping obsolete.

The ethical debate between the experts will not extend as far as the public, who will view genetically manipulated athletes in the same way as they see contestants on "reality TV".

8. Sports associations lose control

International sports organisations will lose de facto control over competitors, arrangements and media rights. Organisations representing the interests of competitors will gain significant control over both the calendar of events and media coverage.

The media, sponsors and in some cases city councils will join together to organise events together with competitors' representative organisations - regardless of the opinion of the national sports organisations. In order to create maximum impact and secure commercial financing, the rules will be tailored to suit TV and other media.

9. IOC seeks special privileges

The IOC, together with the most wealthy of the sports organisations, will be forced to "buy" top competitors, paying not only for participants, but also awarding significant financial rewards to winners and record breakers.

In order to protect their interests, the IOC and the largest of the sports organisations will attempt to gain special dispensation from the EU and other international bodies. However, this will not be granted, as the request will be seen as contrary to the rules of the free market. It will also be pointed out that the IOC and other sports associations continue to demand sizeable payments from media and sponsors.

10. Nordic elite is privatised

In the Nordic countries, top sport will be developed and controlled by private business organisations specially adapted to the role. Initially, in the period 2006-09, these organisations will be based on the Team Danmark model.

With the exception of football and golf, national sports associations will be reduced to acting as umbrella organisations for elite recruitment. When they recruit new talent, elite organisations will be forced to pay a fee to both the "mother club" and the relevant sporting association.

The company "Norsk Elite Sport A/S" will be established around 2010, as a distinct business enterprise offering targeted financial contributions. One of its initial activities will be to allow young people with potential to combine their education with a top sports training programme.

11. Loose organisation gives breadth

Those areas of sport which do not recruit from the elite ranks will establish a loose organisation of shared interests. In Norway, the organisation will continue to bear the name of the Norwegian Confederation of Sports (NIF).

However, by 2010, the role of the NIF will have undergone a substantial change in focus. The "new" NIF will be first and foremost a mouthpiece for voluntary interests and membership-based local organisations concerned with physical activities, sport and outdoor life. The state will channel money through the NIF to local activities involving children and young people.

Is professional sport a desirable role model?
As the years go by, one major dilemma will remain. Should fully professional and commercial elite sport be seen as a desirable grass roots model for children and young people? Should it be acceptable that all sporting objectives and values revolve around this model of sport?

It is not difficult to see that Jaques Rogge, Joseph Blatter and co use their connections with local, grass-roots sport to strengthen their legitimacy. However, this perception of all competitors belonging to a single sporting family can harm local sport's ambition to pursue practices designed to serve the majority of children and young people.

Regardless of this, top international top sport is the dominant model for the local sports associations - from the 5-6-year-old's first sports meeting away from home, until the elite selection process becomes a reality for the majority.

As the fallen ski hero Mika Myllyl told Aftenposten last year, young people are aligning themselves with a picture of idealism that is a far cry from reality.

"If you want to win, you must be prepared to experiment...." she said. "All that which is not expressly forbidden is allowed. Morality and "fair play" do not exist. In all countries where top sport is practised, the situation is the same."

Is this the type of sport a legacy we want to leave to our children and grandchildren?