So with the Olympics over and the softballers all sad that their sport is done, it brings up the question of why? Why is the IOC removing softball (or, more specifically, baseball—I kind of get softball) from the Olympic games? I don’t get why they remove sports at all unless those sports are no longer relevant on the world stage (which I don’t believe is the case in this situation, which I will go into in a while).
In fact, I also don’t see why they turn down so many sports that want inclusion (other than logistics and stuff). I don’t mean the fringe sports, I mean something like cricket or rugby or karate and the like. I don’t get why tae kwon do would have to be eliminated to include karate. I just don’t really get it.
Basically, there are a bunch of sports in the Olympics (equestrian, shooting, archery, fencing, modern pentathlon) that reflect the pastimes of the uppity upper class Europeans of the 19th century. But since the Olympics aren’t really about reenacting the Russo-Swedish wars, those sorts of sports aren’t exactly indicative of the sporting community of the 21st century.
That said, the only sports I think the Olympics should get rid of are dressage (how is riding a horse in a circle a fucking sport? I mean, I get show jumping, sort of, but horse-nastics is no more a sport than canine long jump), modern pentathlon (running, swimming, shooting, fencing, and show jumping? Who the hell does this?) and shooting (archery I get as there’s some sort of physicality to it what with the pulling of the bow string and stuff, but this is basically just Duck Hunt—actually, I’d be cool with it if it were Duck Hunt).
In fact, I think they should be adding more, which they generally are doing, sort of, as they tend to add more sports than they ditch, and even when they keep the number of sports even, they always add new events (longer distances or different equipment like the marathon swim and BMX this year, for example). I don’t think they should remove a sport until it is no longer part of the global sporting consciousness (and I think the above mentioned fit). Anyways, here’s what I think should be added.
Baseball/Softball
Yeah, I know that these were just pulled from the Games, but I truly do think that’s an error. I don’t see how the fact that only three or four teams can contend for the gold (in baseball; two in softball) is any different than say gymnastics, and even if you can somehow argue that it is, the issue is a product of the way the tournament is set up. By guaranteeing the host nation and Europe each one spot, that winds up with a full quarter of the tournament being lame ducks. Those two slots go to Central American or Caribbean teams (or a third Asian team) and all of a sudden there’s a little more balance in power. Of course, I also think pros should be involved, but that’s besides the point.
The only stupid thing about baseball/softball is the fact that softball is even played at all. Girls should play baseball (just like they should play ringette) not sports designed to be effeminate versions of sports boys play. But, more importantly, it means building a second stadium for a sport that often won’t ever be played again by the host country. So yeah, this is all softball’s fault, but it still should be an Olympic sport.
Horse Racing
I’m not sure I fully agree with this one, and I think it’s obvious that it’s never even been considered because of the gambling implications, but if jumping and dressage are fucking Olympic sports, then this should at least be considered, both for its popularity and entertainment value (which dwarfs the other horse sports) and so that oil-rich Arabs can win themselves some Olympic medals. In fact, I think it would be even more fun than the usual horse races because, instead of a huge purse, all they’d be racing for would be pride and a medal, and I wonder how many owners would take the reins themselves instead of letting their jockeys ride their way into an Olympic medal. Actually, maybe that’s why this has never come up as an Olympic sport: the guys who control the horse (the trainer and the owner) wouldn’t be the guys winning the medals.
Cricket
Okay, I seriously believe in this one. Cricket is probably the second most popular sport in the world after soccer (and I say probably only because there really isn’t a good way to measure this sort of thing). That’s right, the second most poular sport in the world, and it’s not in the fucking Olympics. I think this boils down to the fact that the main countries that play this are of Colonial British descent, and the IOC is run by a bunch of old dudes from countries that don’t really like the Brits. Second-most popular!!!!!!!!!
Rugby
This one basically has the same rationale for not being included as Cricket does, with the added bonus of sort of extreme violence. Rugby just doesn’t seem like a sport that fits with the whole Olympic vibe, what with the penchant for dudes getting hurt and stuff. But rugby is an insanely popular sport around the world, and it wouldn’t be costly to build for or anything.
Golf
With the emergence of guys like KJ Choi, Vijay Singh, Jose Maria Olazabal, Angel Cabrera, and a ton of Aussies and South Africans, golf is a much more international game than it used to be, when there were only the Americans and the Europeans. Ten different nationalities have won on the PGA Tour this year, and while the vast majority of them are still American, that can be tempered by limiting the amount of entrants per country. The only real obstacle I see on this one is that there is a chance that the host country may not have a course that’s good enough to compete on, and building that kind of course is pretty expensive for what would ultimately be a minor Olympic sport.
Karate
Really only for the potential for a Bloodsport-esque moment.
