It is becoming extremely difficult to get behind the Olympics. The world, it seems, is always “waiting for the asterisk” following an athletic performance. This is especially (but not exclusively) true in regard to the Russian athletes.
The Olympic committee has just banned Russian triathlete Igor Polyanskiy for doping with EPO or Erythropoietin, which is a hormone naturally produced by the kidneys, that enhances endurance.
When the IOC informed Polyanskiy of his positive test, he did not attempt to refute it. It was accepted as fact. While he was not in contention for winning a medal (he placed 43rd in the men’s race in Tokyo) and he made it possible for a 14th place finish in the mixed relay race, his positive test did have longer-lasting consequences.
The Russian triathlon team was disqualified for the 2024 Olympics to be held in Paris. Why is the Russian team so prone toward bending the rules? Because they seem to feel the risks are worth the reward. Before we go any further, it does beg the question of how many wins has the Russian team posted over time that were gained due to unethical behavior?
Is it “Cultural” or Something Else?
So as to not appear biased toward an entire country, I do recognize that despite its history of blood doping, thousands of Russian athletes have competed over time who were completely “clean.” In addition, I have little doubt that other unethical activities have, or will be discovered perpetrated by other countries – including, potentially, our own.
The Olympics has, in fact, become a big business. While we may all want to believe in the amateur ideal, I am afraid that the amateur train left the station many decades ago. Invariably, the lines have sharply blurred between professional and amateur in many events and the elevation of athletes is commonplace. The rank amateur may be seen by sports agents, advertising agencies, manufacturing companies etc., and get elevated to everything from movie stars to sneaker endorsers.
The rules, just as the professional/amateur statuses, have blurred as well. What might have been absolutely unthinkable 25 years ago, is perfectly acceptable in 2021.
What is unchanging is ethics. Whether the world wants to accept it or not, there are ethical boundaries and expectations that should not be crossed. My question is how is an ethical sensibility infused into the Olympic equation? How do ethics become as important as a winning attitude?
While I would not suggest that ethical sensibilities of Afghanistan or Peru or even Lichtenstein are identical, I do believe that an argument could be made for ethical expectations of all three countries. So, why not institute ethical training prior to competition to underscore what can and cannot be considered ethical behavior? Why not precisely spell it out, complete with choices and consequences?
Virtually every country has an Olympic training center or an Olympic headquarters. Why not bring in a team of trainers and translators and present the same message to all parties? If it cannot be done in-person, clearly a virtual message could be shared leading up to the competition.
Though I may seem naïve, I do know that every case of fraud has its origins in a lack of oversite. My suggestion is to bolster that oversite to the point where the ethical expectations are clearly spelled out. At the end of the day, what would be lost if this approach was instituted?
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS!
