Olympics isn’t just a sports event, it’s a movement
reward every Paris Olympics Gold medallist with a cash award of $50,000. While many athletes, including Neeraj Chopra, welcomed the move, it has now sparked a global debate, with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) president Thomas Bach expressing his concerns during an online media briefing recently.
“The role of the international federations (IFs)…is they have to make every effort to try and close the gap between the athletes coming from privileged countries and those coming from less privileged countries. This is where the discussion is coming from (on the WA decision)”, said Bach. With the Olympic Games being the pinnacle of sports competitions globally, it is fair to reward athletes for their extraordinary feats. Considering the short career span of athletes, their financial well-being should be a priority.
However, should the IOC follow the WA model? Is this the way forward for the Olympic movement? That’s where the disconnect arises. Unlike other sports competitions, the Olympics is a movement for global solidarity. It aims to unite the world through sport and bridge the gap between privilege and under-privilege. That’s why 90 percent of the IOC’s revenues are ploughed back to the member nations, with the hosts receiving $2.8 billion (Summer and Winter Games combined).
The aim is to promote sport across all levels around the world so that athletes in relatively underprivileged nations can aspire to make it to the top of an elite international sport. If the IOC starts to reward gold medallists
