|
The world of sports encompasses a vast array of activities, from
athletics to hunting and shooting, from rowing to equestrian events, and from
boxing to hockey and soccer. To claim that television will ultimately eradicate
these pursuits is a blatant fallacy. With or without TV, people will still have
the desire to participate in sports. Engaging in sports is beneficial to health,
builds muscles, satisfies the competitive spirit, encourages sportsmanship, and
fosters friendships and social connections among people with shared interests.
Since the founding of the Olympics during the Greek and Roman eras, sports have
been a popular leisure activity, and it will undoubtedly take more than the
downsides of television to eliminate it.
That being said, it's important to appreciate the benefits of television
coverage for sports. Televised sports provide top-notch entertainment to those
who are interested. Viewers can enjoy the game comfortably, protected from
inclement weather. For some sports like golf, TV broadcasts capture the game
better than on-site viewing. Cameras follow the ball's full arc, highlighting
the exceptional skills of top players. Team sports can also be watched with an
expansive view of the entire field. Zoom lenses offer close-ups from various
angles, and the immediate playback feature showcases top players' abilities,
fouls, and refereeing standards. Sponsorship is also crucial for sports teams at
all levels, whether their matches are televised or not. Sponsors fund teams in
proportion to television coverage and ground attendance. This provides funds for
improvements to grounds and spectator facilities and money for the purchase of
star players. Finally, being able to watch top players perform with apparent
ease must encourage young people to go out and try to do likewise. Today,
sponsorship offers money for the rich rewards available to stars, which
motivates young hopefuls.
However, televised sports also have their drawbacks. Many people believe that
all sports should be amateur, pursued for the sake of physical excellence
without financial rewards. The film 'Chariots of Fire' highlights a brilliant
young miler who eventually had a trainer as he moved towards Olympic status. Was
the trainer unpaid? Television encourages professionalism, even among amateurs.
Rugby football in the UK, the amateur game, has been forced into a league
system, which leads to star poaching and players demanding payment, particularly
when training takes up an increasing amount of unpaid time. Amateurs are
indirectly recompensed through giving their names to newspaper articles, writing
and signing books, endorsing sports goods, and appearing at functions.
Television exposure is behind all of this, which is why many people
fundamentally disapprove. The line between the pro and the amateur is becoming
blurred.
Another criticism is that many people are becoming sport watchers rather than
sport players. The argument is that television has reduced attendance at
unglamorous matches and events, which has already led to the sale or liquidation
of many run-of-the-mill clubs. Moreover, the excitement of the crowd atmosphere
is lost when watching from home. As with cinema, a visit to the event is
preferable to watching on TV.
Thirdly, there is the old Olympic ideal, which is to spread international
goodwill. Today, the Olympics are watched worldwide by millions via satellite
television. Does this foster goodwill and fair play, or does it tend to
nationalism and a 'win-at-all-costs' attitude? Coincidentally, drug abuse among
athletes has grown alongside television.
Money motivation has also been mentioned. It's reasonable for players, whether
amateur or professional, to be properly recompensed, but television creates
'stars,' whether genuine or fake, who can demand exorbitant sums,
disproportionate to their contributions and abilities. This 'hype' is
unfortunate and does nothing for sports.
In conclusion, television has its benefits and drawbacks for sports. However, it
will never kill sports. |
