|
Skating
has become a 'risky' business See the glides, the slides, the falls on backsides. The Dimitris and Natashas having more prangs than Bathurst. On the brink at the rink, Olympic figure skating - BE THERE Imagine Mike Raymond reading the above in that voice of his which sounds like it scrapes paint off metal and you get some idea where I think the promotional future lies for figure-skating. Watching the final rounds of Olympic pairs competition this past week I got the impression grace and control could well get the shove in favour of thrills and spills as the attraction for spectators at these events in future. And judges seem to be pushing things in that direction. Now, this isn't a gripe about Aussies Stephen and Danielle Carr, staying on their blades and off their bums only to finish 13th behind a string of tottering twosomes. I realise the Carrs designed a relatively simple routine and carried it off beautifully while other couples, who looked at times like they'd been choreographed by the Keystone Cops, scored better because manoeuvres they successfully performed were more difficult. In many ways I admire a judging philosophy that rewards risk-taking. But it does lead to figure skating becoming, for the average spectator, a sport that's easy to watch and hard to follow. If a poised, slick performance can score less than one with obvious blunders, fans may eventually have to adopt the motor-racing attitude of enjoying the prangs as much as the achievements. Still, the real issue with something like figure-skating is the old question of where do you draw the line between sport and artistry? When a contest combines athleticism and artistry, judges need to award points to decide the outcome. The question this prompts is: "Is it really sport?" It's sometimes suggested that anything requiring judges allocating points subjectively is not a true sporting contest, and I must admit the theory makes sense to me. Trouble is it doesn't just push "showbiz" performers like Torvill and Dean and synchronised swimmers out from under sport's banner, it also means the exclusion of more traditionally legitimate pursuits like diving and gymnastics. And what about boxing? In the absence of a genuine knockout, fight outcomes are decided by the referee's and/or judges' opinion. The moment you suggest these pursuits aren't "sport" the competitors, who put in rigorous physical training to compete, and the spectators, who support these spectacular events, cry foul. But surely the fact that an event requires fitness and athleticism, and provides exciting competition, doesn't make it sport. Ballet dancing requires a higher level of fitness and athleticism than most Olympic disciplines. That doesn't make it sport. Quiz shows can provide exciting competition. They're not sport. The most popularly held belief about the Olympics is that they're threatened by professionalism. A bigger threat, surely, is a departure from the basic principles of sporting contest. I don't suggest highly athletic disciplines like diving, gymnastics and figure-skating be discouraged. A separate summit of world competition could be formed for such events, perhaps called the Artistic Olympics. As for synchronised swimming, ice-dancing and rhythmic gymnastics, well, how does the Olympic Eisteddfod sound to you? |
||
|
||
