Yes they should. A lot of the countries, regardless of the size of their population, have already been investing a considerably large amount of money on their national teams for a long time now. Take the world-famous American swimmer Michael Phelps, for instance. Every single move he makes is observed and analyzed by a number of trainers, along with various high-tech equipments. Considering the fact that Phelps is a national swimmer therefore all his swimming-related expenses are covered by the government of the USA, it should not be too difficult for one to understand how much a government can value its sportsman. This isn't for nothing- the govenments are aware of the fact that a nation that is closer together is a stronger one.
Although I cannot come up with an example from real life, I see no reason why I can’t show the inspirational movie ‘Invictus’ which is a true story as a proof on how beneficially it has worked for the governments to support their national teams. In the movie, Nelson Mandela joins his forces with its national rugby team’s captain François in order to bring the people of South Africa together. They succeed and South Africa not only wins the Rugby World Cup Championship in 1995, but it also is a more united country with its people closer to each other now.
The global language of sports can indeed be a major factor in the creation and strengthening of the national consciousness. If people realize that they can communicate through sports, they will continue to do so and this will eventually diminish some concepts that were previously the cause of the creation of bountaries. A more comfortable environment and a stronger stance against 'others' will be created since the citizens will have a common point. The governments should continue to value its national teams in order to create a more peaceful environment in the country and encourage communication between its citizens.
Many people underestimate the power of a county's sport team. As you stated, the South African Rugby team of 1995 brought the whole country together. It unified the different people of South African and helped create a single nation. Sports have sent messages through out history, the biggest one being equality between groups. All different kinds of people watch sports, in a way it can change them when their team wins or loses.
ReplyDeleteInvictus, based on a true story, is an excellent example of how sports are able to unite countries. It clearly shows how sports are able to expose the commonalities between people and allow connections to form because of them. Regardless of social class or race, all people in South Africa felt the excitement of rugby and let the thrill take over, resulting in a more unified nation. However, on top of unity, sports are also capable of inspiration. For example, the 1980 Olympic hockey game between the United States and the Soviet Union is known as the “Miracle on Ice”. In this game, the Soviet Union, easily the best team in the world, was matched up against the U.S., which consisted of college students who had never previously played together as a team. However, the young American team surprised the world by pulling off a close victory, setting the citizens of America off in frenzy. At the end of the game, sportscaster Al Michaels had uttered his famous words: “Do you believe in miracles? Yes!” (Sports Illustrated). The game was not even an ordinary miracle; the game was viewed as political and social battle in the midst of the Cold War (The Santa Clara). Not only did the magnitude of this particular U.S. victory unite the nation, sending Americans “pour[ing] into the streets of Lake Placid” (Sports Illustrated), but it also gave people hope, inspiration, and spirit. Therefore, states should care about their sports teams’ performances, even during economic or social hardships; sports have the ability to boost morale and spread optimism.
ReplyDeleteAsli made a great point about how states should also care about their sports teams’ performances because in almost all professional cases, the athletes are investments as well. Corporations sponsor athletes of their choice; to expand on Asli’s example of Michael Phelps, The Wall Street Journal said Phelps was making $3 to $5 million annually from the 10 sponsorships he brought to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, including VISA, Hilton, AT&T, and Speedo. He was receiving 50 sponsor proposals per day before he left for China. Michael Phelps is an excellent example of how athletes not only represent countries in international sporting events, but how they also play an integral role in the economy. Millions of dollars are invested in athletes in many forms, including sponsorships, advertisements, and guest speakers. Athletes are also excellent choices spokespeople for organizations; for instance, Tom Brady, Dikembe Mutombo, and many others all support The ONE Campaign (ONE Campaign). In general, because many athletes share the same status as celebrities, they are utilized to influence public opinion. This greatly affects the decisions that are made by the public, and which consumer products are successful. Thus, from an economical standpoint, because the public holds many athletes in very high regards, states should indeed care for how they treat their athletes, and how well the athletes perform.
I completely agree with what has been said so far. I would like to add that the success of a country's national team also has a major impact on the morale of the country and their overall efficiency. My parents have told me that after Nadia Comaneci, a Romanian gymnast, got the first perfect ten in gymnastics the entire country was so ecstatic that it led to a whole new career field. Everyone at that time and even still today wanted to become gymnasts and win gold. This shift in the country's focus I believe has better results for the people living in the country to establish a nation that makes them proud. In essence, the success of a nation's national team has a great affect on the country's economic, social, and education systems.
ReplyDelete