“That piaffe was exquisite,” I said, awed, to my girlfriend.
Her eyes rolled upwards in long-suffering torment at my confidently professed knowledge of a movement in the dressage event. In the past two weeks, I have declared expertise in — among other disciplines — high-board diving, fencing and, perhaps most dubiously, omnium track cycling. Now it was grand prix freestyle dressage, watching Great Britain’s Charlotte Dujardin on her mount Valegro.
I have ridden a horse just half a dozen times, and not for two decades, but as Dujardin’s routine concluded, I was confident enough to announce: “There’s the gold medal.”
Similar conversations have, I imagine, been taking place in homes across the nation during the round the country during the Rio de Janeiro Olympics.
As Mark Cavendish huffed and puffed valiantly around the velodrome in the climactic points race on Monday last week, J.K. Rowling tweeted: “Don’t you DARE tell me Quidditch is hard to understand.”
A Games that was mired in controversy beforehand — and has never entirely shaken it, away from the action — has been, as a sporting spectacle, relentlessly compelling. Even if we have not always fully grasped the rules of the event, we are watching.
Despite the often highly unsociable hours, the 2016 Games have won over everyone from reception-aged schoolchildren to oldsters who might normally enjoy a bit of tennis.
Much of this has to do with the amazing accomplishments of the British athletes, who have recorded their most dominant performances ever in an overseas Olympics. More than 10 million people watched the gymnast Max Whitlock win his second gold medal on Aug. 14, and an astonishing 11.1 million tuned in to BBC1 at 11pm on Tuesday last week to see cyclist Jason Kenny win the men’s keirin. There have been record ratings for BBC4 as well.
If you went off to bed instead, every morning was like Santa had visited overnight, with a new clutch of medals to celebrate. Sport is often a form of escapism and Britain has rarely craved distractions more than now.
Uncertainty about Brexit has left everyone, even the “winners,” bruised and disillusioned. The Labour Party seems intent on implosion, obliged to choose between two flawed candidates. Terrorist attacks are growing more shocking, depressingly frequent and closer to home.
Success in the Olympics has not made these problems disappear, but it has offered a much-needed summer holiday from them.
The old maxim is that it is better to watch sport live, in the round. In Rio, though, that might not always be the case.
Everyone over in Brazil agrees that the conditions have been challenging. The Joao Havelange stadium, the venue for the athletics, is dilapidated, with few working lifts or toilets. Traffic in the city has been gridlocked, so bad that some members of the Dutch team took to commuting by bicycle. The attendance at many events was woeful and the atmosphere embarrassingly nonexistent.
About 280,000 free tickets were given to schoolchildren in Brazil, but more than half of these were never used. It has been reported that bars show Brazil’s soccer matches on TV, but otherwise boycott coverage of the Olympics.
This, in many ways, is sad: Brazil is in danger of missing an excellent Games. Usain Bolt and Michael Phelps, two untouchable Olympians, have signed off with, respectively, an irrepressible swagger and the meme-perfect #PhelpsFace.
BREAKOUT STARS
However, just as thrilling were the new stars. There was a fantastic moment when Bolt, in the bowels of the stadium, was caught on camera reacting to Wayde van Niekerk’s ridiculous world-record victory in the 400m. His hands go to his mouth, he spins on his heels, he is genuinely flabbergasted. A metaphorical baton was passed over right then.
Gymnast Simone Biles lived up to her impossible pre-Games billing, and is there a more beguiling and hypnotic sight than watching Katie Ledecky swim freestyle?
It is true that much of the coverage has verged on hyperbolic, even jingoistic. Sometimes it feels we are more likely to hear news of a Brit finishing seventh than about the actual winner of an event.
Simon Jenkins in the Guardian argued that we have been too eagerly panting to anoint “heroes” and compared the British pursuit of medals — which comes at the taxpayer’s expense, of course — to the ideological oneupmanship of the Soviet bloc nations during the Cold War. The BBC’s reporting was, he felt, comparable to “a British National party awayday.”
And yet a redeeming feature of the Games has been how genuine and endearing the winners often seem to be — certainly in contrast to, say, the Premier League players we have much greater exposure to.
Phelps may have had a pre-Games net worth of about ￡40 million (US$52.3 million), but in the main these athletes are not overindulged poodles. Mostly they are unknown and unheralded for all but a couple of weeks every four years. Even Kenny — now equal with Chris Hoy as Britain’s most decorated Olympian, with six golds and a silver — admitted before the Games that he did not have a personal sponsor because he was not “pretty”.
The success of British athletes has not been universally applauded. The sniping has been loudest at the velodrome, where Team GB won six golds, four silvers and a bronze. French, German and Australian rivals have pulled up short of outright accusations of cheating, but only just.
“They were cannon fodder when you look at the last few years,” said Germany’s Kristina Vogel, who beat a British competitor to win gold so she cannot be accused of sour grapes.
“It is all very questionable,” she added.
TIMED PERFORMANCES
Vogel, and others, are right: There is little correlation objectively between British success at the Olympics and their recent performances in cycling world championships. However, that is exactly the point, the British cycling bosses have said.
Why waste your time peaking for a world championship, which no one outside your sport really cares about and which, crucially, has no impact on the funding the team receives? Far better to save your pennies and spend them when they really matter.
This approach, which is either cutthroat or very canny, has trickled down from cycling and rowing to swimming and gymnastics — and even trampolining and diving, where the country has pretty well zero pedigree.
Team GB certainly did not invent extreme specialization. South Korea was perhaps the pioneer of the approach, concentrating since the 1980s on more obscure sports, such as archery, shooting and, in the Winter Olympics, speed skating, to bolster its medal count.
However, Britain has taken the tactic to another level. From 1996, when then-British prime minister John Major decided that the nation’s Olympic performances were becoming embarrassing, funding for elite sport has increased from ￡5 million to the ￡350 million that has been invested in Olympic and Paralympic sports over the current four-year cycle.
The approach really is ruthless: We are never going to beat the US at basketball, so what is the point in investing in that sport? Medal success in track and field athletics will always be the hardest to achieve, which is why rowing and cycling receive more funding, despite having fewer active participants.
So is this money — which comes from the National Lottery and the exchequer at a ratio of 3:1 — well-spent? Participation in sport, according to Sport England, is declining overall despite Team GB’s unprecedented achievements at the Olympics. There are real concerns about grassroots facilities, as many local authorities are forced to make cuts of about 20 percent.
All of which means that British success these past weeks is probably most accurately seen as a fleeting and certainly expensive morale boost.
Leave.EU, the Brexit campaign group backed by businessman Arron Banks, claimed last week that the medal haul was proof that the country will thrive outside the EU.
“We may be small, but we truly are Great Britain!” the slogan read.
Such piggybacking feels a little desperate though, and only really serves to remind us that soon Santa will take his bag of medals away for another four years and this blissful holiday from reality will be over.
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
RSS