Doing a crossword today I came across the name of Jim Thorpe. It made me think of what I'd originally learned about Thorpe in school.
Thorpe had a distinguished athletic career in school and outside of it. This led to him competing in the 1912 Olympics in Stockholm, in the Pentathlon and Decathlon events. He won gold in both events, an impressive achievement by any standard. But when his past playing baseball in the Eastern Carolina League went public, the International Olympic Committee rescinded his medals.
I'd always learned of this as a racist institution dismissing the achievements of a Native American athlete. But there's a problem with this interpretation. The IOC was right. The ban on professional athletes in the Olympics exists, and it's there for a reason, the US's absurd decision more recently to populate its basketball teams entirely with NBA champs notwithstanding. To be fair to Thorpe, the sport he had professionally played in was not an exact match for the Olympic events in which he participated, so there was ambiguity on his end. But the decision was the right one.
What does this prove? Only that rushes to judgment can happen in any direction.
2 comments:
Apparently there's no longer a ban on professional athletes in the Olympic Games - the IOC began abandoning those strict rules in the late 20th century. Personally I think it was better when the requirements were as rigorous as they were when Jim Thorpe had his medals rescinded. Of course at the time and for him it was a serious disaster. There's no doubt there and considering the fact he played minor league baseball before entering the Olympics the decision was even more unfair.
It's just weird now that just about every Olympic sport allows professional athletes to participate in the Games. It was always a series of contests devoted to play by amateurs. But I guess in this day and age the best are associated with professional clubs almost as soon as they show any promise of natural talent. Considering that being chosen to represent your country is a great honor how could our money hungry society ignore the young professionals.
The good news about Jim Thorpe is that the Olympic Committee restored his medals 30 years after he died. In the meantime he enjoyed great success playing professional football and baseball during his career - he was the first president ofthe NFL. I'm sure he was considered a legendary hero by everyone who knew him or of him.
The IOC has certainly made some changes over the years. Some may even have been good. Separating the Summer Olympics and the Winter Olympics into different years was probably the right call, because having the modern events just a few months apart is a little much. But I'm not convinced lifting the ban on pro athletes is right.
There are huge national and commercial entities involved. They're not scrupulous in trying to get what they want. There were all sorts of ethically suspect things going on at the most recent World Cup, for example. Including the US banning Iran from staying in the country so their team couldn't get a good night's sleep before the games. So if the Olympics are no longer about dedicated amateurs, what are they about? Just ratings and endorsements?
Thorpe gave a heroic effort in his events. The people around him saw him as a hero, and eventually everyone else did as well. For the most part I think that was always going to happen. And of course being the first president of the NFL is nothing to sneeze at either.
Post a Comment