Most of Britain’s Olympic and Paralympic sports are celebrating the announcement of funding rises for the next four years but several sports, including swimming, basketball, volleyball and handball are paying the price of failure with severe income cuts.
UK Sport announced a record amount of £347m to be invested in the run-up to the 2016 Olympics in Rio, with cycling, rowing, boxing, athletics and gymnastics among those whose funding has increased.
However it’s a very different story for those sports that failed to hit their performance targets in London, swimming has had its budget cut by 15%, volleyball by 90% and basketball, handball, wrestling and table tennis miss out on funding altogether.
Despite some of the inevitable complaints from those who’ve had their funding cut, I think UK Sport have got it pretty much spot on.
I understand the argument that those sports where we underachieved should see an increase in funding and those where we were successful shouldn’t see a rise because they’re doing well, but I would argue for the opposite.
Why should those who failed to hit their target be rewarded with extra funding when they haven’t earned it?
I’m glad to see volleyball has seen a substantial reduction and that sports like basketball, handball and table tennis have had their funding removed, because frankly none of these should be Olympic sports and the IOC should get together and update the list as to which sports should be included in the Olympics and which shouldn’t.
No comments:
Post a Comment