★ The Sports Examiner: Chronicling the key competitive, economic and political forces shaping elite sport and the Olympic Movement.★
★ To get the daily Sports Examiner Recap by e-mail: sign up here! ★
≡ OLYMPIC QUALIFYING REVIEW ≡
It’s always about money.
The Association of National Olympic Committees (ANOC) submitted a detailed review of the Paris 2024 Olympic Qualification Systems with the International Olympic Committee and the Olympic Program Commission last week, with a strong message:
“A recurring theme across the feedback was the need to minimise qualification costs, particularly by limiting the dependency on long-term ranking systems that require frequent international travel.
“NOCs expressed concern over two-year ranking pathways that heavily favour athletes and federations with greater financial resources.
“The review process thus focused on proposing mechanisms that balance sport performance standards with more equitable and sustainable access. These included calls for more direct qualification pathways and greater use of existing Continental Games as qualification opportunities.”
In other words, let’s go to the continental Games we already have to attend – African Games, Asian Games, European Games, Pan American Games – and stop making our athletes compete all over the world. Specifically:
● “Among the qualification systems that received the highest ratings were Hockey, Equestrian, and Rowing.”
● “In contrast, Athletics, Skateboarding, and Surfing were identified as the three systems most in need of review.”
ANOC noted that between November and December 2024, a total of 132 responses from 112 NOCs across all five continents were received; the ANOC final report noted attention to several of its recommendations:
● “Direct Qualification Opportunities – When ranking systems are used, International Federations (IFs) are encouraged to also provide direct qualification routes to ensure fair access for athletes across all NOCs.”
● “NOC Eligibility Authority – NOCs have the right to apply stricter eligibility or selection criteria than those outlined in the IF qualification system.”
● “Use of Continental Games – IFs are encouraged to incorporate continental events into their qualification systems to promote regional access and reduce costs.”
Again, this is about money and that some federations require athletes to compete more often in order to have more points and high rankings to qualify.
But at least in track & field, where the competition is measured, timed and scored, there is an enduring discussion about whether a one-time hot performance (or a win against a weak field in a continental Games) should be good enough to allow an athlete not to have to compete again until the Olympic Games. In the U.S., this is solved by having a U.S. Olympic Trials in the sport, but not all national federations or National Olympic Committees follow this formula.
And for those NOCs with limited resources, cheaper is always better. (And let’s not hear any complaints from athletes in those countries about limited competition opportunities, right?)
¶
★ Receive our exclusive, weekday TSX Recap by e-mail by clicking here.
★ Sign up a friend to receive the TSX Recap by clicking here.
★ Please consider a donation here to keep this site going.
For our updated, 694-event International Sports Calendar for 2025 and beyond, by date and by sport, click here!
