Thursday, August 13, 2009

No softball

I guess I shouldn't have had much faith that the IOC would do the right thing, and I actually don't know what the right thing was in this situation. But I am disappointed that the executive board got all excited about golf and that they are banking on Tiger Woods to play in 2016 (when he will be 40--not especially old in golf years but let's remember that he's already had one knee surgery). That's just kind of ridiculous reasoning, frankly. I still think they are silly to think that professionals will place the Olympics above other (paying) commitments or more prestigious events.
So rugby sevens was the other sport nominated. As I have previously admitted, I don't know that much about rugby and a commenter the other day said it wasn't real rugby. I don't know. But I still think it will be interesting to expose more people to some version of the sport. And by some people, I really mean Americans.
Both sports are going up for individual votes (as in each sport will be voted on separately versus as a pair) to the entire IOC in October. Not sure if there is any chance that the executive committee's recommendations will not be heeded, but I suppose there is a chance.
So this all, of course, means that softball did not make it back into the Olympics. And apparently it wasn't even a close vote (or votes--there are multiple rounds of voting). And even if golf and/or rugby get denied by the entire IOC, none of the other sports (in addition to softball there was baseball, roller sports, squash, and karate) will be reconsidered.
Softball peeps have vowed to fight on and the head of the international softball is seeking explanations as to why softball was not deemed worthy for reinclusion. I would be interested in knowing this myself. Softball did a lot of work in this readmissions effort. I wonder what was missing.

2 comments:

Smarry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lisa Creech Bledsoe said...

Whereas the women's boxing decision looks to have been (at least partly) a decision about equality, the decision to consider golf looks more like it was influenced by a desire to attract money.

And while I'm thrilled about the boxing part, I'm also really sorry to see softball cut out. Like you, I read that it had to do with American dominance and a lack of global appeal.

Will golf be any different, or do we only hear about Tiger Woods the most?