So crass to reduce this chaos to a financial call

LORD COe continues to view Tokyo 2020 through the prism of finance. The International Olympic Committee says it is banking on the solidarity of the athletes. And the many sports that make up the Olympic movement do seem rather unified at the moment. Nobody thinks those at the top have a clue.

Whether to train, where to train, what is the purpose, who qualifies, how do they qualify? These are all questions that need answers. It is not the fault of IAAF president Coe or the IOC that coronavirus has delivered another cursed Games for Japan, but little that is being said or done right now inspires confidence.

Coe may have been trying to offer reassurance when he spoke of not harming athletes’ earning potential by advocating early cancellation, but most are every bit as worried that bullish organisers will compromise their health by ploughing on regardless.

At the 2000 Games in Sydney, a feature of the athletes’ village was a giant map of the world. ‘Stick a pin in your home city’ was the invitation and thousands did. The clusters of colours revealed the global spread of the Games. A map of coronavirus victims would display a similar pattern. It is a pandemic — the biggest since the influenza spread from 1918 to 1920 which affected more than a quarter of the global population.

So for Coe to still be talking in terms of Diamond League cancellations and athletes’ loss of earnings is rather obtuse. It seems impossible an event on such scale can take place in the current climate, even if it is still four months away. Coe’s point about distance is reasonable, but to reduce this chaos to a financial call is crass.

‘I need to be careful I’m not removing the earning potential from athletes any more than I need to at this moment,’ he said.

No doubt he meant well. But to continue viewing Tokyo 2020 as an economic matter seems hopelessly out of touch. It is a mistake the hosts appear to be making, too, blithely stating that the Games will take place as normal, as if coronavirus is another obstacle that can be overcome.

Japan acted relatively swiftly against coronavirus, closing schools, banning major events. It has brought the spread under control. Adept at handling earthquakes and typhoons, it will see this as another force of nature to be tamed.

Yet it is also a country in which immigration and emigration is minimal. An Olympics brings a vast influx of visitors, not just spectators. There is a huge movement of people, athletes, coaches, team organisers, and from everywhere. To think that the world will be largely free of coronavirus by then is optimistic, at best.

There are 11,000 Olympic athletes alone, and 4,400 Paralympians, all coming with support staff. This is a little bigger than a debate about earnings potential.

The athletes can hardly be relied upon to make the right judgment alone, either. Unlike many sporting events that have been cancelled, the Olympics occurs every four years and is the pinnacle for the majority of athletes. It is hard to expect a competitor who has worked his or her entire life for this moment, to be the one that coolly calls it off.

That is where leadership from figures such as Coe or IOC president Thomas Bach is needed — cold, rational decisions must be taken. Not ones driven by finance — whether for athletes personally, or the Olympic movement generally.

Already, the advice seems at best confusing, at worst reckless. Continue training, Bach told athletes this week — but how can they when many countries are in lockdown, or avoiding all but essential human contact.

‘Anything is possible at the moment,’ said Coe. ‘Nobody is saying we’re going to the Games come what may.’

Maybe not; but there seems an extreme reluctance to entertain compromise, to acknowledge that a global event due to begin on July 24 appears a foolhardy exercise for the foreseeable future.

even without fans, there is still an enormous risk. Coe acknowledged there may well be, then talked about earnings. ‘The whole world wants clarity,’ he added.

Shut up about the money, Mr President. Is that clear enough for you?