‘It’s BELITTLING the Paralympics. What does this say? That we are worth NOTHING?’
FOLLOWING this month’s news that track and field athletes will be awarded prize money at the Olympic Games for winning gold, questions continue to be asked over the fairness of the decision and the long-term impact it could have on other sports. The announcement — which came as a surprise to many — was made by World Athletics president Seb Coe on April 10. It upset the president of the UCI, David Lappartient, and caused some consternation among federations including the British Olympic Association, who felt there should have been consultation before such a controversial move. While Lappartient said the decision went against the ‘Olympic spirit’, Andy Anson, head of the British Olympic Association (BOA), said it created a ‘problem’ because other sports would come under scrutiny or receive pressure from athletes to follow suit. Mail Sport today reveals the anguish it has already caused among the Paralympic movement, sparking accusations of inequality after it was confirmed para athletes will not be given cash for winning their gold medals. Here, HEATHER DEWAR gets the views of two Paralympic medallists — para cyclist Lora Fachie, who won gold in Rio and Tokyo, and para judoka Sam Ingram, who won bronze in Beijing and silver in London — on the move.
LORA FACHIE
‘First of all, if you’re going into it for the money, you will never win. The hours of dedication you put into winning that medal are insane. ‘Nobody has ever won a gold and had an easy ride of it. There will be many times you’ve had to pick yourself up off the floor, having lost a race or finished an awful training session, felt sick, pushed yourself to the limit. ‘You can only do it repeatedly if it’s something you really, really want. I do agree with the concept of financial rewards, however, because even though the Olympics is considered amateur, many of those taking part are already funded. So, technically, it’s our job. ‘We are paid to train as athletes, so it’s our livelihood. We can have jobs on the side, but that’s really difficult. ‘If you want to be successful, you have to dedicate many, many hours to your sport. ‘We need to be able to pay the bills and have to have something to retire to. Otherwise, you have individuals who’ve been very successful and then have absolutely nothing to show for it. Is that how we reward people who have dedicated their lives to their country? ‘I think disseminating the cash would make sense, as it’s all or nothing for gold in Paris. To
me, that almost belittles every other medal. The fact you’ve got to the final and then there is this “gold medal or nothing” mentality. I actually remember someone saying to me at one point: “Silver is just the first loser, isn’t it?”. ‘I don’t think we really want to encourage that attitude. ‘In other jobs, if you do your job well, you get a bonus, so I do agree with this move by World Athletics. In para sport, we don’t get much in the way of sponsorship deals. There is funding from UK sport but, for me, it hasn’t gone up since 2012. That doesn’t take into consideration the rising cost of living or inflation, or anything else. ‘Unfortunately, it doesn’t surprise me Paralympians are not getting any prize money, but it’s disgraceful. ‘Are we not striving for equality across Olympic and Paralympic sport? It’s almost belittling the Paralympic movement. What does this say? That the Paralympic movement is worth nothing?
SAM INGRAM
‘My first thought was that you need to win first. So, let’s just concern ourselves with that. It is so rare to become an Olympic champion. Sure, $50,000 would be nice, but we should really be focusing on getting that medal before we even talk about the money. ‘I do worry whether this payment negates the fact the Olympics is supposed to be amateur. So in a sense, is this a payment, or is it a gift? What is it? Is it just prize money like you’d get in boxing ? If so, then is it professional? It’s one of these situations where you ask: “What does the money actually do here?”. ‘Yes, I would like $50,000 but what does it do? I imagine the athlete who has stopped their life to become an Olympic athlete is most likely to have had that kind of money before even getting to that point. ‘Many of the gold medallists are probably already making that kind of cash through winnings or sponsorship. So, wouldn’t it be better to hand this money out to those who come in 5th, 6th or even in 7th place? In other words, those trying to make their way up the ranks, where the money might be more difficult to come by. I do think rewarding athletes is a positive thing. I just don’t know how well thought through this is, in terms of best bang for your buck. ‘It would be interesting to see if there are other models out there where this could be given to those further down the pathway or to nations whose pathway structure isn’t as good. ‘To me, it potentially changes the landscape for everyone else. World Athletics’ actions definitely have a consequence and that needs to be considered, because if more federations take this payment method on, what happens with the last sport which doesn’t have the ability to pay this money? It becomes very hierarchical. ‘I think it already is in a sense — in terms of how much presence and screen time they get in athletics. We need to be conscious we’re not compounding that even more. Some Paralympians from other countries can’t believe we are funded by UK Sport. We’re quite far ahead in terms of equality, although you have to win a gold medal as a Paralympian to secure A-class funding from UK Sport. ‘Getting gold can be based on tiny margins. There are some sports where the decision is judgment-based — boxing, judo and taekwondo, for example. And, often, they can be incorrect. So, say I’ve just lost £10,000 a year because someone has made a mistake, it doesn’t sit particularly well with me. ‘It doesn’t make me feel good if Paralympians are not getting anything. The difference between $50,000 and nothing is pretty stark. Does it reflect badly on World Athletics? I honestly don’t know how much they would think about that. It’s quite a complex issue. ‘Everyone would like more money for athletes doing well, but what use does it have, and can it be used more effectively, among those who aren’t doing well? ‘Any additional money can only be a good thing. I’m just not sure about the way it will be administered purely to gold medallists at this Games. Getting silver is very difficult, so not achieving the $50,000 makes that even harder. It would be less of a blow if you could filter it down the field.’