When my 7 year old imitates certain movements of hockey players, the kind of thing they do when they score a goal (you know, the happy dance of hockey kind of thing), who is my child imitating? The hockey player who is an athlete, an isolated person that happens to play hockey? That’s who he thinks he’s imitating.
He doesn’t realize he’s imitating a brand. The hockey player belong to a franchise, a money-making entity in competitive sports. My child doesn’t know this, but I know this. Lance Armstrong’s tell-some-but-not-all interview with Oprah, also a brand, has seeped into my consciousness.
So is every competitive sport a business? Does this mean all sports are rigged? Is it fair to say that all members who contribute to the competitive sport are rigged?
What is the message here?
There are so many things wrong with the statement below. (source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/18/lance-armstrong-drugs-betsy-andreu)
Armstrong continued to insist in the interview that he only took drugs to create a “level playing field” and believed at the time he was doing nothing wrong and could not be caught.”
If he did nothing wrong, why can he not be caught (or risk being caught)?
Lance Armstrong is weak. Not strong, and not a role-model.
The entire thing pisses me off because I have a child who is interested in competitive sports, and looks UP to these people. People he respects for the skill they demonstrate, their seemingly hard work to achieve ultimate satisfaction resulting in recognition and fame. He imitates them. Imitation is the purest, most special form of flattery, especially coming from a child.
How long can I keep my mini-athlete pure?
It’s a question that has no easy answers.