A little boycott of hope

Let's read the following sentence again carefully: "The item was removed from the agenda because no technical solution could be found that would allow Russian teams to play." There are undoubtedly legal wordsmiths behind such a formulation face crushing defeat. This cloaked sentence, which actually flatters the truth, became necessary after the European Football Union (UEFA), under the leadership of its President Alexander Ceferin (Slovenia), decided to allow Russian youth teams to take part in European tournaments again - at least without an anthem and Flag. The decision, however, was met with strong criticism. Of course, especially in Ukraine. But not just there. England, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland announced that they would not let their youth teams compete against Russia. To put it simply, it is a boycott, a rebellion against a continental association that thought that its body, the executive branch, could suddenly make a questionable decision. Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine continues unabated. There are deaths every day, and rockets rain down on civilian targets in Ukraine every day, even if the inhumane massacres of Hamas in Israel may push this into the background of disaster reports for the moment. The killings in Ukraine continue unabated. That's why it would have been a wrong signal to gradually try to make sport more socially acceptable under the dictator Putin with the youth teams from Russia. Unfortunately, there are already enough associations and officials who want to open the door to Russian athletes in the run-up to the Olympic Games in Paris next year. It is therefore a good signal that upstanding and attentive national associations are clearly distancing themselves. “I interpret UEFA’s about-face as an admission that the timing of the effort to reintegrate Russian teams into the youth tournament was completely wrong,” Norwegian association president Lise Klaveness told Sport inside. A lesson against lonely decisions However, your clear position and that of the other nations that have positioned themselves goes beyond the current decision. It is a lesson against incumbent officials. It is a glimmer of hope that sport and its national institutions are perhaps stronger than they usually show compared to those who are at the top of the respective international associations, in which sometimes in fact by hand and based on personal assessments of the respective presidents sports policy decisions are made. Of course, the associations are organized democratically with various committees that always have to be involved. Majorities are therefore officially necessary. These always come about because everyone involved primarily looks at the existence of their personal position. Loyalty, often misunderstood, secures one's place in the executive branch. Voting by approving the proposed program items has long since become a unit. The recent rejection of the UEFA project could be encouraging. Sport and especially its protagonists, the active members of both sexes, essentially hold the key. Economic pressure makes protest more difficult However, this is often difficult to do, because resistance, for example, to incomprehensible dates, to ski races in ecologically sensitive glacier areas, to questionable sporting events due to problematic weather conditions, for example, costs points and prize money. If you don't compete, you can't win and therefore can't earn anything. With this simple formula, athletes are blackmailed by their organizers. It doesn't matter whether these are private organizations such as the ATP or the WTA in tennis or the Tour de France or the Giro d'Italia in cycling, but also all international associations that represent their sport. Without their active members, they would all be left empty-handed. The primarily economic pressure that they can exert usually nips resistance to grievances in the bud. I remember that a few years ago there was a boycott against Russia's relay team at a biathlon race in Ruhpolding. That was well before the war against Ukraine. It was about Alexander Loginov, who was nominated for the relay after a two-year doping ban. It was said that all teams would start, but would then stop in the stadium area to express their protest against Loginov's return. Everyone went through. Nobody stood still. The will was there, the flesh was weak or the current account balance was perhaps in trouble, which is why they didn't want to miss out on the hoped-for prize money. There are still only small protests that are forming, and the activists still give in too quickly when it comes to counteracting the thorns and forcefully defending their own, actually strong, position. Therefore, there will probably only continue to be a few institutions, associations and athletes who rebel. It is still only a small, barely noticeable wave that is forming against authoritarian officials. But it is a start. About the author: Sigi Heinrich The award-winning sports journalist, author and Eurosport commentator from the very beginning (1989) dedicates his column “Sigi's Peaks” to the entire diversity of sport and also likes to poach in foreign regions. Sometimes with a smile and a wink or serious and sometimes deliberately provocative. There should be something for everyone.

Football

Italy

International leagues

International

Winter sports

Hockey

Tennis

Other sports

Motorsport

Cycling

Watersports

Events

Favorites

A little boycott of hope

Suggestions

Comments (0)