OPINION: OLYMPICS CANNOT BE FIELD HOCKEY'S ONLY FRIEND

By Al Mattei

Founder, TopOfTheCircle.com

In 1998, a pronouncement from International Olympic Committee president Juan Antonio Samaranch gladdened hearts in the worldwide field hockey community.

Amongst rumors that sports like the modern pentathlon, archery, and field hockey might be removed from the Olympic program in favor of television-friendly activities like ballroom dancesport, Samaranch declared that field hockey would "forever" remain part of the Olympic summer games.

His pronouncement, however hopeful, may not be the best thing for the sport of field hockey, especially in light of the scandal which has surrounded the IOC's choice of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the 2002 Winter Olympics.

Why? This scandal is big. Huge. Massive.

Alleged bribes and other services totaling anywhere from $600,000 to $1 million were given to certain IOC members in charge of site selection, as has been charged in many publications and reports, including the book "Lord of the Rings."

Many specific bribe allegations have been made public: college scholarships, free medical care, and even guns given as personal gifts to Samaranch. These gift revelations are the kind which, interestingly, are designed to rankle Americans the most.

College scholarship money is extremely hard to get in the United States, especially given the high costs of American higher education these days, and the notion that foreigners were being offered this kind of money touches on the hot-button issues of immigration and education.

Allegations of free medical care, in these days of uninsured and underinsured people in an era of HMO coverage, also seem to be tailored to an American audience. The same goes for guns, given the rising tide of opinion against guns and gun violence in this country.

On the 24th of January 1999, the first shoe dropped, as six IOC board members were targeted for removal. There had been three other resignations in the previous week.

There were two interesting trends about this first wave of people targeted. The first is that only one European member -- from Finland -- was initially forced to resign. All of the others are from either Africa or South America. This is an outrage in and of itself: given the fact that no Olympics has ever been held on either continent, the perception is that IOC members from those contents have been main "bought votes" to throw support behind the American, Asian, and European bids.

And now, those continents have been disenfranchised of their representatives: IOC delegates from Libya and Swaziland resigned before the January 24 meeting, and the ones from Mali, Congo, Kenya, The Sudan, Ecuador, and Chile have been targeted for removal in March. Further investigations surround members from The Ivory Coast, Russia, and South Korea.

The other interesting trend? Samaranch has remained in power, despite public evidence that he has personally profited from the Olympic site selection protocol.

It will be interesting to see how long he holds on: London Times columnist Simon Barnes has blasted the IOC president for turning what is called a "movement" into a quasi-political organization, replete with all its foibles and faults.

"Senor Samaranch is a politician through and through; when in trouble, blame everybody else and form a committe," Barnes wrote. "The fact is, of course, that this monstrously self-aggrandising leader of men is not a real president at all. he is called Mr President wherever he goes, is treated with great deference and is given the best of everything as of right."

Cosmetic changes have occurred at the IOC and within the Salt Lake City Organizing Committee, with re-organization and the formalization of policies to prevent vote-buying and conflicts of interest. However, the selection of failed politician Mitt Romney as SLCOC president does not instill the greatest of confidence.

Questions have arisen in the media about various aspects of the scandal and how widespread it is. One media organization even questioned the role sports federations -- that alphabet soup of governing bodies like FIBA (basketball), IAAF (track) and even FIH (field hockey) -- have in their prominence in the Olympics, and what it might have taken for sporting activities like ten-pin bowling and lacrosse to become part of the Olympic program.

The question for FIH is this: should any pronouncement from Samaranch be believed? And should the FIH be placed in a position where it has to support Samaranch during the scandal to preserve the sport's place in the Olympic Games?

In short, with friends like Samaranch, does field hockey need any more enemies?

What do you think? Email us at topofthecircle@aol.com, and we'll try to print a random sampling of your opinions, as long as you are willing to give us your name and let us know where you are from.