To what extent is the commercialisation of sport a positive trend? Negative
I feel that commercialisation of sports is bad as it denies the sport players of their privacy. As the players would be constantly under the limelight, details of their lives, both the good and the bad, are released to the public. For example, in the recent Tiger Wood's scandal involving his many mistresses, his private life was broad casted to the public, attracting many criticisms. Therefore, the commercialization of sports is bad as it compromises the personal space of the athletes. Performance may not be the main focus in all sports. Some people may take up a sport just to maintain a healthy lifestyle. Many sports, such as running and swimming can be solitary and non-competitive. It does not matter if one does not perform well in the activity, as long as the individual feels that being engaged in it brings benefit to his/her health. If the commercialization of sports were to cause people to develop a mindset that victory and quality of performance is of utmost importance, unnecessary pressure will be imposed on the sportsman. Their mentality may change, resulting in them thinking that only those who can excel in the sport deserve to take part. This causes those who do sports for health benefits but are not proficient to lose their penchant. Commercialization in this case is disadvantageous as it has the power to distort the mindset of people negatively. The psychological phobia may cause some people to be robbed of their chance to engage in a sport they like.
The commercialization of sports has set in motion a shift in paradigm in sports; particularly those which involve teams. Players have become commodities to be traded and sold for extravagant sums of money and even clubs are being sold to the highest bidders. The trouble with this is that while sport used to be about performance excellence and hard work, clubs may now simply obtain success by splurging astronomical amounts of money to buy the best players that money can buy. Players no longer stay loyal to the clubs that trained them and honed their skills but instead seek greener pastures where the pay is higher than the exorbitant amount it already is. The overall result of this is a lack of sense of loyalty and passion and also makes a case for the notion that success can be bought with money. Commercialisation of sports leads to the erosion of it's values. No longer is the focus about doing one's best to win, it is now about wearing the branded goods. The promotion of sports apparel or energy beverages gives the idea that without these goods, one cannot achieve their optimal point in sports. Some of these brands include Nike, Adidas and Gatorade. While they may help the body's posture and movement, it is the person's perseverence that will pull them through. Commercialisation is only another form of distrcation. Hence, commercialisation of sports is bad. Commercialisation of sports is bad. It seems that Sports had lost it true meaning. Sports is no longer a simple physical exercise but involves many other issues. Instead, one's popularity and ability to appeal to the public is more important then one's talent and skills. For example: Anna Kournikova is the biggest tennis start yet she never won a grand slam, she gains a large amount of earnings through sponsorship alone Justin Henin(world no 1) is able to earn in a lifetime. This have shown the disparity between both individuals. Therefore, I conclude that commercialisation of sports have led to people placing more emphasis on looks then talent. Nowadays, if one was to declare themselves a fan of Chelsea football club, the reply you would get would most probably "Before or After Roman Abramovich?" Chelsea Football Club was bought over by a rich oil merchant in 2003, and this led to an interesting disadvantage of commercialisation in sport. Because of the large amount of capital that is provided to these clubs who are bought over by...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document