IOC Rules are so Archaic

[radacrider]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/aug/13/british-cycling-london-olympic-games-2012

Sorry, while overall, this is probably non-cycling, this issue is popping up because the IOC cannot seem to find its way to bring equitability (is that a word?:p) to the cycling events.

Yea, they'll never sacrifice men's events for women's, but I just don't see why, in this day and age, why they can't have the same number. And, the excuse that too many athletes would particiate just does not seem like a valid one to me.

sheesh, just my rant.

[smilingcat]

sheesh... but then again I'm not surprised.

Title IX was supposed to have brought parity in collegiate sport in US. To some extent, it has. but not really. Men's sport generate soo much revenue, it's like a professional sport. while womens sport are always in the red. "Show me the money". Many of the mens team are swimming in it and I can't really think of any womens team that can show a dime.

sigh...

What can we do... just keep hounding IOC until they get tired of hearing us.

smilingcat

[OakLeaf]

Title IX was supposed to have brought parity in collegiate sport in US. To some extent, it has. but not really. Men's sport generate soo much revenue, it's like a professional sport. while womens sport are always in the red. "Show me the money". Many of the mens team are swimming in it and I can't really think of any womens team that can show a dime.

It stinks about the Olympic sports, but men's college football and basketball are really a mixed blessing, honestly I think more negative than positive. Those kids are basically indentured servants for five years, bringing literally millions of dollars each to their institutions, while being severely restricted in the perks that they can receive. All this while putting their bodies on the line, risking career-ending injury, for the possibility of a pro contract and stardom, where in reality the majority of the pros are lucky to see a middle-class salary.