Ok, so the Olympics are about to start in China - who here is gonna watch?
*crickets*
Seriously, I might catch a few events, but all that talk about so-and-so is "poised to medal" and the emotional back-stories is a bit overwhelming ... and since when is the word "medal" a verb?
When you think about it, some of the major components of MMA are already at the games: wrestling, judo (throws and submissions), boxing and tae kwon do, which begs the question: is it really a stretch to just put those sports together and make a place for MMA at the Olympics?
Knowing the International Olympic Committee's stringent requirements for accepting sports into the games, I suspect not. It's too barbaric, they'll say, but really, isn't that how the games started, with armed and unarmed combat inside a coliseum, a blood-thirsty crowd and fights to the death?
Here's an excerpt from the pankration - the ancient Greek sport that uses throws, takedowns, strikes and submissions - entry at Wikipedia:
"In the lead-up to the 2004 Athens Olympic Games, a modern non-nude version of pankration was tipped as being a new sport in the Olympiad, especially due to its being an event in the ancient games. However, its application was not approved. The International Olympic Committee was unconvinced that Greece could handle the total number of sports proposed. To placate the IOC, the organizers removed all new medal sports and pankration missed out."
My conclusion is that it's OK that MMA is not an Olympic sport, because - even though it's now on network TV and legal in many states - it still has that air of a fringe sport, which, I think, for me and many others, is part of its attraction. It's not for everyone. Not everyone can handle it. And that's fine - it will thrive without everyone's blessing - and they can go back to curling or badminton.
If you get the urge to talk Olympics, check out the York Daily Record's blog on the Olympics, called "The O-Zone", here.
Leave a comment