Globalization in sports

In the book “Sport in Contemporary Society”, D. Stanley Eitzen, editor of the anthology, writes as an introduction to the book’s Part 13 (Expanding the Horizons: Sport and Globalization), “Globalization, according to Joseph Maguire, refers to transnational networks and migratory patterns resulting in interconnected world patterns. Globalization, then, involves, among other things, markets, production, finance, the movement of people and cultural homogenization. There has been a global economy for 500 years.

“In the sport realm the cultural imperialism employed by British colonists of the 19th and 20th centuries brought their sport (soccer, rugby, cricket) to their colonies (e.g., India). The Olympic movement spread around the globe during the 20th century, and this, too, has been interpreted by some observers as a reflection of the colonial dominance of the West, but in the last 25 years or so, it has accelerated rapidly.

“While globalization is not new, the pace has quickened rapidly with the transportation and communication revolutions of the late 20th century. Macguire states, “...There is a speeding up of time and a “shrinking” of space. Modern technologies enable people, images, ideas, and money to criss-cross the globe with great rapidity”.

At this point, we’ve devoted a little more than 200 words, or about a fourth of this column, to a phenomenon which some may think is unrelated to sport despite our reference to sport being introduced by colonialists and the Olympics. For truly, globalization is every bit part of sport for over 30 years especially if one considers basketball and soccer (and, fairly recently, track and field) where foreign talent (foreign to one’s country) suit up for commercial teams and even for national squads as naturalized citizens. 

Even corporate sponsorship of sport by sporting wear multinationals has become so globalized that national loyalties of companies have become almost meaningless, but this is another topic that deserves separate space some other time.

Globalization of sport has affected almost all facets of life, including sport and even collegiate sport in the Philippines and in other countries.  These other societies however seem not to be alarmed by the presence of foreign players for various reasons, among them perhaps more openness to diversity.

 But the crux of the matter is that, as pointed out by Jay J. Coakley in his article, “Globalization and Sports: Issues and Controversies” in Eitzen’s book, “As sports have become increasingly commercialized, and as national boundaries have become less relevant in sports, an increasing number of athletes have become global migrant workers. They go where their sports are played, where they can be supported or earn money while they play, or where they can have the cultural experiences (or, supposedly, college education, when they are recruited as scholars in Philippine universities). This global migration of athletes has raised new political issues in connection with sports.”

Former PSC chairman and now dean of the college of physical education at Foundation University in Dumaguete City, Dr Perry Mequi (a bronze medalist in athletics in the 1954 Asian Games in Manila), has for quite some time, raised issues related to migration of foreign athletes in collegiate sports.

In his latest email, Mequi states, “I read a report that the UAAP will start banning foreign players by 2015. The NCAA has already approved a no foreign import by 2015.  Recruiting foreign players violates the ‘Filipino First’ policy and our sense of justice. For every foreign player recruited and given scholarship and other perks, a Filipino is deprived of the same opportunity to develop himself and contribute to the betterment of his/her country.”

Mequi adds, “The purpose of collegiate sports is for the education and formation of young people unlike professional sports which is for entertainment and amusement. The basketball professional leagues can use imports but certainly not collegiate sports. If we adopt the view that collegiate sports is for education and formation, then most of the problems we now witness such as cheating, violence, disrespect for authority would be eliminated or minimized.”

Mequi, who offers insights sports sociologists articulate, asserts that “school sports should focus on ‘academics first, championships second.’ The sports programs of schools and colleges should be judged not on the number of championships won but on the number of graduates and scholars they produce. Respect for academic responsibility and accountability should be the basic value that is imbued in the training and character formation of athletes from the elementary grades to college level.”

We certainly agree with Mequi on the purpose of sports and giving Filipino youth all the opportunities to excel but at the same time being competitive with anyone, including imports. The parties responsible for recruiting these imports must however provide demonstrable proof that the imports (and even more so, Filipinos) are indeed full-time students who regularly attend classes and fulfill academic requirements. We must condemn situations when so-called athletic scholars don’t even know where the campus washroom or his classroom is! Again, these ghost students is a topic for succeeding discussions.