The last games of the century now pass the torch to the Olympic homeland
The seventeen-episode series known as the Olympics has come to an end. To convey in words all the beauty packed into the opening and closing ceremonies along with the fireworks display in Sydney is simply impossible. For the athletes, specialists, and fans of the games in Australia, it became a celebration of strength, courage, and beauty. 3.5 billion people followed the games on television.
Shoulder to shoulder stood the thrill of victory and agony of defeat. The winner’s stand has only three places and but one for the gold. Eighty countries won medals at the Olympic Games, and 51 carried away gold ones.
To adequately sum up Ukraine’s quadrennial performance is also impossible. In the unofficial rankings our 23 medals (three gold, ten silver, and ten bronze) put our country in 21st place, a step backward from Atlanta, where our 23 medals included nine gold, two silver, and 12 bronze, placing us ninth. Time is needed in order to give a final analysis of the results of our compatriots’ performance in the land down under. Hasty judgments could do injustice to our Olympians and harm our preparations for the next four-year cycle. In many events there were serious mistakes. We expected at least two or three medals in heavy athletics, and the Ukrainian performance in light athletics was disillusioning. Simultaneously, however, our boxers outdid themselves, bagging two silvers and three bronzes, a simply brilliant result.
The two gold medals and one silver our Kharkiv mermaid Yana Klochkova captured and our golden sharpshooter Mykola Milchev’s performance early in the games remained our main successes. In many sports our dreams of gold remained but pipe dreams.
Much has been said on the role of sports in improving a country’s image, but our state’s relationship has turned into naked consumerism according to the principle of “you give us something, and we’ll make it up to you.” Financing for the training of our Olympians de facto fell through, and only a few of our athletes had support, symbolic by Western standards, from sponsors. One cannot accept the old saw from the Soviet period embraced by Ukraine’s National Olympic Committee that “Winning is not as important as taking part.” Perhaps we should say, “Better fewer but better.” For there were very many “tourists” whose record before the Olympics gave them no hope of being even in the top twenty. Would it not be better to concentrate our money on the best of the best?
The way the Olympic Games were organized leaves the most positive impression. The major difference of the Sydney competition from its predecessor in Atlanta (and all the media remarked on this) was that the local inhabitants truly put their heart into opening the quadrennial games. In America the spirit of commerce often overshadowed the spirit of competition.
In total medals won the USA came in first with 97 medals (39 gold), followed by Russia with 88 medals (32 gold), and China with 59 (28 gold). The Ukrainians came in 21st, their relative paucity of gold accompanied by far more awards of the less noble metals. In terms of gold they trailed even Ethiopia with its four gold medals (eight in all). The rhetorical question of why can only be posed the International Olympic Committee and its longtime President Juan Antonio Samaranch. For two decades now the number one man in world sports, the Spaniard has announced that the coming Athens Olympics will be opened by a new IOC president.
We have four years to wait for the next games and new victories of Ukrainian Olympians in Greece. In the meantime, our state simply must as soon as possible reevaluate its relationship to sports.
