Loaded question on another site.
Without a doubt, throughout history, there have been many high performing athletes who have been in the realm of abuse on frequent occasions. That’s the theory at work where the ends justify the means. Torture. Anguish. Ridicule. Embarrassment. Shaming. Slave-driving demands. You get the point.
The story goes that you put many eggs into one basket and toss that basket around repeatedly. Many of the eggs break. The eggs that survive are your tough eggs and they are the champions. Brutal. But, it is part of the sporting legacy. And, it is what the media seems to showcase. People are resilient.
However, is that the true aim of what we crave for ourselves, our children, our communities?
How should we “re-create?”
To me, recreation and play, and even athletics should be built as ways to better ourselves, those around us, and those in society. Furthermore, there have been caring, loving, open, honest programs that have been and are able produce their share of champions and record breakers. To kindle the drive and to support the passion for excellence is a whole lot of fun too.
Greg Mumm asked: Do you think improved athlete welfare directly impacts on better athletic performance?
Despite an increasing amount of research suggesting that improved athlete welfare equals improved performance and longevity in sporting careers, many High Performance Managers still leave this element to separate associations or bodies. I would like to hear from athletes about whether they think improved welfare leads to better performance and whether they want more support here from coaches or would they prefer to have this aspect separate?
Peace to you and yours in our sporting endeavors. Life is short.
