The author says

The are some out there, at least those who remain unenlightened, that appear to regard sport as some sort of second class activity that threatens their more cerebral pursuits in some way through its popularity. The idea that governments are so willing to spend money on sporting events, people or sporting codes is a waste

This is rather vague. Do "some out there" object to large amounts of Government money being spent on potential Olympic gold-medallists, or do they object to generous funding support for the population at large to participate in? ((I've heard of the former, not the latter).

If it is the former, I'd entirely agree with them - Olympic gold medallists are of no value to society. Academic stars are. And the article doesn't touch on this issue.

If it is the latter, I'd entirely disagree with them - sport for the masses is valuable, as the article cogently argues.

No-one can fault the reasoning of the article but sport is now more entertainment 'owned' and manipulated for profit than a noble pasttime. No longer can I watch Souths play St George in a grudge match full of passion and with an eye to history, I gotta watch a branded, sponsored and pre-packaged team on a sponsored oval in a sponsored competition with the players all keeping a wary eye on the tiniest misdemeanour.

Marketing 1. Thrill nil.

Australians are NOT sports lovers, they're sports watchers, armchair critics and couch potatoes. Big difference.

Jeremy, I think funding elite athletes, for instance Olympians, is an integral part of ensuring participation of "the masses", as it provides inspiration and much encouragement for particpation. I do not think there would be the same particpation without fundung the elite athletes, to a degree, particularly in the less well-funded and/or amateur sports.

I am definitely the non-sporting type; I accept that I’m in the minority (if I take into account the millions of spectators who have never played sport but like to watch) and I have no objection to sport-mad people except when they ask me what the ‘latest score is’.

What I do object to is having to pay for their sport. When I was target shooting and flying gliders, taxpayers didn’t foot the bill; nor should they have.

If you (the individuals) want it – pay for it

Mr Right,

I personally think the taxpayer should fund the sports (and the arts for that matter), just like they fund healthcare, roads, education etc. They all play an integral part in the society we have.

The idea that you have to pay for everything fully yourself, would leave very large numbers of people unable to particpate in some of the most basic sporting activities, with the associated social and health impacts.

The idea of the tax system is for the benefit of society as a whole, rather than the idea of 'everyone for themselves'. Such a self-centred attitude as the latter would hardly make for a civilized and equitable society, and would marginalise those (kids especially) who are not in a position to pay the full cost. Sport is an important outlet, in many cases, for those who are not financially well off, and the same can be said for artistic pursuits.

They may not have an immediate tangible economic return, but they certainly have long-term societal benefits.

quote from origonal poater
...>This is by no means a comprehensive list but it demonstrates that there are physical benefits from playing sports;..<<

no one can deney benifits of exersize [but as more than one person has pointed out
THE BENIFIT IS IN THE DOING
not the watching it on foxtell
#>>..however, it is true that you do not have to play sports to get these benefits, which you might also get from a daily walk or other form of exercise..<<

we have this tribalism[pretend tribalism] that allows us to make these children into gods[that our tribe beat their tribe[usually by a fluke or accident or luck more than skill [but i know skill makes its own luck]

i also know that if enough monekeys are typing randomly [and it is all filmed from multiple angles amasing things can be reflected in a slow mo replay on the news

but its not news [its sports] one idiot will beat the other idiot [guarenteeed] its sports not news [it dosnt exersize the brain to know who your half hunch back forward centerleft team captain is [its gibberish for the mindless]

its amusment for the M-asses[its not news [its barely real]

think i like news[you hate news , thus STEAL my news [plus have your sportcasts] to hypnotise and divide the mass'ss, to give us adrenolin rushes and flashing lights in our eyes via the different lighting angles [sit back to the light box god and see the stuff hypnotising your brain into exticy][your mistaking as passion for your team]

over paid , overblown, overhyped , overpriced ,over the top destraction
im over it

The author tries to equate all "sporting" activities,there are different types of sport, sport as entertainment, participatory sport which confers health benefits and the ludicrous production, at taxpayers' expense of elite athletes. Those individuals who believe that national prestige is enhanced when an Australian athlete is better a some meaningless activity than foreigners are deluded, that's the East German mentality. Each Olympic medal costs the poor oppressed taxpayers millions.Why should taxpayers fund sport as entertainment, let the audience pay. It's the old formula of "Bread and Circuses", I'd prefer more bread in the form of funding for education, health and science.

I agree with Bennie's thread that Aussies are spectators rather than participators.
It has been so for millenia; Rome appreciated the controlling influence of bread and circuses.

I think a HECS-style scheme should be introduced for those who attend our taxpayer-funded Sports Academies.

Why shouldn't those who go on to make lots of sponsorship dollars repay their debt?

It's good enough for those who actually make a physical difference to society, so why not for those who simply provide entertainment?

I am a sport hating atheist yet my taxes help support sport and
religion.

NOT HAPPY KEV.

Rache, I agree that those who are trained at an academy, or through specialise fuding by the taxpayer could indeed have a HECS system. It would make a lot of sense.

But I think you shouldn't overlook the importance of entertainment. It provides much-needed relief from everyday life, which in many cases is essential for people to retain some sort of enjoyment. Without it, there would be a lot more problems as more people searched for ways to expend their pent-up energies.