Chloe Coleman
Deputy Head of Press, Easter 2014
Enquiries: pressofficer@cus.org
Press Release – 08.02.2016
‘This House Believes Money is Ruining Sport’
The third debate of Easter term on the 6th May focussed on the contentious issue of the consequences of
money on sport. This slightly more niche debate was clearly conducive to strong opinions, leading to
impassioned floor speeches from both sides of the issue.
The first speaker in proposition was Dr Joanne Hudson, a sports psychologist specialising in motivation and
self-perception. Reminding the chamber that today is the anniversary of the four-minute mile, she reminisced
about a time when sport was definitely not motivated by money, expressing her fears that an increased
emphasis on sponsorship and celebrity is ruining sport for young competitors feeling the pressure to perform.
Deloitte’s Lead Partner of the Sports Business Group, Dan Jones, countered this by claiming that while
money may not be the be-all and end-all of sport, its overall contribution is a positive one. He maintained
that even though we are living in less prosperous times, sport remains a ‘great escape’: there is more to be
done to make sport more accessible, which will in itself inevitably mean more money.
The Chamber then heard from double Paralympic archery champion and record holder Danielle Brown
MBE, who shared her experiences competing within a money-obsessed industry. She argued that while there
is much we can learn from sport, including discipline, honesty and a sense of fair play, money has the
potential to push these to one side, focusing instead on the ‘commercially viable’ side of the Paralympic
games.
However, commentator and former editor of World Soccer Keir Radnedge had little sympathy for this,
referring to it instead as a ‘populist fantasy’. He pointed out the problems of assuming that ‘sport’ is
synonymous with ‘Premier League’ and urged us to consider the wider world of grassroots sport, where
money’s influence fosters higher standards and an increased competition ethic.
This was met with a laugh from former professional footballer and sports writer Pat Nevin, who joked about
the extortionate price of attending a football game and the danger of pricing fans out of the stadium. He
worried about the consequences for the atmosphere of the sport before suggesting that while money is of
course necessary for sport, it is currently being misspent.
The final speaker in opposition was Professor Mike McNamee, a philosopher specializing in the ethics of
sport. He accused the position of a false nostalgia in their claims of a ‘golden age’ of money-free sport,
concluding the debate by stating that it money in sport is neither unequivocally good nor bad – it is what you
do with it that makes the difference.
As is to be expected with such a pertinent issue, floor speeches were frequent and unafraid to challenge the
speakers on their positions. A particularly pressing point about the long-term consequences of allowing Qatar
to host the World Cup elicited fervent applause, neatly contextualizing the issues of the debate and its wider
consequences for the future of sport.
--By Chloe Coleman
Deputy Head of Press, Easter 2014
THE CAMBRIDGE UNION SOCIETY, 9A Bridge Street, Cambridge, CB2 1UB, United Kingdom
Registered Charity, No. 1136030