RECENT events concerning the governance and integrity of international athletics have been well documented. Many people have lost faith in the ability of the IAAF to ensure a level playing field for competition, either financially or in sporting terms. Those responsible for drug testing are fighting a constant battle not only to keep up with the medical expertise of the cheats, but also to engage fully with the authorities charged with applying the testing regime. The IAAF, WADA and several national governing bodies have already clashed on interpretations of rules, deadlines and so forth. The participants themselves, spectators and sponsors, are all expressing their own respective concerns and seeking answers and clarifications, and television rights and media sponsorship contracts are either under threat of withdrawal or being renegotiated with sub-optimal conditions, overshadowing the forthcoming Rio Olympics, World Championships and far beyond.
While confusion as to how to move forward continues, the sport hurtles toward a crisis of spectator confidence from which it may struggle to recover. As with any professional sport, attracting and keeping audience interest must be the keystone of the debate, or there is no sport; but achieving this is a complex issue.
In many respects these problems appear to mirror those already faced, with various degrees of success, by other sports. Unfortunately, this does not automatically mean the same successful solutions should be adopted. As I shall show, athletics incorporates unique features which make it vulnerable to outside pressures in ways other sports are not, but also affords opportunities others cannot exploit.