I’ve never really understood what being a Commonwealth champion actually means. From a sporting context, it just seems to be someone who has bettered athletes from a random bunch of countries including some, but definitely not all, of the world’s sporting superpowers.
However, I am certainly not one to pooh-pooh the Commonwealth Games experience. One of the things that I enjoy the most about the event is that it gives territories a chance to compete on an international stage when they wouldn’t normally be able to do so.
Niue's team – which does not compete at the Olympic Games – is welcomed at the 2014 Commonwealth Games opening ceremony
Another reason to get on board with the spectacle is that it’s an opportunity to see athletes from the Home Nations represent England, Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales in sports where this would not normally be possible.
Phillips Idowu represented England – instead of Great Britain – at Glasgow 2014
Most of all, though, the Commonwealth Games is a period where sport can immerse everybody that gets close to it, whether in person, or watching in every corner of the world.
My family and I attended Glasgow 2014, and we had a great time.
So, my congratulations to Birmingham on being awarded the 2022 event are most certainly genuine.
There is the added benefit that UK Sport may now pursue aspirations to hold a future edition of the IAAF World Championships at the city’s Alexander Stadium.
Dai Greene is one of the athletes to compete at the 2011 Birmingham Grand Prix in the Alexander Stadium
I do think that it is unfortunate, however, that the originally scheduled host city, Durban, could not go on and stage the Games.
After first seeing the South African city being awarded the event, combined with a slew of reports about British cities being interested in the 2026 version, I was thinking that we had entered into a neat little cycle.
It seemed as if the Games were set to rotate between a city in the United Kingdom, then a city in Australia or New Zealand, and then a city in a country which is relatively inexperienced in delivering major sporting events, before the cycle would start over again.
This seemed to be a good scenario. For every three editions of the Commonwealth Games, two would be in countries which already had the administrative know-how, with the third being used as a way to stimulate sporting and structural development in a country which is somewhat less used to that kind of attention.
Now that idea has gone out the window, with Birmingham stepping in to host just eight years after Glasgow. This could yet turn out to be the start of dangerous times for the Commonwealth Games Federation. It could signify the beginning of a period where the Games are effectively traded between just two countries, with the United Kingdom and Australia each hosting every other edition. If that turns out to be the case, then it could damage the event’s credibility, causing big problems ahead.
Additionally for Birmingham, though happy to be hosts, there is the downside that they have the task of hosting the Games four years earlier than what originally could have been envisaged. This means less preparation time, which means, in theory, that they can’t put on the best event that they could possibly have managed if they had four more years to think about their plans. While this is annoying to an extent, I’m sure that it will still be a fantastic occasion, and the potential bid for the IAAF World Championships may never have been a possibility if there was the extra wait.
One thing that will be a relief for all is that the process of assigning the host city is now finally complete. Work can begin in earnest in preparation for the 2022 Commonwealth Games in Birmingham.
A big part of that work must now be to answer the question of what events to include.
Although most decisions in this area have already been made, there is still talk that cricket could make a comeback.
Any tournament, though, could well be restricted to women.
My last blog post demonstrated that women’s cricket has seen significant progress in recent years, although there can still be setbacks.
How, then, would a women’s exclusive cricket tournament at the Commonwealth Games fit into this stop-start progression?
I’m inclined to answer that it would not sit well at all.
Essentially, in the year 2022, women would be getting special treatment, and I don’t think that would be sending a positive message.
The message would be that the men are too good to play in the competition, as they’re off playing franchise cricket in money-spinning Twenty20 matches. The Commonwealth Games would merely be a compensation competition to female players.
I should say that in no way am I opposed to cricket being part of the Commonwealth Games. After all, it’s quite novel to think of a potential outing for the rarely seen national team of Northern Ireland.
I just think that when it comes to cricket’s inclusion, it should all or nothing. That means both men’s and women’s tournaments or none at all.
While I’m sure it would be a thrill for women to compete for gold, how patronising would it be if the only reason why they had the opportunity was because of their gender?
One of the best sporting events that I went to this year was the Women's Cricket World Cup, including the final at a sold-out Lord's.
The 2017 Women's Cricket World Cup Final
It was a magnificent occasion, and when the players were out there giving it everything and performing with athletic prowess, at no point did it go through my mind that they should be given special treatment solely because of their gender.
