Turning the corner

The former Honda F1 team has announced that it will make the 2009 grid, having secured financing to run two cars this season - as the Brawn GP team. Team principals have thanked people such as Ron Dennis and Luca Montezemolo, and the other teams, for helping them achieve their goal. In the meantime, the Formula Teams' Association (FOTA) has proposed a package of measures designed to ensure the future good health of Formula 1. Is this form of collective and collaborative team strategy the best way forward for all sports, irrespective of the views a governing body might have?

Double-whammy for cricket

The potential implications of the terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Pakistan, and the allegations of fraud made against Allen Stanford, have already been raised by this blog. The issue now for cricket's strategic decision makers is: what should they do with the sport? Retrench? Consolidate? Or seek to pursue an aggressive fight-back or growth strategy?

An age of wage restraint?

To ensure that he keeps his drive with the Honda F1 team in 2009, reports suggest that Jenson Button has accepted a £15 million pay-cut (from £24 million per annum to £9 million per annum). Is this the action of a passionate racing driver? Or the action of someone who will still be earning millions? Is Button the first of many, as athletes from across the sporting world accept that a new austerity is emerging in the light of the current economic downturn?

Bid brands and mega-event success

Some critics have recently suggested the English committee that is working on the country’s bid to host the 2018 FIFA World Cup is over-laden with politicians. The view is that England should utilise its distinctiveness rather than relying on elected officials. Hence, this would mean using Beckham, the Premier League, Wembley, etc. as the focus for a bid – but is this the approach to take? Should bids be viewed as brands and be developed and positioned accordingly? And what is the art and the science of a successful sporting mega-event bid?

Benitez counts cost of Torres' injury

Liverpool manager Rafa Bentiez has been bemoaning the absence of striker Fernando Torres from his side, and the consequent dip in form this has resulted in for his team. Indeed, Benitez appears to be suggesting that, should Liverpool fail to win the Premier League title this season, it will be directly connected to Torres’ various injuries. This raises some interesting questions: what is the total cost of an injury to a club? How much of this cost can be attributed to medical care for the player? How much of this cost can be attributed to lost revenues in the light of weaker performances on the pitch? Are there opportunity costs that can also be attributed to the injury of a leading player?

Risk and security in sport

Sport has never been able to ignore risk and security issues, but in the light of today's armed attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Pakistan the severity of such attacks is evident. The human tragedy aside, there will now be serious ramifications for international cricket's fixture list. The Australian cricket team has already refused to tour Paksitan for the foreseeable future and others will surely follow suit. Could terrorism therefore be destroying cricket in Pakistan? With the sport on the brink, how can the cricket authorities mitigate the threat of terrorism? Moreover, with heightened security clearly necessary in Pakistan, how can or should the risks of attack be minimised?

Diamond opportunity

IAAF delegates are due to meet in Monaco to discuss the formation of a 'Diamond League' for athletics. This would entail creating a circuit, something akin to tennis' ATP circuit, that would pit leading competitors against each other a number of times, internationally, across the year. Is the league a good idea? Is it needed? Is it a way of enhancing the best features and qualities of athletics, particularly during harsh economic times, thereby securing its future? Will it make the athletics season more accessible and clearer to sports fans? Will it make the most of top-level athletes? Or is it simply elitist, favouring a small number of top athletes rather than athletics as a whole? Isn't it simply yet another case of the impending commercialisation and polarisation of a sport out of which the upper echleons of the sport benefit but few others do? Is it really about coordination and rationalisation, or more about utilising 'star' assets more effectively? There also remains a fundamental question: what's wrong with athletics as it stands?