Since the edition of Lei Piva, the Olympic Committee of Brazil (“COB”) has used the meritocracy criterion as one of the most forceful for the distribution of resources. Of course, meritocracy is relevant. But this concept has to be seen with some care, so as not to create injustices.
Otherwise, let’s see. To achieve the expected merit, it is necessary to provide conditions for this. If someone does not have the essential conditions to achieve the merit, it is not fair to charge that person with the same rigor as one who has the means to achieve it. This equation applies to Sports Confederations. Over the years, some sports have been able to achieve more significant sporting results. Others, although growing, have not yet reached the same level. The reasons for this are diverse. It is evident that the expressive international results should be applauded and are cause for great joy.
But many Confederations and Athletes can achieve expressive results if they receive more resources. Whoever receives more, naturally, will present better results than whoever receives less. And if those who already receive more continue receiving more and more, a vicious circle will be created, widening the differences between Athletes and Confederations. So this equation has to be revised. Confederations and Athletes who still do not receive as many resources need to receive more, to expand their conditions to improve results. I invite everyone to read the chapter of our Positive Agenda for the COB in which our Working Group proposes to significantly increase the floor of transfers to the Confederations without prejudice to anyone.
The COB has cash on hand to improve conditions for all modalities. There is no such thing as “big sport” versus “small sport”. There is sport and they all deserve dignified treatment.