Was it Team Malta… or Team 'whoever can get us the most medals'?

The issue of nationality and sports is a hot topic which has been swirling around the Small Nations Games (GSSE) for weeks. Following the resounding success of the country when it topped the medals table for the first time in Malta’s sporting history, many were sarcastic about the patriotism, asking whether it was misplaced, after it was learned that a number of foreigners had been given passports in order to play for Malta. 

But it is not just the passport loophole which saw so many foreign-sounding names wear the Malta colours, and the controversy over this continues. How much can we stretch the concept of ‘nationality’ in order to allow athletes to play for our country? 

I admit I have not been able to make up my mind about this thorny issue. My initial stand was that if you are representing Malta you should be Maltese, or somehow have some kind of affiliation with the country (i.e. you were brought up here, have residency or are of Maltese descent). But even on these latter criteria I eventually realised that there are many grey areas. 

During the course of this last week I have discussed this with a number of people (thank you to all those who gave me their feedback) and it seems I am not the only one with this dilemma. On the other hand, some were very unequivocal about how they feel. 

There were those who bluntly stated that if you are going to represent your country, then the criteria should be very strict: you have to be of Maltese blood, born and raised here… “pure Maltese” as we say. 

Others would give allowance to those of Maltese descent (such as Australian swimmer Georgia Bohl, whose grandmother was Maltese) or those who are Maltese but who left the country at a young age to improve their chances of a sporting career (the Sultana siblings in squash). 

Still others would stretch the participation to those who are not Maltese but who have lived here for a number of years (Croatian tennis player Matija Pecotic who came with his family to Malta at the age of 3, and grew up here). 

In all, 24 foreign athletes were allowed to play for Malta under residency rules. 

Where people objected the most was on learning that passports were handed out to foreign nationals with absolutely no connection to Malta - which is what happened with four members of the table tennis team and which is what caused the greatest uproar. Incidentally, Pecotic was also given a passport but this did not meet with the same objections, presumably because his ties to the country are well-known to the local tennis community. 

So, to answer the question as to whether the Malta Olympic Committee did anything shady or wrong… technically, the answer is “No.” A look at the GSSE rules shows that everything that was done falls within the criteria of who can represent a country. In fact, a very comprehensive analysis and breakdown of those who won medals, which was carried out by the Times of Malta, showed that seven sporting passports were handed out, namely in tennis (1), table tennis (4) and basketball (2). 

These passport holders won five gold medals, two silver medals and a bronze medal.  They also won medals in teams alongside Maltese athletes. The conclusion by the fact-checking exercise carried out by the newspaper was: “Malta would have still topped the GSSE table without the medals won by the athletes who were granted a passport.” 

But what if we had to remove the athletes whose ties to the country are simply “Maltese descent” (which can be stretched to some tenuous branch of the family tree) and who do not even live here?  If athletes are simply going to be asked to hop on a plane because they are being financially lured to represent Malta so that our medal count looks good, where does that leave our home-grown athletes who may not be given a chance to form part of Team Malta, or who form part of the team but remain sitting on the bench as reserves? 

If, when an international competition comes along, a spot on Team Malta is going to be given to someone else (but who can assure us of a medal) - what message does that give to our up and coming athletes? 

I am of the opinion that it might completely demotivate them, they will shrug and give up because there is no point in trying to get on the team. However, several people I spoke to are of the belief that, on the contrary, local athletes need to be challenged if they want to improve, and fighting against better competitors to obtain that coveted spot is what they need to up their game. 

While I can understand this point of view because we do suffer from the “big fish, small pond” syndrome, and our athletes often struggle once they go to compete abroad - there does need to be some kind of mechanism in place to ensure we continue to nurture and develop what is an already small pool of athletes to begin with, and not just discard them in lieu of winning medals. 

In fact, the crux of this whole nationality debate boils down precisely to this. What is the Malta Olympic Committee and SportMalta (in other words, the government) doing to promote a sporting mentality among Maltese youngsters not simply to win medals but to cultivate and elevate sports on a national scale with a clearly-defined, long-term vision and strategy? 

We were told that €5 million were distributed to the associations representing each discipline taking part in the Games. The aims, according to the press release were quite commendable, “to assist sports associations financially, to employ, among others, professional coaches on a full-time basis together with the rest of the necessary technical staff, to finance the participation of Maltese athletes in competitions and training sessions abroad, and invest in more appropriate technical tools.” However, questions posed by the news website The Shift, about how and where this money was spent by the respective associations, have remained unanswered. 

Where did these millions go? The public has a right to know. 

There are other questions, such as what happens next to those foreigners who won gold medals (and pocketed a cool €10,000 each)? Have they been bound by any obligation to give back to the country by, for example, providing training to Maltese athletes in their respective sports? Will they now play for Malta in other international competitions? 

Another burning question is what about the national records which were broken in disciplines like swimming? Will the new national records stand even though they were set by someone who came here for the games and left? 

Finally, even though no rules were broken, how ethical was Malta’s approach to these games and its determination to win as many medals as it could at all costs? Some have argued that in other sports, especially football, players of different nationalities have been playing for other countries for ages, and no one bats an eye - and yet, are we really being honest with ourselves when we boast about ‘Team Malta’ and ‘proud to be Maltese?’ 

The only thing I am certain about in this whole debate is that, for me, handing out passports to whoever is willing to play for Malta is nothing but a joke, and by doing so, we are only fooling ourselves that “we” have reached the required standard of play to beat our competitors. 

Having said that, we should not be so ready to rain on our own parade either. We can allow ourselves to be happy for once about the medals which were won fair and square, rather than fall back on our default Maltese cynicism and pessimism. 

It is also not fair to diminish or sweep aside the real achievements made in most of the disciplines by local athletes who excelled despite the limitations of this country. Watching them compete and achieve their goals did more to promote their respective sporting disciplines and inspire youngsters than anything else.