Sport development as an entity is very self conflicting as its core strategy’s are both to promote ‘sport for all’ and produce medals on a national stage. As such a lot of tension exists between the two as to which deserves more time and money. Having analyzed not only sporting development models but looked at the governing bodies proposals and schemes that are in place I would be more inclined to say that mass participation deserves more funding. This is because I feel that the through mass participation a lot more can be achieved. Firstly physical education in schools is something which receives a lot of money through schemes such as PESSCL which is aimed at mass participation; if you were to take away the funding given to these types of schemes you would see a drop off in the numbers of young people playing sport. This would impact on the potential numbers of elite athletes which indirectly suggests that mass participation has greater bearing on the future of sport. However elite talent development is something that the Sports Council are particularly concerned with, as according to Pickup (1996) the structure of sport was hindering developments of elite athletes and sport had to be reformed; subsequently the national lottery was brought into to bring funding to elite sporting athletes. The government’s decision to make such a policy shows their commitments to elite sporting bodies by providing a framework from which elite sports could excel. However lottery funding also applies to those playing recreationally, as it shows that if participants fully commit to their sport then they will receive funding where necessary. Again the government can be seen to have got lost in the bureaucracy’s of sport not really being fully committal to mass or elite sport. As already stated
Sport development as an entity is very self conflicting as its core strategy’s are both to promote ‘sport for all’ and produce medals on a national stage. As such a lot of tension exists between the two as to which deserves more time and money. Having analyzed not only sporting development models but looked at the governing bodies proposals and schemes that are in place I would be more inclined to say that mass participation deserves more funding. This is because I feel that the through mass participation a lot more can be achieved. Firstly physical education in schools is something which receives a lot of money through schemes such as PESSCL which is aimed at mass participation; if you were to take away the funding given to these types of schemes you would see a drop off in the numbers of young people playing sport. This would impact on the potential numbers of elite athletes which indirectly suggests that mass participation has greater bearing on the future of sport. However elite talent development is something that the Sports Council are particularly concerned with, as according to Pickup (1996) the structure of sport was hindering developments of elite athletes and sport had to be reformed; subsequently the national lottery was brought into to bring funding to elite sporting athletes. The government’s decision to make such a policy shows their commitments to elite sporting bodies by providing a framework from which elite sports could excel. However lottery funding also applies to those playing recreationally, as it shows that if participants fully commit to their sport then they will receive funding where necessary. Again the government can be seen to have got lost in the bureaucracy’s of sport not really being fully committal to mass or elite sport. As already stated