China's stars try to ring sponsor changes
When China's sports authorities kicked Tian Liang out of the national squad this year, it was not for failing in the pool: the diver had won a gold medal in a synchronised event at the Athens Olympics less than six months before.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr Tian's offence was to have defied the National Sports Administration's control over the commercial activities of its charges by employing his own agent and signing a lucrative contract with a Hong Kong entertainment group.
This challenged the administration's claim, in a 1996 regulation, that “the intangible assets of serving athletes belong to the state” and its demand for half of his commercial income.
“The ‘Tian Liang incident' stems from an irreconcilable contradiction between the desire of athletes to ‘maximise their personal value' and the regulatory and management system [of Chinese sport],” said the People's Daily, mouthpiece of the ruling Communist party.
This tension has been highlighted as multinationals show growing interest in sponsoring Chinese athletes as part of their brand building before Beijing hosts the Olympics in 2008.
For backers of the state- directed sports system, Mr Tian's attempt to control his own commercial activities appeared ungrateful to the nation that nurtured him to international glory.
Professor Xu Benli, of the Shanghai University of Sport, says successful sportspeople should not balk at turning over half of their earnings.
“The success of our current national athletes is the result of huge investment in them by the state and by taxpayers, so they have an obligation to pay something back,” he says. “It's like repaying an old person who brought you up and paid for your schooling.”
Mr Tian, 25, declines to comment on such criticism. “I am not familiar with these issues. I only understand diving,” he says.
Supporters say Mr Tian's decision to negotiate his own commercial deals was a natural attempt by an athlete near the end of his sporting life to secure a financial future and prepare for a career in entertainment.
“In fact it would be very easy for Tian Liang to return to the national squad: all he has to do is make an apology and hand over the money,” says Andy Liu, the diver's agent. “But Tian Liang feels he has done nothing wrong.
“Everybody says Tian Liang must repay the nation and repay society,” Mr Liu says. “Tian Liang has won so many gold medals is that not repayment?”
The dispute is fuelling discussion about China's sports system, a relic of a socialist central planning mindset now largely abandoned.
It has been criticised for the clout it gives coaches and officials and for directing resources that could be used to widen sports participation towards a chosen few potential champions.
Some worry about its impact on the eight out of nine children sent to 1,700 special sports schools who never join the ranks of the 20,000 “top athletes” supported by the state.
Analysts say there is no chance of substantial change to the system before the 2008 Olympics, especially since it helped to win a record 32 gold medals in Athens.
But some hope for a more flexible approach to commercial activities that will help prevent disputes like that surrounding Mr Tian by boosting both athletes' incomes and state revenues.
Even those who fear local athletes are getting greedy say the Sports Administration needs to recognise that commercialisation of sport is a global reality that communist China cannot deny.
In its commentary, the People's Daily made clear that sports officials have no choice but to dive deeper into the world of sponsorship deals: “Since athletes are part of the nation's wealth, all of their value including their commercial value should be fully exploited to do otherwise amounts to allowing the loss of a kind of ‘state asset'.”
Mr Liu, who has secured Mr Tian deals representing products from noodles to electric bicycles, says that instead of banning athletes from employing agents, sports officials should co-operate with agents to help athletes maximise their commercial interests.
“I can't compare with them on training, they're the state,” he says. “But when it comes to athletes' after-sales service, market development or packaging of intangible assets, I'm better.”
“田亮事件”触动中国体育神经
今年，中国国家体育总局将跳水运动员田亮逐出国家队，这并不是因为他在泳池中表现欠佳。大约6个月前，田亮在雅典奥运会的双人跳水比赛中摘得一枚金牌。
体育总局对旗下运动员的商业活动进行控制，而田亮自行并与香港某娱乐集团签订了一份丰厚合同的违规行为，是对这种控制的公然违抗。
这是对体育总局于1996年颁布的规定的一种挑战，规定称，“现役运动员的无形资产属于国家”，并要求其缴纳商业收入的一半。
“‘田亮事件’源于运动员‘最大限度实现个人价值’的渴望与（中国体育的）规范和管理体制之间不可调和的矛盾，”作为执政党中国共产党的喉舌，《人民日报》做出上述评论。
在2008年北京举办奥运会前，跨国公司对赞助中国运动员表现出越来越浓厚的兴趣，并以此作为其品牌建立的一部分，这一紧张局面因此突显出来。
对于国家垂直领导的体育体制的支持者来说，田亮企图控制个人商业活动的行为似乎对祖国是忘恩负义，因为是国家把他培养为耀眼的国际明星。
上海体育学院徐本力教授表示，功成名就的运动员不应拒绝上缴一半的收入。
“目前，我们国家的运动员所取得的成功是国家和纳税人对他们进行巨大投资的结果，因此他们有回馈的义务，”他说，“这就如同报答一位养育并供你读书的老人。”
25岁的田亮拒绝对这种批评发表评论。“我不清楚这些问题，我只知道跳水，”他说。
支持田亮的人认为，田亮决定自己洽谈商业合约对于一个运动生涯即将结束的运动员来说十分自然。这将使他今后在经济上获得保障，并为投身娱乐事业做好准备。
“事实上，田亮要重回国家队十分容易，他只需要道歉和交钱就可以了，”田亮的经纪人刘韬说，“但田亮觉得他没做错什么。”
“人人都说田亮必须回报国家和社会，”刘先生说，“田亮赢得了这么多的金牌，这难道不是一种回报吗？”
这一争议引发了关于中国体育体制的讨论，这是现已基本摒弃的社会主义中央计划经济模式的残余。
中国体育体制遭到批评，因为它赋予教练和官员许多权力，并将有限的体育资源集中在少数几名运动员身上，因为他们有望获得冠军。这些资源原本可以让更多的人享用。
在被送往1700所运动专科学校的孩子中，九人中有八人永远无法跻身于2万名“顶尖运动员”行列，这些尖子运动员都由国家资助培养。一些人担心，这种体育体制会对这些遭淘汰的孩子造成影响。
分析人士说，在2008年奥运会前，中国的体育体制不会发生实质性的变化，特别是它在这个体制下，中国在雅典奥运会上赢得了创纪录的32枚金牌。
但是，一些人希望对商业活动能采取一种更灵活的方式。同时提高运动员和国家收入，将有助于避免类似“田亮事件”的争议。
就连那些担心运动员变得越来越贪婪的人也表示，体育总局必须意识到体育运动的商业化是一个全球现象，共产党领导的中国也无法否认这一事实。
《人民日报》在其评论中阐述，体育官员必须更深入地研究赞助合约的细节，除此之外别无选择。“由于运动员是国家财富的一部分，我们必须充分利用他们的价值，其中包括商业价值，否则等于放任‘国家资产’流失。”
刘先生帮助田亮签订了从方便面到电动自行车的一系列代言产品合约，他说，体育官员应与经纪人合作，帮助运动员最大限度提高商业利益，而不是禁止运动员聘请经纪人。
“在培养运动员方面，我无法和他们相提并论，因为他们代表的是国家，”他说，“但说到运动员的售后服务、市场开发或无形资产的包装，我更胜一筹。”
