David Owen

I am told that Giorgia Meloni, the Italian Prime Minister, is expected soon to decide whether athletes from Russia and Belarus are to be allowed to take part in this year’s International Fencing Federation (FIE) Fencing World Championships.

These are scheduled to take place in Milan, the northern Italian city that will also co-host the next Winter Olympics and Paralympics, between July 22 and 30.

The FIE has already barred a number of top Russian fencers from the event, citing International Olympic Committee (IOC) recommendations as its reasoning.

Whether or not this intelligence regarding Meloni’s ruling turns out to be accurate, it strikes me that in a perverse way, Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s aggression has done something to help minority sports such as fencing as they struggle on in a sports world increasingly dominated by football and computer games.

Not that I think anyone should be thankful for Putin’s wretched little war in Ukraine.

But the anguished debate that has followed on whether Russia should, as a consequence, be frozen out of international sport has made the unfashionable sports that huddle for warmth beside the five-ring Olympic brazier relevant again.

Under normal circumstances, mainstream media interest in a statement by the political leader of the country hosting a minority sport’s World Championship would be extremely limited.

Meloni’s statement, when it comes, stands a chance of making it into national news bulletins.

A decision by the Italian Government on whether to allow competitors from Russia and Belarus to compete at this year's World Fencing Championships in Milan could bring unexpected publicity to the event  ©YouTube
A decision by the Italian Government on whether to allow competitors from Russia and Belarus to compete at this year's World Fencing Championships in Milan could bring unexpected publicity to the event  ©YouTube

It scarcely seems possible now, but 50 years ago, the head honcho of the International Sports Federations, Thomi Keller, wielded a bigger stick in international sports affairs than the then IOC President, Lord Killanin.

Then sport got rich and Killanin’s successor, Juan Antonio Samaranch, brilliantly - and ruthlessly - harnessed the new cash geysers so as to bolster the IOC’s bank balance, and therefore its power over the international sports ecosystem.

The body that once gave Keller the bulk of his influence has now vanished in a puff of smoke; meanwhile the smaller Olympic International Federations are heavily dependent on their Olympic Games payments, handing the IOC yet more potential leverage over their affairs.

To give an idea of how significant such Olympic payments are in the financial affairs of smaller Summer Federations, I took a look at the 2022 audited accounts of the World Archery Federation, which the body was kind enough to send me recently.

These show, broadly speaking, that in both 2021 and 2022, World Archery generated around CHF7 million (£6.3 million/$7.8 million/€7.2 million) of income, of which about CHF4 million (£3.6 million/$4.4 million/€4.1 million), in both years, is classified as "Olympics Revenue".

I make that a ratio of about 57 per cent – and there are other sports which are proportionately more dependent on their Olympic money than archery.

I do not wish to overstate the potential benefits of this new-found relevance to the less commercially successful Olympic sports.

It comes, after all, at enormous cost - first and foremost in human lives.

Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine has had many consequences for world sport ©Getty Images
Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine has had many consequences for world sport ©Getty Images

In purely sports terms, the Russian invasion and its aftermath has sown division among individuals and organisations, just as in other spheres.

It has also exposed the concept of autonomy for international sports decision-makers as both a) not necessarily desirable, and b) a bit of a pipedream.

(And, yes, I am aware what last week’s Group of Seven (G7) statement said.)

Nor does this new-found relevance confer direct commercial benefits.

I do think, however, that it hands International Federation marketing personnel a useful card to play in talks with prospective new sponsors and media partners.

I mean, if Putin is so desperate for Russian athletes to secure entry to these competitions, they must have some value, right, even if they are not the Premier League or the Champions League?

The other thing one can predict with confidence about the Italian decision when it does come is that it will not please everyone; indeed, it might please almost no-one.

If Meloni takes a tough line and keeps Russians and Belarusians out, then one imagines Ukraine would be satisfied and Russia outraged.

But if she allows some to compete as neutrals, it may spark anger from Ukraine and its staunchest supporters, without coming close to satisfying Russia.

As far as the sport of fencing is concerned, well, at least more of us than usual may be paying attention.