Olympics, Italy promoted. But reforms and organisation are needed to continue winning

From our correspondent in Paris - In France better than in Tokyo. Italian sport smiles as it waves goodbye to Paris and the Eiffel Tower. We confirm ourselves in the Top10 of world sport, qualitatively improving the already record balance of the Japanese Games, which matured and then scarred in the bitter time of the pandemic. We win medals in fencing, swimming, athletics and artistic and rhythmic gymnastics, which are the pillars of Olympism. We also triumph in the fourth-place rankings, confirming the depth of our sports movement. Everything OK then? Yes of course, but also no, in the sense that the numbers have to be read in depth, especially in a complex Olympics like the one in Paris, whose sporting and geopolitical legacy will reverberate in international relations for a long time, and only in the context of Olympism.

A rich medals table, nothing to object to that of the Italian team. But certainly Russia's absence as a consequence of the invasion of Ukraine has 'liberated' a haul of 71 medals, that precisely the one won by Russian sport (here reduced to a pulpy representation) in Tokyo. Who took them? In empirical mathematical terms, the host France took the most, and South Korea (ten more medals) also significantly increased its haul compared to three years ago, entering the Top10 in place of Russia. Japan held its own (as is usually the case for those who hosted the previous Olympics) while the phenomenon of the Netherlands, which confirms itself among the world Olympic powers at both the Summer and Winter Games despite a population of just over 17 million, is hardly surprising.

In this scenario, therefore, we can say that (like others after all) we were little able to take advantage of the space left vacant by Russia in the medals table. And equally little is worth mirroring in the ranking of the wooden medals, not all of which are the result of bad luck or chance: some are real victories on which to build for the future (for example, Benedetta Pilato's much-discussed fourth place in the 100 breaststroke). And it is useless to discuss thousandths or centimetres missing: in professional sport at the highest level those make the difference and are often the consequence of work, quality, adaptability, in short, everything that leads to the conquest of an Olympic medal. It is true, however, that we have been on the Olympic podium in 15 disciplines, a sign that unlike other countries, we know how to excel a little bit everywhere, which is a great merit.

This merit is magnified by the asymmetries inherent in our sports system, which relies on amateur clubs and military groups, while drawing very little from schools and universities, due to well-known and chronic structural and cultural deficits. A limitation not so much and not only for top-level activity, but in particular for initiation into sport and basic motor education. The hope is that the reflections of the Paris medals will also illuminate this (large) dark side in our sport-education system.

Julio Velasco's women's Italvolley brought us back to the heart of an Olympic Games (and indeed to the top step of the podium) as far as major team tournaments are concerned. A presence, however, that over the course of the summer editions has become increasingly difficult and occasional (net of the wrongs suffered this time by the Settebello, and the chronic disinterest of our football). The reasons are various and well known, but two key measures are urgently needed to broaden the base from which to draw: 1) the ius soli (not only sporting, but at least that); 2) tax measures that - in the absence of regulatory changes at EU level - would make it more advantageous (or at least equal) for clubs to invest in Italian players.