The Editor, Sir:

In the post-Beijing euphoria, people seem to be tripping over themselves with suggestions as to how to honour the outstanding performances of our Olympians. It should be obvious that as we win more medals, the matter of street-naming could become more problematic.

When Christopher Columbus sailed to the Americas/West Indies, it was a first-time achievement, and for that he is still recognised. It is ludicrous to perceive similar honour, to that bestowed upon Columbus, being bestowed upon every sailor who now accomplishes that feat. What was appropriate for pioneers is not necessarily appropriate for those who follow.

Let nothing I say be construed to mean I am opposed to honouring or compensating our athletes for their remarkable and outstanding accomplishments in Beijing. I am asking that we do not allow our emotions to sway us into absurdity.

We often talk and fail to act. Our long history of world-class performances demands that we establish Halls of Fame. This concept of a Hall of Fame has been in the air for decades, yet we do nothing other than talk about it.

It is about time that we establish a sports policy, which incorporates compensation packages, in material terms, for our people in sports. For many young people, scholarships to access education are better compensation than cash, which can be frittered away in a short time. There are some circumstances where the provision of housing, to improve living conditions and environment of the athlete requires prompt action, because, to put it kindly, the conditions are challenging.

For such athletes, a comfortable home means more than a thousand streets bearing his or her name while the home in which he or she lives is owned by someone else.

For the privileged

In earlier times, sports were largely for the privileged, those who had the means to afford participation. Over time, the professionalisation of sports has changed its principal characteristic, from an instrument of social and national recognition only to, very important, a vehicle of economic transformation, in addition to the foregoing.

If we recognise and appreciate this important change, we will act accordingly. I am strongly recommending that we forget the street and stadium-naming method of honouring our active athletes at this time. Let us deal with tangibles that will act as motivation to others that hard work is rewarded with more than 'praise'.

For the 'waggonists'/conditional supporters who are extremely generous with the praise packages, let us see them reach for their pockets to give some 'raise', which can be of tangible benefit to these deserving athletes. Let there be funding for the gymnasiums and nutrition programmes for the no-name athletes who need the help in order to make the breakthrough.

I am, etc.,

LUCIUS C. WHITE

1Tankerville Avenue, Kingston 6