It is beyond any doubt that hosting multinational sports, such as the Olympic, bring lots of enthusiasm for the organising country. While some individuals consider that organisation of such events has advantages associated with it, others claim that it is a mere wastage of money. This essay will discuss both sides of the argument in depth. I personally go with the former view.
To commence with, the advocates opine that it will bring benefits to the host nation. Because when some tournaments are organised at the global level, tremendous participants from all over the world gather at a single place and mingle with each other which gives them ample opportunities to exchange their culture, and also they learn to co-operate. For instance, in the Olympic games which are held after every four years innumerable sports-persons take part in different sports activities, which continue for months. Thus international sports are an excellent way of spreading culture to various parts of the globe, and hence these should be held to promote the feeling of fraternity and integrity among the nations.
On the other hand, the opponents argue that it would waste an exorbitant amount of the money. Since infrastructure of the holding country has to be improved in order to welcome the participants, and furthermore, it represents the image of the hosting country, therefore it becomes quite essential to invest wealth in the improvement of the facilities. For example, when Commonwealth games are hosted by India, large number of roads and bridges were built to please the tourists. To elucidate, although I certainly agree that costs involve in the establishment of a good reputation is extremely huge, it will be overall beneficial.
To conclude, despite having different opinions on the issue of holding global games. Some people think that it would result in positive outcomes, whereas others strongly oppose this and regard it as a waste. I think that an investment of lump some money is nothing in front of a worldwide reputation.
It is beyond any doubt that hosting multinational sports, such as the Olympic, bring lots of enthusiasm for the
organising
country. While
some
individuals consider that
organisation
of such
events
has advantages associated with it, others claim that it is a mere wastage of money. This essay will discuss both sides of the argument in depth. I
personally
go with
the former view.
To commence with, the advocates opine that it will bring benefits to the host nation.
Because
when
some
tournaments are
organised
at the global level, tremendous participants from all over the world gather at a single place and mingle with each
other
which gives them ample opportunities to exchange their culture, and
also
they learn to co-operate.
For instance
, in the
Olympic games
which
are held
after every four years innumerable sports-persons
take part
in
different
sports activities, which continue for months.
Thus
international sports are an excellent way of spreading culture to various parts of the globe, and
hence
these should
be held
to promote the feeling of fraternity and integrity among the nations.
On the
other
hand, the opponents argue that it would waste an exorbitant amount of the money. Since infrastructure of the holding country
has to
be
improved
in order to welcome the participants, and
furthermore
, it represents the image of the hosting country,
therefore
it becomes quite essential to invest wealth in the improvement of the facilities.
For example
, when Commonwealth games
are hosted
by India, large number of roads and bridges
were built
to
please
the tourists. To elucidate, although I
certainly
agree
that costs involve in the establishment of a
good
reputation is
extremely
huge, it will be
overall
beneficial.
To conclude
, despite having
different
opinions on the issue of holding global games.
Some
people
think
that it would result in
positive
outcomes, whereas others
strongly
oppose this and regard it as a waste. I
think
that an investment of lump
some
money is nothing in front of a worldwide reputation.