Some countries achieve international success building specialised sports facilities for top athletes to train instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use Positive or negative

The popularity for governments to build professional training centres for elite sports people rather than widely use by general public has become a great debate. In my opinion, this approach tends to be a positive, although the opposite side needed to closely consider.

The country’s top sports players are more likely to honour their country with the facilities and equipment comply with these specialised training centres. Different kinds of equipment and devices allocated for monitoring the health status of athletes, such as muscle strength, blood pressure and diets. Trainers are able to schedule the training sessions in terms of criteria, by doing this; top players are able to maintain their performance in the field. As a result, it is highly possible for them to win medals from the competition and improve their national publicity. Additionally, younger generations could be inspired by this and devote themselves into the sports industry, and therefore, a country’s sports industry would boom significantly.

On the other hand, funding the professional training arenas only could pose an adverse impact on the public sector. General people would have limited assigned areas for participate sports, particularly; those who come from less well-off families or those who do not tend to join the gym. This means they have to use those seldom and aging public facilities, which could not cater the needs of all. Consequently, local residents could not participate exercises frequently but to stay at home, which results in an inactive lifestyle that causes negative effects to their health.

In conclusion, I believe that funding of the sports industry is crucial to the development of a country, despite the fact that such development will be carried out at the expense of partial public health.