International cross-country skiing has no choice if the sport remains relevant. Fat trailer profits have to go.

This is a comment. Comments reveal the author’s position

Top sports can never be completely fair.

If Michael Phelps and I were the same age, followed the same training regime and had the same support equipment, I wouldn’t stand a chance against him in the pool. His physical condition is very different.

In the same way, 211-centimeter Ivo Karlovic is made to serve in tennis, while Therese Johaug’s abundance of genetics has given him a huge advantage uphill.

Such things are true, but to what extent should the equipment amplify the difference in sport?

In a soccer game, one team usually doesn’t have much better boots or calfskin than the other. In cross-country skiing, the equipment factor is very important.

Norwegian lubrication trailers and a large lubrication team mean our runners can be served in seconds, compared to countries that have to turn everything around.

Are we then talking about fair competition? Or should action be taken so that cross-country skiing will become athlete against athlete, at least bothered by who is capable of what?

The issue has been aired before, but what’s interesting is the movement we’re now seeing from within the ski family.

The alarm bells are ringing so loudly that continuing as it is now, according to the largest countries, does not seem sustainable in the long term.

That’s why it’s so interesting to read the thoughts of Guri Knotten, the Norwegian ski leader who started a super exciting position in Switzerland.

He advocated drastic change. Equipment standard is a headline that in practice can mean a revolution.

Exactly how something like this could happen in such detail, neither Knotten nor anyone else could say for sure. The important thing is to work on finding the best solution.

Then we have to get rid of the mindset that equipment should be such an extra ace in the hand in the competition. It may still be a long way for Norway and other countries to give up profits, but in the long term, everyone should think again.

Of course, it should be thoroughly investigated what could work, and how we can get a fairer game. In the first example, it is important to get agreement that this is the path we must go. A common lubrication system for everyone is a possibility that has been explored. The limit on the number of skis allowed per head is another.

Knotten’s good point is that we must dare to play, dare to think new, realize that the continuity of sport must defeat the competitive advantage of a nation.

Fortunately, Pierre Mignerey’s FIS summit also seems interested in a change, and it’s positive that work is underway to investigate ski joint preparation.

If cross-country skiing loses ground any further in the big countries of central Europe, it will start to get very small again. Many are struggling, and for example Great Britain has such a bad economy that they struggle to pay coaches.

Of course, the necessary exclusion from Russia creates further problems for the sake of short-term interests, but there is a side line here.

The bottom line is that something needs to be done about the fact that gear and lubrication are racing to amplify an already big difference. Critics will surely come up with various arguments as to why standardization is so complicated in practice. But here there is a real reason to seek opportunities instead of developing limitations, even if it means reducing Norway’s competitive advantage.

Cross-country skiing has no choice, a change of track is required.