Look, for example, at what is happening in cricket these days. Just yesterday the head of South Africa's United Cricket Board, Gerald Majola, said he might well consider having the SA team boycott further tours to Australia if the crowds in that country can not be prevented from hurling racist abuse at his boys.
The Australian cricket authorities have predictably thumped a couple of racism tubs and promised, a little half-heartedly, to stamp it out.
But, the question one needs to ask is whether this whole racism issue that has dogged the recent test series, is reality or part of a marketing plan?
Look at it this way. There is no doubt that when captains and coaches start slinging off at each other before matches, that's all marketing. Getting as much media coverage as possible before the game to get the attendance up. Remember who started it all - Cassius Clay as Ali was known then, shooting his mouth off at opponents and single-handedly getting a lot more people interested in his fights and consequently getting himself a heck of a lot more money.
But, back to cricket. Given that all that pre-game hype is all about marketing, then I think it is fairly safe to assume that the sledging that goes on between players on the field is also marketing in a bizarre sort of way.
Not marketing to get more people to the game but employing marketing to win matches.
Let's face it, Australia are world champions not only because they train hard, play hard and motivate themselves, but also because they use every possible ruse at their disposal to win matches. Which is what sledging is all about. Verbally abusing batsmen breaks their concentration and batsmen who can't concentrate make mistakes.
Now given that the on-field sledging is all part of a cricket teams' overall marketing strategy, it is surely not unreasonable to assume that the next place marketers of the sport will look for leverage is among spectators.
Is it entirely unreasonable to assume that a whole bunch of spectators were "employed" to give the South African fielders a hard time? To put them off their stroke ?
Perhaps the marketers never quite meant them to start hurling racial abuse but that's the danger with any rent-a-crowd situation - control is not easy.
Whether marketers of the Australian game are guilty or not of getting spectators in on their disruption marketing act, is beside the point.
The simple fact is that a lot of ordinary people who watch cricket can't help wondering where reality ends and hype starts. And the irony of all this is that there doesn't seem to be any danger of overhyping sport these days. Certainly, a lot of people still firmly believe that many one day cricket internationals are rigged to ensure the most gate money. But, they still watch the games.
Take pro wrestling as an example of the fact that there is no downside to over-marketing sport. Everyone knows they're rehearsed, rigged, pre-planned and choreographed to the finest detail. The wrestlers are all actors and mostly really bad actors. But still, in spite of this quite obviously contrived sport, the fans keep coming back for more.
Quite clearly, like cricket and pro wrestling, more and more sports are falling into the category of pure entertainment. And this is, it seems, what the masses want. And marketing is playing a bigger and bigger role to the point where in future it will not be coaches, captains and selectors who will be the kingpins but rather the marketers.
