Which sports belong in the Olympics - and which do not

Analysis - The Paris Olympic Games are almost at an end, and so the quadrennial question is again top of mind - what sports should or shouldn't be part of the Olympic Games?

In the spirit of cutting the fat and trying not to waste your time - unlike the football, basketball, tennis, golf and rugby at the Olympic Games - let's crack straight into it.

The qualifying criteria for Olympic sports is as follows:

• History and tradition
• Universality
• Popularity of the sport
• Image
• Athletes' health
• Development of the IF
• Cost

These are all good criteria and they help you to understand why certain sports have been added to the Olympic Games.

But that list misses one crucial criteria the Olympics are all about.

The Olympic Games should be the pinnacle of the sport. This is in two ways. Winning an Olympic gold medal should be the absolute pinnacle of that sport, and in the spirit of its amateur traditions, sports that are professional behemoths shouldn't really be involved.

That's why the axe should swing firmly in the direction of the massive team and professional sports.

Football is the world's largest team sport and the pinnacle is to win the World Cup, followed by the likes of the Champions League in the club game. In the men's Olympic tournament, it's basically acknowledged that there's a problem by making a bizarre rule that players must be under the age of 23.

Basketball is dominated by the NBA and the WNBA, so much so that North American teams declare themselves world champions after winning a North American club competition. Come Olympics time, many big names decide not to make themselves available, such is their focus on the NBA. The less said about 3x3 basketball the better.

Tennis and golf have their four grand slams or majors which are the peak of the sport. And like basketball, some players have sat out from the tournaments to focus on other events.

Rugby is another sport that has its pinnacle in the World Cup. Sevens may be a different version of the game, but that doesn't mean it should be there. It does have a better argument than the other sports.

Cricket and baseball are set to be added to the Los Angeles Olympics, and neither deserve to be there either. Baseball does have a decent World Cup, but again, the main focus is on Major League Baseball in North America. Cricket has a huge global following, but winning the World Cup is the pinnacle of the sport.

One of the big problems with these team sports is the fact that many of the world's best athletes in those sports opt out and don't attend. It happens during every Olympic Games, and it devalues the gold medal.

If your sport is seen as devaluing the gold medal, it shouldn't be there.

But we shouldn't stop there. We need to talk about swimming.

The best thing about the majority of Olympic sports is their simplicity.

Who is the fastest runner in the world? Who is the highest, or the longest, jumper in the world? Who is able to lift the biggest weight? Who can throw a spear, or a rock the furthest? Who can climb this wall the fastest?

Simple, right?

So why do we have a massive number of swimming events, half of which are dedicated to ways for people to swim slower than they might another way?

Does athletics also include backwards running, or a skipping race, or the wrong armed shot put, or the underarm javelin?

The swimming is great, but it should simplify and only include various distances and team events, not prescribed strokes for each event.

The medley could be an outlier, where one athlete has to master four different swimming strokes.

Road cycling and lightweight classes in rowing could also face the chopping block, but get a reprieve for now.

And while the likes of breaking and skateboarding might make you question the IOC's decision making, it's important to try things from time to time and see if they stick. Clearly, breaking will only be remembered for Raygun's performance, and probably won't ever return to the Games.

Now that the cutting is out of the way, let's add some sports into the mix.

Firstly, welcome back to tug o war.

The tug o war was at five Olympic Games from 1900 until 1920 and featured between five and eight members. Great Britain led the way with two gold medals, two silvers and a bronze.

The sport should be reintroduced with a men's and women's 10-a-side competition. Nations would find their 10 biggest units, and the world would come to a halt once every four years to watch the simplicity of the tug o war.

Another idea: I'm open to teams selecting their tug o war crew from the athletes they had picked for other sports. This year, the New Zealand men could include shotputters Tom Walsh and Jacko Gill, weightlifter David Liti, maybe even golfer Ryan Fox, for instance.

Secondly, cross country should be added to the Olympics.

The sport was at three Olympic Games, the last of which was 1924 in Paris when many athletes struggled with pollution and extreme heat. Might that ring a bell, triathletes?

A 10km cross country run over rolling, hilly terrain could be a visual spectacle and ask something different of athletes.

Imagine a cross country event in Los Angeles in 2028 that starts on Hollywood Boulevard and winds its way up the hills, past the Griffith Observatory, and finishing after racing past the Hollywood sign?

Squash should also be an Olympic sport. It is widely played, it doesn't have a huge professional base like tennis, and its Olympic inclusion would undoubtedly become the pinnacle of the sport. (This is happening in Los Angeles in 2028.)

Now to break my own rules, beach soccer should be added to the Olympics.

It is just another format of the game of football, like sevens is to rugby, but the short sharp nature of the games, the visual appeal of flying, acrobatic bicycle kicks, the wide global spread, and the largely amateur nature of the game make it a winner.

Imagine beach soccer semi-finals featuring Brazil, Tahiti, Spain and Iran, for instance, which would be entirely possible in the sport. (I know, Tahiti is France, but still)

And then some ideas we could try, but just to test them rather than necessarily making them permanent.

For instance, chess. It's growing massively around the world, and could be a fine addition to the Games.

Polo would be an incredible spectacle to add to the Games, a sport with a long tradition even if it's a little elitist.

And lastly, what about motorboating? It used to be at the Olympics, so should we bring it back?

Well, maybe not motorboating, or powerboating as we'd probably call it today, but what about motorsport? Is it time we introduce gokarting or something similar?

So there you have it, an Olympic Games that ditches many of the professional sporting mega stars in favour of the more amateur roots, while also looking to develop and change with the times.