Commentary by Manuel Silvério
Independent sports analyst and consultant in regional development
(Former civil servant with international experience and long-standing dedication to public policy and sports development)
In Macau, the problem is not a lack of talent – it is a lack of continuity.
And that continuity inevitably begins at school.
It is there that most young people first come into contact with sport. It is there that vocations emerge, habits are formed and the first foundations are laid. But it is also there that, far too often, the journey comes to an end. When the school cycle finishes, regular participation in sport also ends for many.
This break is not inevitable. It is, above all, the result of a system that is insufficiently connected.
In Hong Kong, for example, school sport is structured through the Schools Sports Federation of Hong Kong, China (HKSSF), an autonomous organisation that coordinates inter-school competitions and ensures the link between the education system and the sports sector. It is a model with clear responsibilities, continuity and its own institutional framework.
Funding comes from a combination of public support, government programmes and private partnerships. It is worth noting that, although entities such as the Hong Kong Jockey Club play a significant role in the broader financing of sport, school sport itself relies above all on a stable and functional institutional structure.
This example highlights something essential: investing is not enough – organisation is what matters.
In Macau, the system remains excessively fragmented. Schools, clubs and associations often operate in parallel, with limited coordination and without a clearly defined pathway for young athletes.
There have, of course, been commendable efforts. In some disciplines, training schools have been created – both by the Sports Bureau and by clubs and associations. Football and wushu are examples. More recently, some clubs led by younger and more dynamic administrators have also begun to place greater emphasis on youth development.
Yet these cases, while positive, remain isolated.
What is missing is structure. What is missing is continuity. What is missing is consistent technical and administrative support.
Past initiatives, like the introductory sports schools run by the former Youth and Sports Department, laid the groundwork. Today, with superior resources and facilities, there is both the capacity and the need to go further.
When the associative system is unable, on its own, to ensure continuity, the role of the public sector must be clear: to establish properly structured training centres or sports schools, with defined criteria, technical supervision and integration within the overall sports system.
This is not about replacing clubs or associations, but about ensuring that no talent is lost due to a lack of structure.
In practical terms, the priority does not need to begin with a major reform. It can – and perhaps should – start with a simple and workable mechanism: identifying, at the end of each school cycle, those students who have maintained regular sports practice, and creating an effective link between them and existing clubs, associations and training structures. This requires regular coordination between education and sports authorities, basic information sharing, the definition of priority disciplines and close technical support.
Rather than creating new and heavy structures, the focus should be on building a functional process. For example, a pilot programme in selected sports, with clear selection criteria, schedules compatible with school life, referral to clubs with training capacity and annual monitoring of outcomes. How many young people move from school into the associative system? How many remain after one or two years? How many receive adequate technical support? Without such indicators, we will continue to speak of intentions, not results.
There is also a social dimension that cannot be ignored. Many families value sport but fear that continued participation may compromise academic progress. It is therefore essential that the system provides confidence, predictability and balance. Young people should not be forced to choose too early between education and sport. A mature system is precisely one that can reconcile academic demands with sports development, without improvisation and without relying solely on individual effort.
Macau does not need to reinvent everything – it needs to know how to choose, learn, adapt and build its own model.
Examples already exist. Hong Kong is a nearby reference. Portugal also offers relevant experience in linking schools, clubs and federations. The key is not to copy, but to understand what works and adapt it to the local reality.
Because the problem is not at the starting point.
The problem lies in the transition.
While many young people enter the system, only a few manage to stay – and fewer still truly progress.
It is precisely at this stage – between school and the associative system – that Macau continues to lose talent.
More important than identifying young talent is creating the conditions for them to thrive, through regular training, technical support, a competitive framework and a clear pathway.
Without this, talent appears - but disappears just as quickly.
The real question is not whether Macau possesses young talent, but whether the system is equipped to support them beyond the point of discovery. As it stands, the answer is only partially in the affirmative.
Sport is not built on isolated moments.
It is built on processes.
And those processes require three things: organisation, consistency, and vision.
If Macau wants a stronger sporting future, it must first ensure what is still missing today: continuity.
Because talent is already here.
