In recent days, we've witnessed a familiar scene – the moment athletes appear on political candidate lists, social media fills with mockery, insults, and outright hate. From "209 centimeters of low point" to "renting out their ass" – language that speaks more about society than about the people it's directed at.

Herein lies the real question – what exactly offends us? That an athlete enters politics? Or that they do it from the "wrong" side?

Because, if we put emotions aside, the facts are clear: athletes in politics are neither an exception nor a Bulgarian phenomenon.

In Italy, the former head coach of the national volleyball team, Mauro Berruto, is an MP. In Poland, former captain Marcin Możdżonek is part of local government, while Andrzej Szewiński and Paweł Papke have been and are MPs. In Brazil – a country where volleyball is a religion – Leila Barros is a senator, and Ana Moser was Minister of Sport. In Peru, former national player Leyla Chihuán has been a congresswoman and vice-president of parliament.

The list goes on. No, this is not a "system error". This is the system. Even at the highest state level, there are similar examples – the President of Finland, Mauno Koivisto, was known for his active participation in volleyball and his love for the game, which he did not abandon even during his term in office.

Outside of volleyball, the examples are telling. Kyiv is governed by a world boxing champion – Vitali Klitschko. California was governed by Arnold Schwarzenegger – a bodybuilding champion who very realistically could have run for US president if he hadn't been born outside the country.

We can accept that a boxer governs a capital like Kyiv. We can accept that a bodybuilding champion governs California. We can even accept something closer – that Bulgaria was governed for years by a person who comes from sports and is a master of sport in karate. But when it comes to a volleyball player, suddenly the question becomes: "What does he understand about politics?"

Here begins the real double standard. When a "conventional" candidate is listed, it's normal. When an athlete does it – suddenly doubts, mockery, and explanations of how "it's not their place" begin.

Another important parallel. In Bulgaria, it is quite calmly accepted that a person from sports can be a minister. It is even discussed quite seriously how the first Bulgarian in the NBA took on such a post. But when it comes to volleyball – a sport that in recent years has been the most successful team sport in our country – suddenly the same logic doesn't apply.

A person who not only has a career at the highest level but also actively participates in developing young athletes, in the growth of a club, and in creating a system – suddenly "is not suitable". And again, we come to the question – is the problem with the profession, or with where the candidacy comes from?
The argument is also heard that, regardless of the party, such participation is a "disappointment" because the athlete "is renting out their fame." But if that's the case, then the question is no longer political. Then the question is one of principle – should athletes participate in public life at all? Because if the answer is "no," then the problem is not with their choice, but with them themselves. And that is no longer criticism, but a denial of their right to be part of the public process.

Here we must make an important clarification. It is entirely possible for people to have reservations about certain political figures. This is normal in a democracy. But then the question is different: where were the other parties? Why didn't they try to attract these people – with their own ideas, with their vision for sport, with their own policies? Because it is much easier to mock someone's choice than to make it your own.

We also get to the core of the problem – how we perceive expertise at all. What does a lawyer understand about a children's and youth academy? What does an economist understand about managing a sports club? What does a person who has never been in a locker room understand about high-performance sport?

The state is not composed solely of laws and budgets. It is a system of real sectors – education, healthcare, army, culture, sport. And if we want these systems to work, they must include people who know them from the inside.

The truth is simple: athletes are no more unprepared than "traditional" candidates. They are simply different. And that's exactly what is irritating. Because athletes have something that is often lacking in Bulgarian politics – a demonstrable result. Medals. Victories. Responsibility. Discipline. Work under pressure. They have given something to this country – emotion, self-confidence, national pride. And instead of being appreciated, it is often met with mockery.

Perhaps this is the real problem – not that athletes enter politics, but that 37 years later we continue to view every attempt at difference with suspicion and ridicule. This is not a problem of sport. This is a problem of society.

And another thing that is conveniently forgotten – no one is without sin. "Dirty laundry" can always be dug up for anyone. But if we go down that path, there is one question: who has the right to judge?

As it is said: "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone."

Athletes are not the problem, but rather that we have become accustomed to accepting mediocrity as the norm.