Some people believe that international sport creates goodwill between the nations and that if countries play games together they will learn to live together.
Others say that the opposite is true: that international contests encourage false national pride and lead to misunderstanding and hatred. There is probably some truth in both arguments, but in recent years the Olympic Games have done little to support the view that sports encourages international brotherhood.
Not only was there the tragic incident involving the murder of athletes, but the Games were also ruined by lesser incidents caused principally by minor national contests.
One country received its second-place medals with visible indignation after the hockey (曲棍球) final. There had been noisy scenes at the end of the hockey match, the losers objecting to the final decisions.
They were convinced that one of their goals should not have been disallowed and that their opponents』 victory was unfair. Their manager was ina rage when he said: 「This wasn’t hockey.
Hockey and the International Hockey Federation are finished.」 The president of the Federation said later that such behavior could result in the suspension of the team for at least three years.
The American basketball team announced that they would not yield first place to Russia, after a disputable end to their contest.
The game had ended in disturbance. It was thought at first that the United States had won, by a single point, but it was announced that there were three seconds still to play. A Russian player then threw the ball from one end of the court to the other, and another player popped it into the basket.
It was the first time the USA had ever lost an Olympic basketball match. An appeal jury debated the matter for four and a half hours before announcing that the result would stand. The American players then voted not to receive the silver medals.
Incidents of this kind will continue as long as sport is played competitively rather than for the love of the game. The suggestion that athletes should compete as individuals, or in non-national teams, might be too much to hope for. But in the present organization of the Olympics there is far too much that encourages aggressive patriotism.
[分析] 本題考核知識點：對文中細節的理解。
解此題需要正確理解第一段。本段中作者首先通過some people believe和 others say that擺出了兩種對立的觀點。然後才引出了自己的觀點，接著用事實進一步證明自己的觀點。所以，本題的正確選項應該來自於本段的第三、四句。第三句指出：近來的奧運會幾乎無法支持「運動能夠促進國家之間的兄弟情誼」這一觀點。[C]是該句的另一種表達，所以，為正確選項。brotherhood即指friendship。
[A]、 [B]、[D] 來源於第一段第一、二句，並非作者的觀點，而是some people 和others 的觀點。
[分析] 本題考核知識點：根據上下文理解文中人物話語的意思。
理解此句的關鍵是對「are finished」 的正確理解。其在文中的意思為 「被毀了，完蛋了」。 「This wasn’t hockey」 也說明，該經理人認為這場比賽已經不能稱其為真正的曲棍球比賽，不公正的決定已經毀了曲棍球。另外，句子的結構說明：曲棍球和國際曲棍球聯盟在are finished這一點上是完全相同的。選項中只有[B]把二者放在了並列的位置。所以，[B]為正確選項。
該經理人的話語中並沒有提及international games，和no more hockey matches，所以，排除[A] 、[C]。根據上面對句子結構的分析，若[D]正確，則 hockey should be dissolved也應該正確。但此舉顯然不合邏輯。所以，排除[D]。
[分析]本題考核知識點：寫作目的題。
理解文中事例的寫作目的要看作者的觀點。最後一段中指出，作者認為目前奧運會的組織方式過多地鼓勵了愛國主義情緒，而這也恰恰是造成國際體育賽事中麻煩不斷的根源。[A]選項符合作者的觀點。另外，也可以從事件本身細節中找線索。描寫本事件的第三段第一句指出：結果出來之後，美國籃球隊表示他們不會向俄國隊服輸。第五句指出：這是第一次「美國」在奧運會籃球賽中輸球。本段最後一句指出：隊員投票的結果是拒絕接受銀牌。這些細節都表明：隊員過分看重比賽的勝負並非源於個人原因，而是把籃球隊看作了國家的代表。所以，無論從作者觀點來看，還是從事件細節分析，[A]都是正確選項。
[B]的錯誤在於prolong一詞的使用：文中並沒有說明是裁判宣布延長比賽，還是真的只剩三分鐘。[C]、[D]的錯誤在於：文中對裁判委員會的決定和美國籃球隊的做法只是進行客觀描述，並沒有進行評論。
認識兩個例子在文中的作用需要理解文章主旨。由本文的第一、第四段可知，作者的觀點是：比賽中所表現出的競爭性不利於國際友誼的形成。這也正是第二、三段舉的兩個例子所要說明的。所以，[C]為正確選項。
[A]的錯誤在於偏離文章內容。文中並沒有通過討論運動員的心理，或分析事件形成的具體過程，以說明虛假的民族自尊心如何導致國際比賽中出現不良事件。相反，本文從不良事件觸發，對產生事件的原因進行分析。[B]明顯與文中內容相反。作者舉例想要說明的是「競爭性」，而不是「不公平的決定」。排除[D]。
另外需要指出的是，28題和29題之間存在很強的關聯性，這會在一定程度上影響試題的效度。今年的考題中已經儘量避免了這種情況。
[分析] 本題考核知識點：最後一段理解推理題。
文章最後一句指出，作者認為，目前奧運會的組織方式過多地鼓勵了進攻性的愛國主義（從而導致比賽中經常出現不良事件）。由此可以推出：（為了減少此類事件的發生），必須對其進行改進。[A]為正確選項。
最後一段倒數第二句…might be too much to hope for說明作者認為要求運動員以個人名義參加比賽不太現實。所以，[B]不正確。 [C]和原文內容相反。文章最後一段第一句說明：「比賽的目的是出於競爭而不是出於對運動的熱愛」是造成體育比賽中不良事件的根源，所以，作者對[C]持否定態度。[D]的錯誤在於其沒有意識到：國際比賽本身是好的，造成國家之間誤解的原因是國際比賽的組織方式存在問題。