Why are English Athletics so bad?

[Rob W 0]

After another disapointing day in Helsinki the reporter on 5 Live sudddenly turned round to the two retired athletes who'd been commentating and who were going on about "how the system needed to change"

 

He asked them if they, as fairly succesful atheletes, intended to start training kids, becoming role models and getting their hands dirty............

 

 

WOW!!!

 

 

They were absolutely stunned "its all very difficult", "I don't have the time"

 

ie getting free trips and a salary for commentating is fine but giving something back - FORGET IT!!!!!

 

 

Made my day

 

[manc-mag 1]

Speaking personally, I'd only 'give something back' if there was a really BIG cheque on offer.

Edited August 8, 2005 by manc-mag

[Guest alex]

I think Britain were the 3rd best nation in terms of athletics medals won at the last Olympics, pretty shit eh? I would suggest Rob's cynicism when it comes to athletics is matched only by his lack of knowledge.

[sweetleftpeg 0]

But surely with the cocktail of illegal steroids our top athletes are taking we should be pissing it?

[Rob W 0]

I think Britain were the 3rd best nation in terms of athletics medals won at the last Olympics, pretty shit eh? I  would suggest Rob's cynicism when it comes to athletics is matched only by his lack of knowledge.

8686[/snapback]

 

 

Apology please

 

Athletics (track)

 

USA 16 medals

 

Russia 8

Ethiopia 8

 

Kenya 6

 

Jamaica 5

 

Nigeria 4

 

Morrocco 3

Australia 3

 

China 2

France 2

Greece 2

GB 2

Ukraine 2

Australia 2

Bahrein 2

Belarus 2

 

Algeria 1

Portugal 1

S Africa 1

Slovakia 1

Eritrea 1

Cuba 1

Dominica 1

Italy 1

Spain 1

Poland 1

Ukraine 1

Mexico 1

Poland 1

 

putting in the field medals would only push us futher down the list

 

as you say "pretty shit"

[manc-mag 1]

I think Britain were the 3rd best nation in terms of athletics medals won at the last Olympics, pretty shit eh? I  would suggest Rob's cynicism when it comes to athletics is matched only by his lack of knowledge.

8686[/snapback]

 

 

"I dont know about that, Ted. He's pretty cynical like!"

 

[Rob W 0]

[Shearergol 0]

I think Britain were the 3rd best nation in terms of athletics medals won at the last Olympics, pretty shit eh? I  would suggest Rob's cynicism when it comes to athletics is matched only by his lack of knowledge.

8686[/snapback]

 

 

Apology please

 

Athletics (track)

 

USA 16 medals

 

Russia 8

Ethiopia 8

 

Kenya 6

 

Jamaica 5

 

Nigeria 4

 

Morrocco 3

Australia 3

 

China 2

France 2

Greece 2

GB 2

Ukraine 2

Australia 2

Bahrein 2

Belarus 2

 

Algeria 1

Portugal 1

S Africa 1

Slovakia 1

Eritrea 1

Cuba 1

Dominica 1

Italy 1

Spain 1

Poland 1

Ukraine 1

Mexico 1

Poland 1

 

putting in the field medals would only push us futher down the list

 

as you say "pretty shit"

8698[/snapback]

 

 

Nope, Alex is right (he said the last olympics after all, where GBR were third in the athletics table behind USA and Russia.

[Rob W 0]

That's not what he said

 

"in terms of athletics medals won" was what he said and the numbers are as above...................

 

we came higher in the medal table because of Holmes 2 golds because a single gold outranks 99 silvers

 

Still a grim performance whichever way you look at it

[Rob W 0]

PS You smart ases know so much about athletics that you missed the fact I made a mistake in the table... GB got 3 golds (and a total of 3 athletics medals) of course - puts us level with Morroco and the Ausies

 

 

Goes of in triumphal mood, whistling......................

[Shearergol 0]

PS You smart ases know so much about athletics that you missed the fact I made a mistake in the table... GB got 3 golds (and a total of 3 athletics medals) of course - puts us level with Morroco and the Ausies

 

 

Goes of in triumphal mood, whistling......................

8709[/snapback]

 

 

I admit I know nothing about athletics, as I pay very little interest in it. However, according to the official medals table for the Olympics 2004, we're third.

 

That'll do me

[Guest alex]

PS You smart ases know so much about athletics that you missed the fact I made a mistake in the table... GB got 3 golds (and a total of 3 athletics medals) of course - puts us level with Morroco and the Ausies

 

 

Goes of in triumphal mood, whistling......................

8709[/snapback]

No, I just wasn't around to point out your mistake Rob. I was going off the notion that gold medals count for more than anything else, this is the officially recognised method, although I concede I perhaps should have worded it differently (3rd in the overall medal table ok by you Rob?). Incidentally we won a bronze as well as the three golds so that would put us joint 8th on rank by total medals (ahead of Australia and Morocco) so that's you incorrect on two counts. If you're going to be so smug, try being correct too

[manc-mag 1]

 

"Unlike Paula Radcliffe, this one has the potential to run and run!"

[Guest alex]

 

"Unlike Paula Radcliffe, this one has the potential to run and run!"

8728[/snapback]

Why? I'm right

[Rob W 0]

If you agree that British athletics is a basket case only kept out of first place in the World Embarrasement League by Tennis then indeed, sir, you are right

[Guest alex]

If you agree that British athletics is a basket case only kept out of first place in the World Embarrasement League by Tennis then indeed, sir,  you are right

8791[/snapback]

I notice you haven't commented on the facts presented above Rob, perhaps because you were incorrect, twice

[sweetleftpeg 0]

Look, we're still better than Bahrein so leave it.

 

I'd also like to point out that Italy, Spain and Portugal only got 1 track Gold each. So there are bigger and just as developed countries as us who are struggling more.

[Rob W 0]

If you agree that British athletics is a basket case only kept out of first place in the World Embarrasement League by Tennis then indeed, sir,  you are right

8791[/snapback]

I notice you haven't commented on the facts presented above Rob, perhaps because you were incorrect, twice

8794[/snapback]

 

 

The bronze was for Heptatholon which is (partly) Field sports and theerfore not in my list

[Rob W 0]

From the Beeb

 

Swimming took a team of 26 to Athens and reached 14 finals, five more than Sydney.

 

Performance director Bill Sweetenham predicted two medals, and that's exactly what the team got.

 

 

 

But the cost in lottery funding per medal - £7.23m - will be considered deeply disappointing by those with their hands on the purse strings.

 

Athletics, too, managed just four medals from 58 competitors. And two of those came from one woman.

 

GB CYCLING: SUCCESS

Chris Hoy

Four-year funding: £15.27m

Athens medals: 2 gold, 1 silver, 1 bronze

Cost per medal: £3.82m

Clegg fired the first warning shots before the closing ceremony in Athens had even begun.

 

"There were far too many athletes not getting through the first rounds and being eliminated in early heats," he said.  "Outside (Holmes and the relay) and Kelly Sotherton's bronze, it's been a mixed performance by the track and field team. That's something I'm going to have to sit down with UK Athletics and do a thorough analysis of."

 

As in Sydney, the big-hitting sports for Britain were sailing, rowing and cycling.

 

Between them they accounted for 13 of GB's 30 medals, very similar to the 12 of 28 four years ago.

 

All three have been praised by UK Sport's interim chair, Sue Campbell, as the perfect models of how sports should be run.

 

 

FAILURE: HOCKEY

Four-year funding: £10.5m

Athens medals: none

Cost per medal: n/a

 

Campbell wants each sport to have lean, accountable performance programmes that consistently produce world-class talent.

 

Cycling, after the work done by Peter Keen before Sydney and with its impressive medal tally from the last two Olympics, fits the bill perfectly.

 

British hockey does not. Despite an outlay of £10.5m over the last four years, the GB men's team finished ninth in Athens. The women's team did not make it there at all.

 

 

 

 

and nothing has changed...............................

 

 

[Guest alex]

If you agree that British athletics is a basket case only kept out of first place in the World Embarrasement League by Tennis then indeed, sir,  you are right

8791[/snapback]

I notice you haven't commented on the facts presented above Rob, perhaps because you were incorrect, twice

8794[/snapback]

 

 

The bronze was for Heptatholon which is (partly) Field sports and theerfore not in my list

8813[/snapback]

Yes, but both track and field events count as Athletics Rob, not making your own contrived list doesn't really make one iota of difference to the facts does it?

[Rob W 0]

It would have pushed us even further down using your criteria of "medals awarded" my son...............

[Guest alex]

It would have pushed us even further down using your criteria of "medals awarded" my son...............

8825[/snapback]

Rob, I explained that I worded that incorrectly, I meant 3rd in the medals table. But you got me on that technicality, well done. That doesn't really alter the fact you were incorrect in asserting that the English are so bad at athletics in my view which was your original point I assume. On top of that, your argument is full of inaccuracies and contrivances (i.e. not counting field events). Perhaps, I wouldn't have been so quick to point these out if you weren't so smug and patronising, Gramps.....

Edited August 8, 2005 by alex

[Rob W 0]

From the beeb

 

Quote

 

Will the golden glow soon fade?

 

Britain took a squad of 58 to Athens. But only 18 of those athletes reached the finals of their events, and only six produced personal bests when it mattered most. Holmes apart, the only individual medal won by the remaining 57 was Kelly Sotherton's bronze in the heptathlon.

 

The comparison with some smaller nations is not a happy one.

 

Sweden, for example, had an athletics squad of just 16 - but produced three gold medals, for Carolina Kluft, Stefan Holm and Christian Olsson.

 

The British men's sprint relay gold was a wonderful surprise on the last day of competition in the Olympic Stadium. But it also masks a worrying trend within the male part of the British team. In the nine individual track finals, Britain had just one male representative - Michael East in the 1500m.

 

For the first time since 1976, there was not a single Briton in the final of the 100m. None of the relay team could make the final of the 200m either.

 

Watch the women

 

The British men have historically out-performed their female counterparts.

 

Using the traditional scoring system (three for gold, two for silver, one for bronze) the men out-scored the women 9-1 in Atlanta and 7-5 in Sydney.

 

In Athens, the women took over. The score was 7-3 in their favour, and that was with potential triple jump gold medallist Ashia Hansen missing injured and Paula Radcliffe failing to win the medal we had all expected.

 

Of those British athletes who exceeded expectations, almost all were women - Holmes, Sotherton, Abi Oyepitan and Jade Johnson. Of those who failed to perform to the level expected, most, Paula excepted, were male - Phillips Idowu, the sprinters in the individual 100m and 200m and the 400m men.

 

Not that the long-term prognosis looks great for either gender.

 

At this summer's World Junior Championships in Grossetto, Britain failed to win a single medal for the first time since 1972. Go further back in the development process to this year's English School Championships, traditionally the first sighting of new talent, and you find a record low number of entries, with some events gong straight to finals.

 

The pool of fit, athletically-gifted children in Britain from which future Olympic champions might come is shrinking at an alarming rate. 70% of all children stop all physical exercise when they leave school.

 

Among girls, the problem is even worse - according to recent government figures, they are one-third more likely than boys to give up physical activity and twice as likely to become obese. Athletics, like many other sports, is also paying the price for the absolute dominance of football in 21st century British life. Football offers glamour, prestige and wealth that athletics cannot offer.

 

While athletics clubs up and down the country struggle to fill teams for league fixtures, football has more than 40,000 clubs at recreational level in England alone.

 

Outgoing UK Athletics performance director Max Jones admits: "We have got to try to get our act together over the next four years on the development side of things."

 

The recent Foster Review into British athletics has recommended investment into schools and grassroots, reform of the competition structure and streamlining of the sport's administration. Jack Buckner, former European 5,000m champion, has been appointed to implement the changes.

 

 

Unquote

 

Thats what I mean - unrealistic ambitions, general underperformance and always hyped up as if they are going to do something and COMPETE

 

I'm NOT smug - I'm bloody furious about it and the wasters who are taking the grants and not giving value for money

 

And I'm not patronising anyone - but when I'm accused of knowing nothing when all the stats show how badly we do compared with (e.g) SWEDEN FFS or Ethiopia (3 golds, 1 silver 2 bronze) or Jamaica (2 golds, 1 silver 2 bronzes) then I do get a bit narked..................

[sweetleftpeg 0]

Come on Alex, back up your argument with a few quotes from Skynews, that'll have him on the ropes.

[Guest alex]

From the beeb...fucking hell, that was unexpected