BBC Blog Network

User Profile

tarquint

Listed below are comments made by tarquint between Thursday, 14th August 2008 and Tuesday, 26th August 2008.

«Newer
Older»

London hopefuls become Village people 4:04pm on 26 Aug 2008 "It was team GB, and within that name, there are seperate sports, sponsers, targets and funding systems."

The most successful sub-team was British cycling, and we have already heard how other sports, and national teams have tried to poach the ideas and members of Brailsford and co. Perhaps we should remember then that the cycling team does not set specific medal targets, they set personal targets instead. Why? Because how can someone perform beyond their own personal limit. Does anyone honestly think Chris Hoy is trying his damndest because he thought that in a week's time, Britain might be 3rd as a nation in the medals table? Of course his efforts after the fact can be seen in that way, but in terms of the event, its nonsense. Sportsmen/women compete directly against other human beings. This is why it is quite meaningless to talk about nations competing against other nations via a medal table, and actually insidiously nationalistic. This was exactly the motive for the systematic drug programs of East Germany and CCCP...and eventually leads to cheating and/or sabotage.

Of course a debriefing needs to take place, to work out how to improve the underperforming sports, because they have received public funding. But against what criterion? My fear is that a predominant emphasis that is now emerging from this over-nationalistic attempt to be 3rd 'best' nation in 2012 is a mistake, and actually insulting to those who will take part. They can only do their best as individuals (or teams, crews etc). Of course improved support, technological and psychological (something that cycling has excelled in) can be improved, but still only to a point.

It is still August and so silly season. Lets hope those responsible for whipping up this frenzy calm down a bit soon.
London hopefuls become Village people 2:08pm on 26 Aug 2008 In defense of kapnag, I think he is trying to say he is proud of the people that were selected to represent a country, called Great Britain, but doesnt feel a citizen of a new state called Team GB.

Even if I am wrong here, I think Matt Slater should know better in criticising him by saying "Its just a name". Names are important because they have meaning, and whether he thinks that meaning has been misinterpreted or not, as someone using words in his work for the BBC, (an organisation that has incredible power to shape the meaning of words), he of all people should recognise that the term has become imposed and can not now be avoided by kapnag or anyone else simply turning off. Perhaps if the BBC can invent a filtering device on its programming, for its overusage of words, then he might have a point. (If it can, can I please ask for the word "Massive", and the phrase "In history" to be the first to be filtered from the increasingly superlative dominated field events coverage. A world record is by definition the longest or fastest..."ever"...or "in History"..of "all Time" and we as the fee paying public really don't keep needing such tautology rammed down our throats.)

On a different note, I am proud to be British, and enjoyed the feats of the individuals. I enjoyed less the mood towards the end of the Olympics, where in truth the individuals became lost...instead it seemed we only cared about Brabants and De Gayle because they kept the dreaded Aussies at bay. Hold on...that's not right.

Sure. Be proud of the achievements of the participants of 47 events who came home with medals. Be proud of the brilliant strategies and management (the one person who truly deserves a knighthood is surely Dave Brailsford), that has been made to help even more improve. But is not the current gloating in being 'better' than other nations both rather childish, and worse, just a covert form of nationalism?
Britain's cycling success - is it cricket? 7:19pm on 18 Aug 2008 Once so much funding becomes available as it has done via the lottery, results are going to be expected back (hence the targets from the politicians.) It really does show how difficult it was for British athletes pre-Athens to compete with the often already professional athletes from abroad.

However, even so, cycling was a very very smart sport to target. 1. There had been Gold precedents in Boardman and Queally. 2. Its a sport that involved technology (which we are good at). 3. Britain is a densely populated country, and so suits large scale indoor facilities in the centre of the country, and efficient use of lottery type funding. 4. It is a sport that is not possible by less well off countries (where is the Kenyan cycle team). 5, and best of all, there are lots of events in cycling where athletes can double and even triple up to bolster the national medal tally.

Britain shouldn't feel bad about this. In the past, our best sports (Rowing and Sailing) did't allow medal tallies to reflect the British talent in those sports. Had there been a 500m sprint, and a relay in rowing, Redgrave and Pinsent..would have claimed far more than 9 golds. The US and Australia (track and field and especially the disproportionate amount of golds available in swimming) have for years topped the tables in overall tallies because they targetted these.

So what sports next? Hopefully the swimming team can build a team around Adlington now. It amazes me how poorly Britain does in Judo. I know Japan are dominant, but even so...perhaps it will take another Redgrave, to spur people on here.
British girls pay price for relay mistake - but I'd have made it too 11:17pm on 14 Aug 2008 This is connected both to this post and also yesterdays discussion about the number of medals swimmers can win. Why is it that the rules allow this change over of teams from qualifying rounds to the Finals? It seems that this in particular damages the second string nations, of which Britain is one, who are not able to rest key members. Consequently, the big teams are able to put in all the best swimmers in the Finals only.

Yesterday, a lot was discussed as to whether Redgrave was a truly great Olympian with his seemingly measly 5 Golds...debatable...but one thing is certain, in Rowing, as in most true team sports, you cant chop and change as you do in Swimming (and athletics). As said yesterday at present it is physically impossible for rowers to get more than 2 medals in an Olympic meet.

Its time for the ruling bodies in Swimming to do something about this in my view. Phelps, a true great as he is, should have to swim all qualifying rounds of his relays to truly deserve a Gold for that. Relay Golds are devalued unless that happens.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

tarquint