BBC Home

Explore the BBC

100 comments

user rating: 5 star

BOA & UKA vs Kate Reed...

British athletics
by Ryan Bailey (U9425147) 03 September 2008
comment on the article

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/ath...

What are they thinking, this poor girl... it is with this attitude that we have problems. These people should be trusting the people they have selected to represent them, not mistrusting. It is hardly a vote of confidence for the girl. The people that are backing her are also incredibly suspicious of her. This is definietly not a recipee for success.

I understand the sentiments of the bodies, but it is giving very mixed signals. Once selected at that point.. there is no need to test your athletes, as it'd be too late anyway, otherwise you shouldnt have selected them in the first place.

Poor Kate Reed, i hope she gets a full public apology for the way she has been treated. It is terrible.

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Sep 6, 2008

Nothing to do with incident mind you.

This is all to do with a crazy person doing crazy stuff.

You would understand if you knew her. Although it's cracking good 'anti UKA' fodder for you old boys with nothing else better to do.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by tim400 (U1822727)

posted Sep 6, 2008

Then if it is nothing to do with this incident why post it up on this thread?
And why the totally uncalled for comments about "you old boys with nothing else better to do."
Get a life.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by BigGut (U1688772)

posted Sep 6, 2008

James,

You being a former olympic athlete from 30 years ago does not change the FACT that the handbook and selection criteria laid down by the BOA dn UKA states ABSOLUTELY CATEGORICALLY that athletes who are not deemed fit enough to compete by the medical staff may be required by the BOA Chef De MIssion to complete a time trial.

By ulterior motives I assume the poster means your membership of the ABAC committee and failure to get a job with UKA. As has been firmly established I have absolutely no links to any organisation that either does or wants to control the sport in this country. I am just a free thinking individual with no personal axe or personal gain to be made from posting here or anywhere else.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by tim400 (U1822727)

posted Sep 6, 2008

You have to be joking B/S/F you are recognised throughout the athletics community for representing UKA at every possible turn so stop being cute.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 7, 2008

The world according to the anti UKA mob -

Athlete makes claims about a coach = They are a nutter, fruitcake, deluded, fantasist.

Athlete makes claims against UKA = they are the new messiah and their word is fact with out question.

Here ends the lesson.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by tim400 (U1822727)

posted Sep 7, 2008

Not at all.
Here starteth the lesson.

Thats why I am suggesting there should be an open and honest inquiry into this.
I take it you are in agreement with that john.
And if not why not?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 7, 2008

Ok before I begin, let me make it perfectly clear to those who do not know of me or my post that I am not pro or anti UKA.

There are those of you reading who know me from other forums some I have fallen out with others I have a lot of respect for and are therefore not suprised with some of the comments I come out with. So let me start with comments made by flyinghurdler and then finish up with biggut.

flyingh it is quiet clear that you know a great deal regarding Kate Reed as you have mentioned in your posts. I have no doubt about almost all of what you say, but it is my opinion that there most definitely was a problem with the treatment that she recieved and the direction and ordering of Dave Collins.

For me Collins' descrepancies started before the team left the our shores. He said that only fit athletes would be competing in the games and showed baised to a couple of unfit athletes who were in his predictions to medal or make a final. Why was Kate Reed's fitness test any different to others that were made known?

Paula's was done a week before the marathon on a treadmill for 45 minutes in an air conditioned room. Tomlinson's was a few jumps into the pit 3 days before his qualifying and Reed's followed a drugs test, 2 room searches (1 of which was unsanctioned by the BOA) and in the beijing heat.

NONE of those athletes should of competed because Collins himself said so when in the UK.

Now, Biggut you and I have been going at this hammer and tong since Reed's trackside incident and throughout it all you have waved that rule book about as if it was some devine right to. The rule book works both ways, infact the rule book is for all involved within UKA and it is clear to me (and you, by your lack of posting since shown 3 days ago)that UKA do have a welfare case of it's own to answer to.

And just before Flying hurdler or biggut or anti reed or pro uka person want to personally attack me bare this in mind. I know what I know and I trust what I know to be the truth! I am only looking at this incident only. Time will come for the other stuff to come out and when it does be very sure of what you say.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 7, 2008

ffs Tim400, every time you come out with the same old rubbiish, Biggut DOES NOT represent anyone but himself, I represent no one but myslef, Neither of us are UKA representatives. It would seem that unless people are prepared to sl4g off UKA you will call them representatives of UKA. Merely pointing out that the bully boys on AD repeatedly make say that BG or I are prepresentatives of UKA does not make it true, the reason being is it's a lie. If you can't get over that fact that's your problem but please stop posting up the garbage about either BG or I being a representative of UKA, I am not and neither is Biggut no mater what the bully boys on AD think.

Just because some of the protaganists here are well known to have a personal axe to grind it doesn't mean it's ok to go making up things about people.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by tim400 (U1822727)

posted Sep 7, 2008

Spare me the rubbish B/S/F you both individually? and together represent UKA at every turn and are even referred to as the "UKA altar boys" and have been for over two years.
Now perhaps instead of trying to divert attention perhaps you could address what this thread is about.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 8, 2008

There seems to be a lot of vitriol in this discussion and a number of people who it would appear hold very entrenched views whether they are within a circle at UKA or not.

I have held off for a couple of days but will now disclose my interest in this matter. I have no connection with UKA and have never been a competitive coach or athlete.

My connection with UK athletics goes back to the day that I stood on the CGU trading floor watching Dave Moorcroft and Cees Shrauwers publicise the deal that started the UKA sponsorship deal with what was then CGU and became Norwich Union and will soon be known as Aviva in the UK.

I have handed out prizes and had my picture taken at events. I no longer work for Norwich Union but from peopole I know still there it is a much changed place. Just ask the several thousands who are to be made redundant this year.

All of the management team that signed the original deal and signed the post Athens deal with UKA have gone and the company is now run by accountants.

Who was right or who was wrong is to be honest to me somewhat immaterial but the whole saga smacks of amateurism. Money for sponsorship is tight and will only get tighter as the credit crunch goes on.

Unless UKA sorts itself out and starts to deliver I can't see Aviva or anyone else wanting to continue to bankroll UKA.

One final thought. Much of the live athletics shown on the BBC, which was the real reason CGU got involved in the first place allied to the very cheap nobody else wants UKA price they were able to negotiate, is on Sunday afternoons.

From next year in addition to the MotoGP coverage the BBC will have 18 weekends of Formula one to cover. I can see athletics getting shunted out and without lots of cheap terrestrial tv coverage is anyone else going to put anywhere near as much money in?

Just some thoughts from the outside looking in.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 100.00%
    4 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1
    0 votes

average rating:
5.00 from 4 votes