The olympics are class-based

Van Hellseek

Van Hellseek

Van Hellseek

Soldato
Joined
2 Jun 2004
Posts
18,423
The majority of western olympians will be middle class, or at the very least privately educated.

Which in my opinion kind of defeats the idea of a world event.

The majority of gold medalisits are either middle class, or even complete inbred toffs (sailing etc...).
 
Van Hellseek said:
The majority of western olympians will be middle class, or at the very least privately educated.

Which in my opinion kind of defeats the idea of a world event.

The majority of gold medalisits are either middle class, or even complete inbred toffs (sailing etc...).
Click to expand...

It certainly true of the trap shooting as the guy that won gold said he first got into it at school. I mean what school teaches you clay pigeon shooting? It certainly isn't accessible for the average person.

Then again the story of Mo Farah, being a refugee from Somalia and a troublesome kid getting ino fights etc, until his PE teacher discovered he had a talent for running and developing his talent is pretty much is a fairy tale of a very poor kid becoming a runner who is now the best in the world in his discipline.

Without doubt some of the sports are certainly unaccessible to working class people but there are plenty that are.
 
There will be some events where by their very nature it is more difficult to get into them unless you have an exposure to them early - shooting, equestrianism, fencing, sailing, rowing perhaps. To an extent you can argue that the participants in those events are more likely to be determined by class.

The rest of the Olympics (i.e. most of it) make little to no demands on the participants in terms of the kit necessary to start in the sport - athletics, cycling, swimming, martial arts, gymnastics, boxing, diving etc. Those events will usually need coaching for people to go from good to exceptional but to actually get into the sports isn't hugely hard initially.

So no, I don't accept the starting contention. There's also no reason why the sports mentioned above as more difficult to start in shouldn't equally have a chance for people to show they're the best in the World at them - if you're the best in the World out of people who compete then it's that simple, it doesn't matter how many people do it.

//edit and as for making it Western Olympians but then complaining about it not being fit for a World event - huh? You'd accept then there are other nations than the Western ones competing so what if their athletes are not middle class? Do the Western Olympic Federations have to start up quotas of people who aren't middle class to compete to satisfy your ideals?

I'd also note that a number of our best performers aren't middle class by birth and would be happy to acknowledge this.
 
simulatorman said:
OP don't come back until you can actually prove to us that your four claims are true.
Click to expand...

Not trying to start anything but this article maybe where it stems from...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19109724

None of the equestrian are state educated. Understandable I suppose but the lack of funding to develop young talents within the country is atrocious.

One very simple but big game is Basketball. Football takes so much dominance that school just let kids play football, all the time. Cricket was occasional but that's it. If I wanted Basketball, I've got to do it on my break - even the extra curriculum Basketball in my secondary school was pants (Mayfield School, Portsmouth) No funding or decent equipment, we had a Maths teacher with some passion running it off his own back.

Things might have changed but if you want to develop in Basketball, you have to leave this country (what a sad affair!) either on scholarship or you have rich backings to steer you there to State side College. That's when Class comes into play.
 
Mr Jones said:
One very simple but big game is Basketball. Football takes so much dominance that school just let kids play football, all the time. Cricket was occasional but that's it. If I wanted Basketball, I've got to do it on my break - even the extra curriculum Basketball in my secondary school was pants (Mayfield School, Portsmouth) No funding or decent equipment, we had a Maths teacher with some passion running it off his own back.

Things might have changed but if you want to develop in Basketball, you have to leave this country (what a sad affair!) either on scholarship or you have rich backings to steer you there to State side College. That's when Class comes into play.
Click to expand...

My school was different. We were actively encouraged to get involved in different sports. I used to play for the school team regionally at Football, Basketball, Cricket and Rugby League.

Certain events are definiately class based but to say the to a blanket "The Olympics are classed based" for every event is not true.
 
Mr Jones said:
Not trying to start anything but this article maybe where it stems from...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19109724

None of the equestrian are state educated. Understandable I suppose but the lack of funding to develop young talents within the country is atrocious.

One very simple but big game is Basketball. Football takes so much dominance that school just let kids play football, all the time. Cricket was occasional but that's it. If I wanted Basketball, I've got to do it on my break - even the extra curriculum Basketball in my secondary school was pants (Mayfield School, Portsmouth) No funding or decent equipment, we had a Maths teacher with some passion running it off his own back.

Things might have changed but if you want to develop in Basketball, you have to leave this country (what a sad affair!) either on scholarship or you have rich backings to steer you there to State side College. That's when Class comes into play.
Click to expand...

Well of course schools are going to concentrate on the main sports people play in this country it's the same in every country...
 
DIABLO said:
Well of course schools are going to concentrate on the main sports people play in this country it's the same in every country...
Click to expand...

That's why we get a football league that reflects society, i.e. the ratio of Private school sports star : State school sports star.

What about the other sports? Only those privileged enough will get exposed to a wider variety of sports, thus bringing out more exposure to being selected and groomed to Olympic athletes.

Schools, especially state schools needs a lot of focus on minor leagues for sports. From these minor leagues, we'll get star athletes. Why does Jamaica have so many fast runners? They start in school, competitions between schools, regional, national and then internationals.

That's where we're missing a load of talent, lack of funding and no steer in grooming from within. Australia have such a great Women basketball team, they don't appear out of training in the states. They have minor leagues in school and from there, talents are scouted.

Allowing students to do only major sports IMO is poor but great for school management. The easy way out for state schools.


Simon said:
Wow -already whining
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's whining but I'm trying to bring up a debate on why there's class difference in our Olympians - Lack of funding, direction from state schools and government. The emphasis on just academic league tables neglect the sporting facilities that schools should have to nurture talents.
 
Last edited:
Mr Jones said:
Perhaps it's whining but I'm trying to bring up a debate on why there's class difference in our Olympians - Lack of funding, direction from state schools and government. The emphasis on just academic league tables neglect the sporting facilities that schools should have to nurture talents.
Click to expand...

There's a finite amount of money available to schools and Britain is thought to be doing more poorly in academic terms than before (a separate debate, in and of itself, perhaps) so if the choice is to spend money on sports facilities or improving educational standards then a decision has to be made with regard to limited funding. While I love sport I think there's probably more utility gained for more people by improving the educational standards - whether we're actually doing that is another question.
 
Mr Jones said:
Not trying to start anything but this article maybe where it stems from...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19109724

None of the equestrian are state educated. Understandable I suppose but the lack of funding to develop young talents within the country is atrocious.

One very simple but big game is Basketball. Football takes so much dominance that school just let kids play football, all the time. Cricket was occasional but that's it. If I wanted Basketball, I've got to do it on my break - even the extra curriculum Basketball in my secondary school was pants (Mayfield School, Portsmouth) No funding or decent equipment, we had a Maths teacher with some passion running it off his own back.

Things might have changed but if you want to develop in Basketball, you have to leave this country (what a sad affair!) either on scholarship or you have rich backings to steer you there to State side College. That's when Class comes into play.
Click to expand...

Yes, I couldn't agree more, the state, you know average joe paying tax, should fund every single kid to play every single sport as much as they want.

There are no petty limits on time in the day, money available, popularity of sport or actually learning things in school.... what a ridiculous country we live in.

Seriously, almost no one wants to play basketball, because you do, because a few kids do your school should dedicate a bunch of money to keep you happy?

The fact is there ARE schools that will specialise in basketball, and ones that push football but ultimately sport in this country is, and should realistically be persued outside of school. School = education, the thousands upon thousands of sports clubs are where kids should go if they are interested in sport.

What makes more sense, my local area people who like basketball get together, make teams and play with parents organising it, or school spending lots of money to compete in school leagues, which takes teachers time away from you know, teaching in school, all to accomodate a few kids.

DO you know how many schools there are that put out sports teams that are utter rubbish, because almost no one in that school is interested in said sport but its expected to put a team up for certain things.


Ultimately if a kid is interested in sports its up to the kid/parents to get involved in said sport, there are leagues for basically every sport out there, you have to go to them. This "it should all be handed to me on a platter" attitude of the uk is why so many fail in sports. The vast majority of athlete's train hours every day, work incredibly hard, will be back in training in days after winning a gold, it will be 4-8 years of daily hard work to win a gold, if your parents can't find you an athletics club, football team, basketball league to play in, its not the state or the school's fault.

Take basketball and replace it with a sport some other kid feels should have been at school, funding is FAR better spent on clubs not limited by the teacher quality in school, not limited to kids in that school, not wasted on multiple schools with kids who aren't even interested in the sport. Spend money for 5 million kids to play basketball with rubbish quality teaching but decent equipment, or spend money for 5k kids who put their heart and soul into basketball, make the effort to join a team and put proper coaches/equipment into it?

99% of the best athletes who win golds win because of their WILL TO WIN, millions of people ride horses/have horses worldwide. Its still the people who ride their horse 3 hours a day, train every day of the week from 10 years old till they win a gold at 30 who win these things.

The funding is irrelevant, the winners mentality is, shooting isn't popular or feasable in the middle of town so its farmers and "country folk" who get into it, that tends to be posher school kids, I went to state school, I live in a town, I've still been skeet shooting because I made the effort to get into it.

Putting 50million into basketball in schools won't create more than 1 or 2 extra top basketball players, because 99.9% of the basketball players who have the will to train hours a day for twenty years.... already do so, the rest are guys that might put a few hours a week into it for a few years, then give it up when it gets too tough, pumping money into those kids won't produce anything.
 
Last edited:
Mr Jones said:
Not trying to start anything but this article maybe where it stems from...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19109724

None of the equestrian are state educated. Understandable I suppose but the lack of funding to develop young talents within the country is atrocious.

One very simple but big game is Basketball. Football takes so much dominance that school just let kids play football, all the time. Cricket was occasional but that's it. If I wanted Basketball, I've got to do it on my break - even the extra curriculum Basketball in my secondary school was pants (Mayfield School, Portsmouth) No funding or decent equipment, we had a Maths teacher with some passion running it off his own back.

Things might have changed but if you want to develop in Basketball, you have to leave this country (what a sad affair!) either on scholarship or you have rich backings to steer you there to State side College. That's when Class comes into play.
Click to expand...

no, if you are genuinely talented at basketball you will get a us college scholarship. If you can't get a scholarship there would be little point of paying to go to college in the states, as you are unlikely to be good enough to play at a high level.
 
I'm not expecting the state to be funding every single sports or every single kid. I drew basketball as an example because that's a sport I did and saw a lack of within my local area - not going to bring forth an example and make it out like I know everything about it.

There are sports based schools - Yay! But if you're not in that school's catchment area, you miss out. That's a big flaw and it's also a system that is making academic education flawed - but as semi-pro-waster mentioned, it's a different issue.

I personally think that state schools should have tier system starting from secondary school. Where primary school serve it's purpose as foundation learning, with exposure to as many sports and subjects one can learn, before putting them on a primary school leaver exam on subjects (English, Maths, Science) AND practical exams on hands on subjects (Sciences, Arts, Design) and including P.E.

From there, instead of catchment, schools can focus on Sports College, Maths/Science College, Arts College - where in secondary level learning, all students still get a similar education but with each school focused on a particular sector - that's where state school sports can come in to exposing young talents to wide range of sports and then focus on specifics, thus bringing forth star talents from school levels.

At school level, they can then compete within schools and interschools e.t.c.

I might be missing a lot of nitty gritty here but doesn't that seem more logical than the current system that we have, 'Catchment area schools' at secondary level, where many talents can be scouted and nurtured?

I understand there are clubs and teams one can join, but without focus or finance from parents - Class comes into play again, to be able to financially push the kid into clubs (they can be be very costly, £30 a month for TaeKwonDo, per kid).

With state funding and focused direction, it'll allow kids of all class and background to get a chance to try and the best will stand out from there. Rather than those with the finance backing or private school nurturing be the only ones spotted for their star talent.
 
EdwardTeach said:
no, if you are genuinely talented at basketball you will get a us college scholarship. If you can't get a scholarship there would be little point of paying to go to college in the states, as you are unlikely to be good enough to play at a high level.
Click to expand...

But the question we need to ask is, why does one have to leave this country to be good at an international sport?
 
Mr Jones said:
But the question we need to ask is, why does one have to leave this country to be good at an international sport?
Click to expand...

You don't generally speaking.

Basketball is far more popular and better funded in the US than any other country, and they have the best league. Therefore it is totally logical that you might want to move there to reach the top level. You can't really expect British basketball to compete, whether in terms of funding, coaching or level of competition.
 
Van Hellseek said:
The majority of western olympians will be middle class, or at the very least privately educated...

...middle class, or even complete inbred toffs (sailing etc...).
Click to expand...
I think post this just show a lot of prejudice and suggest you are very narrow minded. 'Reverse snobbery' is pathetic.

drunkenmaster said:
sport in this country is, and should realistically be persued outside of school. School = education,
Click to expand...
Ever since I left school I've felt it's a real shame that we don't do a lot more sport at school. Not at the expense of academic study, but the actual school day should be longer and accommodate 1hr or more per day dedicated to P.E. and sport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom