The most sensible post i've seen. It could be a part of the gymnastics.
Which sports/events do you think should be dropped/included?
- Thread starter Pigeon_Killer
- Start date
The most sensible post i've seen. It could be a part of the gymnastics.
I was going to point this out myself!
Since when did starting in a sport mean you had to turn up with a £20K bike just to have a go?
The track stars of the Velodrome will have started out on cheap bikes, infact I know anyone can turn up and have a go on the Herne Hill Velodrome provided they meet the standard for the track, which is basically a helmet and a bike without brakes.
If somebody is good enough to start winning races, then sponsorship money and the country's own sporting body will start paying for the equipment for the athlete.
The same goes for rowing/sailing, you can join a club and use their equipment. If you have the talent and win races, it goes from there.
Horse Racing I agree is a lot like motor racing and requires a lot of money to be put into it from the outset, so its likely something that requires a more privileged background.
It's winter sports that we really struggle with in this country. Last Olympics our sporting organisation basically went bust. I also remember reading a story by Dan Wakeham who has competed in Olympic Snowboarding Half-Pipe for us. He gave up because he just couldn't afford it, even with some sponsor money, the flights and funding he needed were just too much. He said that the only people who were given proper funding were those who were deemed to possibly be likely to bring home a medal. He had to pay for his own flight to Vancouver!
I think that helps to highlight that the sporting bodies are massively responsible and they need to invest money in athletes for them to even have the opportunity. This is what leads to people from privileged backgrounds competing because they are having to put so much of their own (or family) money into it. I don't feel people should be looked down on for that, when organisations are to blame.
We know China and the USA do well because they have academies and will invest great deals of money in sport and their athletes.
I might be wrong, but I do think there is some kind of limit isn't there?
Which is why many, many stables countrywide (and pony clubs) have local competitions where you can use their horses... You only need to start spending big money when you are at the top of the competitive equestrian events as well. But no, I forgot, everyone that rides horses is rich!!! That's why they all seem to drive T reg Astras/Fiestas or old Suzukis if they want to compete nationally...
Unfortunately it has that air of "rich" about it, much like skiing (in fact skiing/snowboarding is probably significantly more expensive for most beginners/averages) so people don't bother getting into it.
You jsut go horse riding on other peoples horses to start with, not hugely expensive. It starts getting pricey when you get good, but so do many sports, it's also not out of reach for normal people. I know she'd loads of normal people who compete. Some horses are their life, so every penny goes on horses first. Others will do their normal job, then go help out the yard to get free bed and board and do lessons/iding horses when owners are away to get extra money.
![[DOD]Asprilla](/styles/overclockers/avatars/8.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
The only reason you are seeing so many medals now is because of the UK Sport Elite Development Plan which focuses on delivering the most medals for our limited resources. Rather than just giving grants to athletes we now focus on specific areas were we have expertise and if you aren't performing the you funding is cut and diverted to someone with a better chance.
Harsh on those that miss out, but it's delivering on its objective. Success brings in more money from external sources (Sky sponsoring British Cycling for instance) and then the funds can be spread further.
I wasn't implying it was out of reach. My Sister did horse riding and didn't have a horse!
[DOD]Asprilla;22501405 said:
I think thats what I said.
Which is why the athletes who aren't in medal contention positions end up having to fund themselves and getting everything they can out of sponsors. Which brings me back to the point that I think its unfair to look down on somebody just because they've had to put their own money into it, even if they are from a wealthy background.
Soldato
When you said 'blame' I assumed you were being negative.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,646
I'd get rid of any sport that is decided by a judges opinion of artistic performance.
Associate
Also Tug of War would be interesting. According to Wikipedia it was an Olympic sport from 1900 to 1920.
Soldato
Cricket 20/20 would be an effective Olympic sport and being 20/20 it would be more open for minor cricketing nations to take part like The Netherlands, Kenya, Ireland and Australia. I know some posters have concerns that there's not enough exposure of the sport worldwide but bear in cricket is a major sport played in countries that have a total population of over 1.5 billion people. Can baseball say the same?
Yeah Rio was limited to 2 new sports. No idea who sets the limit and if its the same for every game's though. I assume it can't be 2 new ones every game's or we would have loads more than we do now. But Rio is an increase to 28 sports form then 26 at London.
I was responding to a post saying if we have football then we should have cricket so that was the comparison I made - my argument is purely that cricket should be excluded, not that any of the sports you've mentioned should be included.
To expand on my argument a bit one needs to consider the facilities required; building cricket stadia is arguably more difficult (in terms of the amount of land required) than indoor venues with smaller pitches such as used by Handball, Basketball and Volleyball. For London, no problem at all, we've got plenty of world class cricket grounds. In Rio for 2016, maybe not so much. Looking at something like Handball by comparison, for London we were able to build the Copperbox and meet that requirement with the added benefit of the venue being able to be 'recycled' for community sport or whatever.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,078
downhill mountain biking instead of that wussy cross country crap 
Drop men's football, more than enough top level tournaments for it already. Drop tennis for the same reason. Don't add golf and drop beach volleyball (despite the obvious advantages). Cut down on the swimming events, either by dropping distances or dropping strokes.
Some downhill mountain biking would be nice. Maybe another archery discipline (field archery with compunds maybe?) Squash possibly (though not one I would watch). Some more multi event sports, finding triathlon, heptathlon, decathlon, omnium etc quite interesting.
Some downhill mountain biking would be nice. Maybe another archery discipline (field archery with compunds maybe?) Squash possibly (though not one I would watch). Some more multi event sports, finding triathlon, heptathlon, decathlon, omnium etc quite interesting.