backwards society wrote:
Socialist country. They probably hate her for being good at what she does.
Everyone must be equal. No one should stand out. They need to hold her down because "elite" is a bad word in their wold.
"socialist country"? Sweden is the most neoliberal country in Europe. In America you still have US postal service. In Sweden, the postal service is run by private company. That is just one example. Everything here, except the police force annd the army, is privatized.
Old Swede wrote:
backwards society wrote:
Socialist country. They probably hate her for being good at what she does.
Everyone must be equal. No one should stand out. They need to hold her down because "elite" is a bad word in their wold.
"socialist country"? Sweden is the most neoliberal country in Europe. In America you still have US postal service. In Sweden, the postal service is run by private company. That is just one example. Everything here, except the police force annd the army, is privatized.
It's not the most neoliberal country in Europe, but you are right that it's capitalist and defo not socialist, which some people seem to think. OT: SOC have for many years done this with mainly runners, often the marathon and this year also the 800. Retardation.
llort_vbo wrote:
toro wrote:
The guys could have driven to Atlanta and shared a hotel room.
They could have sent them at no cost. All they had to do was submit a form but they left them off the team.
Cool story, but I call bs. You can't drive to Atlanta from Jamaica.
MOD.., Moran of the day
If you think this is a problem with Sweden athletics you are mistaken.
This is a problem with the sport of athletics.
Why is the qualification system not the same for all athletes in the sport?
Agreed! The qualification system is all over the show. If they wanted to add integrity to local/national/continental championships, then qualification should be done per region (Euro, Asia, Americas, Oceania), following a set Q structure. To qual for your national champs you run your local champs, and so on right up to the Olympics. There would be no ambiguity and the best person on the day goes - the best person on the day wins the OG's so why not follow that through the whole qualification process.
The best racing is championship racing, and it reduces the likelihood of of an absolute disgrace of a governing body rejecting a top athlete because they are on a powertrip. This is why top three at US trials is the best system. Drama on the track (and field) - which generates interest (surprise) as well as eliminating non-sensical bureaucratic own goals as the organisation has to pick them. Dream.
That decision should really motivate Swedish runners to try and improve! They may just think it isn't worth working for or go somewhere else.
ex-runner wrote:
If you think this is a problem with Sweden athletics you are mistaken.
This is a problem with the sport of athletics.
Why is the qualification system not the same for all athletes in the sport?
It´s not the Swedish T&F athletic federation who decides which athletes that will go to the Olympics, it´s the Swedish Olympic Committe.
Old Swede wrote:
ex-runner wrote:
If you think this is a problem with Sweden athletics you are mistaken.
This is a problem with the sport of athletics.
Why is the qualification system not the same for all athletes in the sport?
It´s not the Swedish T&F athletic federation who decides which athletes that will go to the Olympics, it´s the Swedish Olympic Committe.
I don't care
Hopefully one day athletics as a sport will realise that for it's long term success it needs to distance itself from the idea that the Olympics is the pinnacle of the sport.
The World Championships need to be the pinnacle.
The Olympics can continue to be be this amateur free for all with random selection criteria depending on where you are born or who you are in bed with, if that's what the IOC wants.
Athletics needs to realise the Olympics are not good for it's success as a sport.
How many people watch football (soccer) outside of the Olympics? Or cycling? How many watch running?
Ask yourself why.
If Sweden does it like the Netherlands does it (which I find likely) then it ís the Swedish Athletic Federation who sets the tougher standards that this athlete didn't meet.
Has happened here for many years. Quite a few Olympic standards are made tougher because of... reasons. idk if they are financial or sporting or whatever, but I find it rather dumb. Just use the Olympic standards ffs.
She didn’t qualify that’s why. She ran the time outside the qualifying period (4th July) and didn’t rank on the World Ranking list. (Road to Tokyo)
Guys none of this is about money. It's not for NZ it's not for Sweden.
It's all about power, ego and an inflated sense of self-righteousness and "ownership" of people in charge of selecting these teams and funnily enough they are usually middle to advanced age white men.
Ask yourself who the people are that end up in these positions that make the decisions? A lot of former athletes themselves that had over-inflated views of how good they were - maybe some themselves with aspirations that never came to fruition. They compensate for the perceived failures of their own by coming up with the mental gymnastics to "hold back" others in the same ways they perceived themselves to have been "held back". It's this "well if I was this good and couldn't make it why should someone I don't think is even as good as I was be allowed to make it" bullsh$t mentality.
They believe they "own" or need to "protect" the concept of competing for their nation when they really don't own a f-ing a thing in this respect. Arbitrary opinions based on nothing but self-righteousness and emotion. What defines/quantifies "unlikely"? What does it really matter? What are the limits of "likelihood"/"unlikely to" and what is the watermark for go or no-go? Impossible to objectively quantify or even qualify.
Let's talk about "likelihood" of making the final in a super unpredictable and tough event like the 800m (both mens and womens) and that the likelihood of even the best making the final is not 100% (history is littered with top 8 pre-games talent/ranked athletes not making it through the rounds for a variety of reasons).
No it’s not. She didn’t qualify for selection. She ran the time outside of the qualification period and didn’t have enough points to qualify through the WR system - so she didn’t have enough good times within the qualifying period.
It’s a simple case of not being selected because you didn’t qualify.
Not unreal at all if you're not a rich country that can afford to take huge Olympic contingents to the Games, including tons of athletes who have no chance of medalling. US self-selects its Olympic teams but in a lot of other countries sports federations are much more hands-on about selecting team members, including who ultimately goes and who doesn't.
how stupid ! the only thing that'll do is help kill athletics in that country.no one will even bother training,or taking it seriously if they know theres no hope of selection.
Think About It wrote:
No it’s not. She didn’t qualify for selection. She ran the time outside of the qualification period and didn’t have enough points to qualify through the WR system - so she didn’t have enough good times within the qualifying period.
It’s a simple case of not being selected because you didn’t qualify.
This is incorrect. She qualified via world rankings. As you can clearly see on the link below. Sweden denied taking her based on their own tougher standard.
https://www.worldathletics.org/stats-zone/road-to/7132391?eventId=10229512jeff tallon wrote:
how stupid ! the only thing that'll do is help kill athletics in that country.no one will even bother training,or taking it seriously if they know theres no hope of selection.
The Olympics are over drugged, over politicized , vainglorious pursuits. who need a bunch of citizens wasting valuable life energy trying to get into them?
So what does the self proclaimed Magic coach JS think about this as Sweden's most famed coach and athletics expert
Incorrectifully wrote:
Think About It wrote:
No it’s not. She didn’t qualify for selection. She ran the time outside of the qualification period and didn’t have enough points to qualify through the WR system - so she didn’t have enough good times within the qualifying period.
It’s a simple case of not being selected because you didn’t qualify.
This is incorrect. She qualified via world rankings. As you can clearly see on the link below. Sweden denied taking her based on their own tougher standard.
https://www.worldathletics.org/stats-zone/road-to/7132391?eventId=10229512
She’s not on the list.
No Swedish runners are in the list.
Think About It wrote:
No it’s not. She didn’t qualify for selection. She ran the time outside of the qualification period and didn’t have enough points to qualify through the WR system - so she didn’t have enough good times within the qualifying period.
It’s a simple case of not being selected because you didn’t qualify.
Your handle is the most ironic part about this - "Think about it" - did you think about your post before you wrote it? Did you think nobody could simply check the facts in about 15 seconds?
She did qualify for selection. As of 1 minute ago she sits 37th in the rankings system and has a large "QUALIFIED BY WORLD RANKINGS" next to her name. That's according to the world governing body so unless you are aware of an alternate governing body whose system she didn't qualify under please let us know. What an idiot.
So, now that's clear - let's get back to the issue here. Sweden, like NZ and a host of other nations like to have "extra" qualification criteria that unlike the WA system (based on quantifiable, non-objective criteria - a timed performance) are completely based on a feeling or sentiment of an individual (or small group). Lisa Lindh ran 1.59.87 on June 1 of this year in Lucerne. She ran 4 other times between 2.00.72 and 2.01.67 - finishing no worse than 4th in all of the qualification races in her ranking score.
Getting back to the point here - you can make the argument depending on what your agenda is that based on what we have seen this year in womens 800m running that it's unlikely she will make the final. But you can just as easily make the argument of why she could and it's impossible to rule out that possibility. That is the spirit of the Olympic Games that is being lost here. The Olympic Games need the possibility of Lisa Lindh making a final in the twilight of her career. It doesn't matter if for every 1 success there are 100 failures - without it the beauty of the Olympic Games disappears (as if it hasn't slightly already given that to really have a chance of winning you need to cheat anyway).
A woman that can run 1.59 for the 800 is a) good enough to be there and b) a valuable part of ensuring an honest and competitive event. Period.
37th is Jamile Samuel?