The question wasn't put to Lord Coe. Some of us might not agree with him about that.
Don’t sell yourself that short. You’re not that dumb despite the evidence of this thread.
So I am obliged to agree with Lord Coe? Does Gault's question require that?
Like most in this thread, your only concern is to attack anyone who suggests it was a fair question, because it doesn't reflect your own views. The mob mentality prevails here.
Her defensiveness was an insight. I doubt a clean athlete would have had a problem acknowledging she was close to a doped record.
It doesn't matter what Jackson thinks of the WR. What changes if she thinks it's not clean? No one is talking seriously about expunging Flo Jo's records. All Jackson knows if what time she needs to run to break it.
As she said "the world record is the world record". It's on the books, like it or not and asking her about it serves no purpose except to obtain a sound bite.
If it doesn't matter what Jackson thinks of the world record then the record itself doesn't matter either and nor does Jackson's performance. I guess nothing matters then. You do follow sports, I assume?
All you guys attacking Gault are the people who whine how T & F journalists never ask the hard questions. As soon as someone forces athletes to tackle a difficult topic, you run to their defense and reinforce this idea that athletes can just play being offended when they are asked something real.
Sure, the question would have been better if JG was simply more direct, but if we go all fanboy on our athletes, all we'll get is a bunch of superficial questions and answers. I think the question was interesting and I would like to know how SJ actually feels about the record.
Spare me. There’s nothing “tough” about bum rushing an athlete immediately after she won a race and asking her a poorly worded question in bad taste.
No, it’s just sh*tty journalism
It's in "bad taste" to point out what any informed follower of the sport believes, that the only time ahead of Jackson's performance is a likely doped record? I suppose it's in bad taste to say it here, as well. In fact anything some fans don't like must be in "bad taste".
For those here who claim Gault's question was in "bad taste" or "racist" it could have been phrased as - "Lord Coe would like to see you expunge what he regards as a dubious record from the books. What do you think of that?" The question reflects the same point made by Gault. So that makes Coe another "racist" or in "bad taste"? I don't see anyone attacking him for making that point.
It doesn't matter what Jackson thinks of the WR. What changes if she thinks it's not clean? No one is talking seriously about expunging Flo Jo's records. All Jackson knows if what time she needs to run to break it.
As she said "the world record is the world record". It's on the books, like it or not and asking her about it serves no purpose except to obtain a sound bite.
If it doesn't matter what Jackson thinks of the world record then the record itself doesn't matter either and nor does Jackson's performance. I guess nothing matters then. You do follow sports, I assume?
This makes no sense. Do you think Jackson wants to break the WR only because she does not think it's clean? She wants to break it because it's the WR - clean or dirty. There is only one WR in the women's 200 that matters and it's 21.34. "The WR is the WR".
If it doesn't matter what Jackson thinks of the world record then the record itself doesn't matter either and nor does Jackson's performance. I guess nothing matters then. You do follow sports, I assume?
This makes no sense. Do you think Jackson wants to break the WR only because she does not think it's clean? She wants to break it because it's the WR - clean or dirty. There is only one WR in the women's 200 that matters and it's 21.34. "The WR is the WR".
It is surely relevant, that like the 800m record (and the 100m mark), it is widely regarded as a doped mark. That is why they have lasted so long. It is also why they lack credibility and Coe among others wants to see them surpassed.
This makes no sense. Do you think Jackson wants to break the WR only because she does not think it's clean? She wants to break it because it's the WR - clean or dirty. There is only one WR in the women's 200 that matters and it's 21.34. "The WR is the WR".
It is surely relevant, that like the 800m record (and the 100m mark), it is widely regarded as a doped mark. That is why they have lasted so long. It is also why they lack credibility and Coe among others wants to see them surpassed.
Sure, that's all relevant. But that's not what this discussion was about.
All you guys attacking Gault are the people who whine how T & F journalists never ask the hard questions. As soon as someone forces athletes to tackle a difficult topic, you run to their defense and reinforce this idea that athletes can just play being offended when they are asked something real.
Sure, the question would have been better if JG was simply more direct, but if we go all fanboy on our athletes, all we'll get is a bunch of superficial questions and answers. I think the question was interesting and I would like to know how SJ actually feels about the record.
Spare me. There’s nothing “tough” about bum rushing an athlete immediately after she won a race and asking her a poorly worded question in bad taste.
No, it’s just sh*tty journalism
Oh, please. It’s a pretty common notion that Flo Jo’s record is dirty. In closed circles most people talk about it openly. But it’s all the sudden bad taste when you say what everyone is thinking. Jackson’s a big girl and can handle the question without you rushing to her defense behind your keyboard with an anonymous username.
Spare me. There’s nothing “tough” about bum rushing an athlete immediately after she won a race and asking her a poorly worded question in bad taste.
No, it’s just sh*tty journalism
Oh, please. It’s a pretty common notion that Flo Jo’s record is dirty. In closed circles most people talk about it openly. But it’s all the sudden bad taste when you say what everyone is thinking. Jackson’s a big girl and can handle the question without you rushing to her defense behind your keyboard with an anonymous username.
Careful. You speak heresy here - even though you're right. The Letsrun "virtue-signallers" have formed a regiment here.
The question was valid regardless of how it might be answered. That is the point. Hence Lord Coe could form a different view on the subject it raised from me, or anyone else. But you need a minimum level of intelligence to understand that. Sadly, that is something you and most of the other posters here lack.
Funny coming from you, a human with the intelligence of a bowl of grits.
I once worked as a journalist for the BBC. I frequently interviewed public figures, including prime ministers. I can say that from a professional point of view that there was nothing unfair or unprofessional about Gault's question. The objection to it here merely reflects a partiality from some fans, who have read into it things that arent there, and would prefer their favorite athletes are not faced with possibly awkward truths - as they themselves prefer not to face. A professional interviewer is not dictated by the feelings and prejudices of members of the public. If that were so, they would ask nothing but questions that could offend no one, of the equivalent of discussing the weather. I guess that would suit those with the "intelligence of a bowl of grits".