Fir the record, many European (and some Asian) countries have such policies or used to have them.
What is completely missing from the discussion is funding. Someone has to pay the bill for an athlete to realize their dream. Why would that dream have an inherent right to be realized over those of other people with talent not in sports within a society? You can't expect the whole society per se to have the (admittedly beautiful) idea of the Olympics as a priority.
Now, my understanding is that the British NOC does not receive direct taxpayer money, they have to raise the money with events and findraising independently? Can someone confirm? So at least no responsibility to the taxpayer here. Other countries' NOC do use taxpayer money to send athletes (I think Sweden does, but not sure).
I'm not saying the UK selection is justified, I am merely pointing out that the outcry here is very one-sided and i would like to know who really foots the bill or if the NOC mismanaged funds before judging this call. Did the athletes get "screwed" or did their Olympic trip not get priority over some other legitimate use of the funds in society? I don't know but this should at least be in this conversation.
The Olympics are in Paris, a short train ride away from the UK. Yes it’s bad as a sport if athletes need to pay their own way but they should at least have the opportunity too.
The UK is a failed state
Lol. paying their own way…
If you are good enough to be qualified to run at the Olympics. You have “paid your own way” a lot. To go to much smaller meets. I think you would be ok to “pay your own way” to Paris. Less than the cost of a pair of shoes…
The Olympics are in Paris, a short train ride away from the UK. Yes it’s bad as a sport if athletes need to pay their own way but they should at least have the opportunity too.
The UK is a failed state
Lol. paying their own way…
If you are good enough to be qualified to run at the Olympics. You have “paid your own way” a lot. To go to much smaller meets. I think you would be ok to “pay your own way” to Paris. Less than the cost of a pair of shoes…
lol
Let’s look at Seddon (for example).
On April 5th, he was in Paris for a road race (I’m sure he would be ok to go there again for the Olympics)
On April 18th, he ran at Mt Sac relays (8 times zones away)
On May 17th, he ran at Drake Stadium in Los Angeles. Stayed in the US for one month?
On June 8th, he was in Rome.
On June 18th, he was in Finland.
On June 22nd, he was in Austria
Then on June 30th, he was racing the trials in Manchester, UK
He was doing all this travel to try to qualify. Cost to go to the Olympics is the issue?????????????
This suggests that the Olympic spirit is something other than gathering the best in the world in one place.yes, there are winners d and losers at the games, but if you’re elite enough to make it and call yourself an Olympian, everyone knows there’s great validation and great marketability in that and you are the ultimate mark of an elite athlete. the idea that anyone meeting these standards in track and field are tourists, when they have the strictest standards in Olympic history, is ridiculous
If you are good enough to be qualified to run at the Olympics. You have “paid your own way” a lot. To go to much smaller meets. I think you would be ok to “pay your own way” to Paris. Less than the cost of a pair of shoes…
lol
Let’s look at Seddon (for example).
On April 5th, he was in Paris for a road race (I’m sure he would be ok to go there again for the Olympics)
On April 18th, he ran at Mt Sac relays (8 times zones away)
On May 17th, he ran at Drake Stadium in Los Angeles. Stayed in the US for one month?
On June 8th, he was in Rome.
On June 18th, he was in Finland.
On June 22nd, he was in Austria
Then on June 30th, he was racing the trials in Manchester, UK
He was doing all this travel to try to qualify. Cost to go to the Olympics is the issue?????????????
lol
Now THAT is going to be one expensive Olympic ring tattoo.
if you’re elite enough to make it and call yourself an Olympian, everyone knows there’s great validation and great marketability in that and you are the ultimate mark of an elite athlete.
So you’re suggesting the snow-boarders and curling players are worthy of the strutting their Olympic rings tattoo, too.
if you’re elite enough to make it and call yourself an Olympian, everyone knows there’s great validation and great marketability in that and you are the ultimate mark of an elite athlete.
So you’re suggesting the snow-boarders and curling players are worthy of the strutting their Olympic rings tattoo, too.
Yes, just as much as the Marathon walk mixed relay athletes
This process is so horrifically arbitrary there’s no way anyone involved could even begin to logically justify it. UKA leaders just laugh off serious criticisms because they know their methods suck but just simply don’t care about the athletes whose dreams they’re destroying.
No offense to him, just the first name that stuck out to me, what is the reasoning behind patrick dever going in two events while some people get outright rejected? What are his odds of being top 8? Probably 1% or less surely. I don’t mean to say he should be excluded, rather everyone with an invite should be included.
I get that your country has a gdp per capita lower than mississippis, but surely you could scrape together funds to get a few more people all of 250 miles to Paris. If they absolutely cannot they should at least give the athletes the option to pay their own way. (Maybe they can’t? I don’t know what the rules concerning this are)
The IOC should consider sanctions of some sort if this keeps up. It goes against the spirit of the games and spits in the face of their own countrymen who have worked their whole lives to get where they are and have such a small window to get to the olympics.
Ian Beattie has never run a day in his life.. he's the damn sacrificial lamb. There is a reason why Coe is not in charge of UK Athletics. England sucks.
I think that'd be a tremendous stretch for Eilish:
Needs a Miracle to Beat: -3 Kenyans in sub-29:30 shape -3 Ethiopians in sub-29:50 shape -Hassan
Sub-31' tier: -Cheptoyek (30:03 in Valencia) -Chelangat (30:24 at Pre) -Kelati -Lauren Ryan -Megan Keith -Schweizer -Valby -Van Es -Battocletti (might only be running the 5,000)
Then there's a host of athletes (Japanese, XC qualifiers et al), who have shown similar/better form. I think something like top 12 would be a possible result, but would require many DNFs.
The steepler meanwhile is about 10 seconds from being competitive for the medal hunt. McColgan is more like 90 seconds in her current fitness.
Yeah, it's a stretch. But she's getting fitter and could be in 31 shape by the Olympics. And a fair few African athletes essentially give up and save themselves for future races if they're out of the medals because they aren't incentivised to run minor places. That let Jess Judd into 8th place in Budapest. I don't think top 8 is likely, but it's not out of the question, and it will be very hot in Paris so they'll be a bit of carnage in the race
I did a bit of research. Ian Beattie, the Chairman of British Athletics has a "day job" as Chief Operating Officer of a firm of Scottish solicitors called Lindsays. Lindsays sponsor Eilish McColgan and some other athletes. Eilish McColgan ran the qualifying time and recently won a 10k in The Netherlands and fully desrves her place. Mr Beattie is also an ex Chair of Scottish Athletics and ex Vice Chair of Sportscotland and an MBE for his work in the charities sector. Basically he is an all round good guy, very keen on athletics (he is a race director of the West Highland Way race, which is unpaid) and I doubt he's getting a lot of money for his part time role at UK Athletics.
Jack Buckner is the Chief Executive of UK Athletics, but overall the problem is the way sport is funded in the UK. It just doesn't get much government funding and it has to fight each year for what it does get, which itself uses financial resources and time in making and justifying cases to do so. It is part of the typical British way of doing this kind of thing, which seems to be to make it as difficult as possible and to create as many layers of difficulty and hoops to jump through as possible, and its not supportive of the athletes.
Mr Beattie's speciality is charities and the third sector, so you would have thought if anybody could have got sponsorship or raised funds for British Athletics, it would have been him. These decisions do seem to be finance (or lack thereof) based, so I don't understand his rather comments about athletes de-motivising their teammates if they don't get out of the heats. Or is it? Leaving athletes such as Guy Learmonth out of the world indoors when qualified on world ranking when the event was held in Glasgow can't have been much of a cost saving. Neither can sending a few more athletes to Paris be that expensive.
There just seems to be no money available and a lot of that must be due to athletics not being televised by the BBC at prime time. The BBC is publicly funded through the license fee and a lot of the British public increasingly resent it and its very obvious bias towards wokeism and a lot of their budget goes on televising live football. Thats quite a new thing in the last 10 years or so, there used to be a much bigger of variety of sports shown live on the BBC and athletics isn't the only casualty.
Last year, UK Athletics was in debt to the tune of £3.7 million, although Nike was a kit sponsor and made a substantial cash payment too. Basically, they are trying to avoid it going bankrupt.
It really is a poor show that such a mainstream sport in a country the size of the UK is struggling for funds to send eligible talented athletes to the Olympic Games. I don't envy either Ian Beattie or Jack Buckner in their roles one bit, but they are not looking into the self-funding or crowd funding route for qualified athletes and I do think that is unwise in the current climate. Perhaps the publicity from athletes having to do so might be enough to attract a big sponsor.
Can anybody explain or estimate the marginal cost to UK Athletics of sending one extra athlete to an Olympics held in a city that's two hours away by train? I can respect (at least in theory) the financial argument--the UK and many other countries spend government money on Olympic teams, and I can understand not wanting to waste it. But in a situation like this, it's just farcical. You're already sending a large delegation, you might as well take everyone who qualifies. Or, as others have said, just let any qualifiers pay for it on their own. I find it hard to believe that any athletes from a First World country wouldn't be able to crowdfund enough money online to pay their way to the Olympics.
It's so short-sighted to think it's not worth doing if an athlete fails to survive heats. Look at Bryce Hoppel. He didn't make it to the finals and changed his training so now he has people to run with. LOOK AT HIM NOW. People need the experience and yes, the disappointments, to make them better.
I have not gone through the full thread as yet - so this might have been addressed. I understand that Beattie has come out and tried to say its about performance and top 8 prospects, which I fundamentally disagree with and that is not the standard that other sports are being held to (Eddie the Eagle Edwards anyone). However, what frustrates me more right now is that they did also tie it to public money and you can bet your bottom dollar (or pound in this case) that the ratio of support staff to athletes will be about 3 to 1. I really hope I do not see any tweets or pics from Beattie that indicates he will be in Paris - little hypocritical if so.
On the performance aspect of it - there are numerous stories of athletes that failed to get out of the heats in their first olympics/worlds and then went on to be olympic stars. Sally Gunnell did not make the final of the '87 worlds - we know what happened there. Eilish did not qualify for the final (steeplechase so 15 or so) in her first olympics - i'm sure the experience there was instrumental in her future success. Indeed later in his career but is Jack Buckner going to pay back the money that was spent on sending him to Barcelona when....he didnt make the final.
And from chatting with some senior athletes (including medalists) - i know one of the things they have enjoyed the most is getting to know UK athletes of other events. Especially those that train in the US you are part of a middle/long-distance group - or a sprints group or a jumps group - you do not cross paths with others. I think Josh Kerr/Laura muir would get more out of spending time with a british discus thrower than they would be de-motivated by them not qualifying for the final.
Really annoyed by the decision. And more annoyed by the response from Beattie - who while there was a glowing post above about him - no one would have noticed if it was some other jobsworth in his role.
At the risk of repetition, as I haven't read every entry, completely insane. I met a girl who ran for U. Richmond, focused on 800, came up short there but qualified for East Regionals at a last chance meet, in the 1500. She was doing okay but then fell way back. I don't know for sure what happened, but I thought one possibility was that she "choked", hate the word. Unfortunately this is only half the story I wanted to tell because the next, her senior, year she got hurt and wasn't able to get a fair crack at qualifying.
But, I think the odds are very good that if she had she would have at least put a good effort out there, less choked, and the chips would have fallen where they may. Experience, experience, experience is invaluable. So starkly true in the NBA where you can really see it maybe the clearest where a young team with the superior record quite often loses the finals to the 'underdog' that has more veteran players.
if you’re elite enough to make it and call yourself an Olympian, everyone knows there’s great validation and great marketability in that and you are the ultimate mark of an elite athlete.
So you’re suggesting the snow-boarders and curling players are worthy of the strutting their Olympic rings tattoo, too.
I don't know about curling, but snowboarding is extremely competitive, death-defying, and awesome to watch.
Yeah, it's a stretch. But she's getting fitter and could be in 31 shape by the Olympics. And a fair few African athletes essentially give up and save themselves for future races if they're out of the medals because they aren't incentivised to run minor places. That let Jess Judd into 8th place in Budapest. I don't think top 8 is likely, but it's not out of the question, and it will be very hot in Paris so they'll be a bit of carnage in the race
I did a bit of research. Ian Beattie, the Chairman of British Athletics has a "day job" as Chief Operating Officer of a firm of Scottish solicitors called Lindsays. Lindsays sponsor Eilish McColgan and some other athletes. Eilish McColgan ran the qualifying time and recently won a 10k in The Netherlands and fully desrves her place. Mr Beattie is also an ex Chair of Scottish Athletics and ex Vice Chair of Sportscotland and an MBE for his work in the charities sector. Basically he is an all round good guy, very keen on athletics (he is a race director of the West Highland Way race, which is unpaid) and I doubt he's getting a lot of money for his part time role at UK Athletics.
Jack Buckner is the Chief Executive of UK Athletics, but overall the problem is the way sport is funded in the UK. It just doesn't get much government funding and it has to fight each year for what it does get, which itself uses financial resources and time in making and justifying cases to do so. It is part of the typical British way of doing this kind of thing, which seems to be to make it as difficult as possible and to create as many layers of difficulty and hoops to jump through as possible, and its not supportive of the athletes.
Mr Beattie's speciality is charities and the third sector, so you would have thought if anybody could have got sponsorship or raised funds for British Athletics, it would have been him. These decisions do seem to be finance (or lack thereof) based, so I don't understand his rather comments about athletes de-motivising their teammates if they don't get out of the heats. Or is it? Leaving athletes such as Guy Learmonth out of the world indoors when qualified on world ranking when the event was held in Glasgow can't have been much of a cost saving. Neither can sending a few more athletes to Paris be that expensive.
There just seems to be no money available and a lot of that must be due to athletics not being televised by the BBC at prime time. The BBC is publicly funded through the license fee and a lot of the British public increasingly resent it and its very obvious bias towards wokeism and a lot of their budget goes on televising live football. Thats quite a new thing in the last 10 years or so, there used to be a much bigger of variety of sports shown live on the BBC and athletics isn't the only casualty.
Last year, UK Athletics was in debt to the tune of £3.7 million, although Nike was a kit sponsor and made a substantial cash payment too. Basically, they are trying to avoid it going bankrupt.
It really is a poor show that such a mainstream sport in a country the size of the UK is struggling for funds to send eligible talented athletes to the Olympic Games. I don't envy either Ian Beattie or Jack Buckner in their roles one bit, but they are not looking into the self-funding or crowd funding route for qualified athletes and I do think that is unwise in the current climate. Perhaps the publicity from athletes having to do so might be enough to attract a big sponsor.
I have to think that seeing athletes who've trained hard for years to qualify for the Olympics but not go because UKA thinks they won't finish in the top eight is a lot more de-motivating than seeing those athletes get to the Games but not get to the finals.
Fir the record, many European (and some Asian) countries have such policies or used to have them.
What is completely missing from the discussion is funding. Someone has to pay the bill for an athlete to realize their dream. Why would that dream have an inherent right to be realized over those of other people with talent not in sports within a society? You can't expect the whole society per se to have the (admittedly beautiful) idea of the Olympics as a priority.
Now, my understanding is that the British NOC does not receive direct taxpayer money, they have to raise the money with events and findraising independently? Can someone confirm? So at least no responsibility to the taxpayer here. Other countries' NOC do use taxpayer money to send athletes (I think Sweden does, but not sure).
I'm not saying the UK selection is justified, I am merely pointing out that the outcry here is very one-sided and i would like to know who really foots the bill or if the NOC mismanaged funds before judging this call. Did the athletes get "screwed" or did their Olympic trip not get priority over some other legitimate use of the funds in society? I don't know but this should at least be in this conversation.
The Olympics are in Paris, a short train ride away from the UK. Yes it’s bad as a sport if athletes need to pay their own way but they should at least have the opportunity too.
The UK is a failed state
I for example get to go to Paris for the Olympics. I scraped and begged for the money and time but I did it. I am sure athletes could get their sponsors to pay for it. Or take advantage of a thing known as idk vacation. As you said it is so easy to get to France from England. Really pathetic by UKA that they pretend they aren't corrupt as fvck.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.