Agree that sending runners around the world to compete dressed up in nationalistic costumes likely isn’t in the interest of taxpayers … but neither is corporate / pharmaceutical industry welfare to the tune of $10k per year (per person) for NHS, nor the dole writ large, nor most of the military spending (which is mostly covered by American taxpayers at this point). I’m sure that list could go on and on.
But none of that addresses why she can’t fund her own way… Which is precisely what every athlete ought to be doing.
Great Britain won just 1 gold medal (in rowing) at the 1996 Olympics, before funding was introduced.
Chris Boardman acclimatized to the Atlanta humidity by training on a stationary bike in his bathroom. Athletes were selling their medals from previous championships to fund the next one.
This sort of model doesn't work.
Doesn't work for what? Winning medals? Letting workers keep more of their hard-earned money? What precisely is the benefit of making people pay for others to travel around to do athletics -- athletics that many do anyway for free at similar (but potentially marginally and insignificantly lower) levels?
Nothing stopping folks from giving willfully to support whatever they want (runners, skeet shooters, rowers, etc...) but if they don't give voluntarily seems cruel and bizarre for the government to threaten them and make them pay for the hobbies (or occupations that would be hobbies without threat of violence) of others.
Either way, no sense in barring athletes from participating under their own steam.
Great Britain won just 1 gold medal (in rowing) at the 1996 Olympics, before funding was introduced.
Chris Boardman acclimatized to the Atlanta humidity by training on a stationary bike in his bathroom. Athletes were selling their medals from previous championships to fund the next one.
This sort of model doesn't work.
Doesn't work for what? Winning medals? Letting workers keep more of their hard-earned money? What precisely is the benefit of making people pay for others to travel around to do athletics -- athletics that many do anyway for free at similar (but potentially marginally and insignificantly lower) levels?
Nothing stopping folks from giving willfully to support whatever they want (runners, skeet shooters, rowers, etc...) but if they don't give voluntarily seems cruel and bizarre for the government to threaten them and make them pay for the hobbies (or occupations that would be hobbies without threat of violence) of others.
Either way, no sense in barring athletes from participating under their own steam.
Perhaps you could find the time to re-write the above in a manner that mere mortals can understand.
The brits have unlimited resources to support the leeching lifestyles of the so-called "royals." The brits spend zero on dentistry. The brits, even though they are a third world shthole, should have enough to send their athletes. All they need to do is defund the "royals" the way they have dentists.
Please stop. Dentists are both private and national health service (NHS). The lack of NHS provision in general is the result of successive decades of policies and market deregulation aimed at creating wealth for a very small minority etc etc. The royals actually bring in more than they take through tourism. This is a tired argument and nothing to do with public money, equality and standard of living and work.
The royals are most certainly a gross and inbred crime family. Still it seldom makes sense to take from the inbred and idle to fund other people's hobbies -- even when those inbred and idle are a massive real estate company masquerading (in costume) as a tourist attraction.
Regardless of the royals, NHS is a massive and oppressive burden on the people of Britain who no longer get to interact with medical products in anything resembling a disintermediated marketplace. This greatly increases costs, reduces choices (totally guts the marketplace for anyone below a very high income level). There are precious few groups of consumers who benefit from the installation of a de-facto monopoly / price-fixing scheme. That's why Britons pay something like $10k per head per year on their crumby NHS.
Of course you're correct to point out that crony-capitalism (what I think you mean by 'privatization') is similarly undesirable. Value for money can't exist when prices aren't dictated by the demand of the consumer and the ability of numerous entrants to supply as they see fit. The role of government is not to corrupt industries by monopolizing them. It is to keep cronyism out of markets so that consumers can express their preferences and entrepreneurs can have a chance to meet their needs.
Doesn't work for what? Winning medals? Letting workers keep more of their hard-earned money? What precisely is the benefit of making people pay for others to travel around to do athletics -- athletics that many do anyway for free at similar (but potentially marginally and insignificantly lower) levels?
Nothing stopping folks from giving willfully to support whatever they want (runners, skeet shooters, rowers, etc...) but if they don't give voluntarily seems cruel and bizarre for the government to threaten them and make them pay for the hobbies (or occupations that would be hobbies without threat of violence) of others.
Either way, no sense in barring athletes from participating under their own steam.
Perhaps you could find the time to re-write the above in a manner that mere mortals can understand.
I'm amazed that WA head Seb Coe hasn't picked up the phone and called Jack Buckner, the British Athletics CEO asking "WTF are you doing?"
seb coe is a tory politician. that's the party responsible for massive public cuts in the last 15 years that have led to this
"massive public cuts" = hardworking folks not being forced to pay for other people's running hobbies?
Is being forced to support other people's hobbies really a partisan issue? One would think that the more choices workers have about how to allocate their money, the better off they'd be. They can always fund athletes on platforms like Go Fund Me if they reckon the cause is worthy.
Of course I'm sure there are some that think Big Brother knows best and can somehow justify the appropriations based on the generation of unquantifiable (and largely nonexistent) nationalistic vibes that are created when people jog around in flag-themed outfits...
Any more help with the language then please ask. Meanwhile I await a translation of your previous post.
Perhaps you mean 'not god-like'? Not god-like In what way? Not immortal? And the opposite of immortal is? Mortal. Not 'mere mortal'. Simply mortal. So what is the significance of the 'mere'? Still unclear.
If you can't understand my previous post I suggest that you consult your nearest government school. The parasites there are uniquely qualified to put you straight. And worry not, they'll bill someone else for the assistance you receive.
seb coe is a tory politician. that's the party responsible for massive public cuts in the last 15 years that have led to this
"massive public cuts" = hardworking folks not being forced to pay for other people's running hobbies?
Is being forced to support other people's hobbies really a partisan issue? One would think that the more choices workers have about how to allocate their money, the better off they'd be. They can always fund athletes on platforms like Go Fund Me if they reckon the cause is worthy.
Of course I'm sure there are some that think Big Brother knows best and can somehow justify the appropriations based on the generation of unquantifiable (and largely nonexistent) nationalistic vibes that are created when people jog around in flag-themed outfits...
Today there will be multi millions watching both Cricket and Football to join in the vibes of national pride and interest and celebration of possible England success.Bashing leather in flag themed outfits…… marvellous is it not?
Any more help with the language then please ask. Meanwhile I await a translation of your previous post.
Perhaps you mean 'not god-like'? Not god-like In what way? Not immortal? And the opposite of immortal is? Mortal. Not 'mere mortal'. Simply mortal. So what is the significance of the 'mere'? Still unclear.
If you can't understand my previous post I suggest that you consult your nearest government school. The parasites there are uniquely qualified to put you straight. And worry not, they'll bill someone else for the assistance you receive.
Clearly found your own cloud of English Comprehension to wander about on. Simply marvellous for you.
The idea of using a language to communicate with is that you can be understood. You have been a conspicuous failure in this regard.
UKA taking it to the journeymen. On one hand, presumably it’s bad for the sport to thin the field. On the other, the standards are know to the athletes, clear as day. The ones getting a hint of the proverbial shaft are the younger athletes who have potential down the line.
I don’t think it’s a matter of cost, albeit the optics aren’t great when you’re flying a delegation out for a holiday with funding that could have gone to athletes.
Great Britain won just 1 gold medal (in rowing) at the 1996 Olympics, before funding was introduced.
Chris Boardman acclimatized to the Atlanta humidity by training on a stationary bike in his bathroom. Athletes were selling their medals from previous championships to fund the next one.
This sort of model doesn't work.
Doesn't work for what? Winning medals? Letting workers keep more of their hard-earned money? What precisely is the benefit of making people pay for others to travel around to do athletics -- athletics that many do anyway for free at similar (but potentially marginally and insignificantly lower) levels?
Nothing stopping folks from giving willfully to support whatever they want (runners, skeet shooters, rowers, etc...) but if they don't give voluntarily seems cruel and bizarre for the government to threaten them and make them pay for the hobbies (or occupations that would be hobbies without threat of violence) of others.
Either way, no sense in barring athletes from participating under their own steam.
The Olympics is a huge money spinning event. Poor performance = less interest = less value for advertisers. There's a clear economic benefit from sporting performance. Saudi Arabia is currently recruiting footballers for this very purpose. Britain's bean counter attitude at the expense of developing economic activity will be it's undoing.
I can't believe how stingy Britain is. What exactly do you mean pay their own way - do the invited athletes travel and stay at the same hotel as the rest of the team and get a bill when they leave? Or should it completely be up to the athletes to source their accommodation and travel themselves?
Athletes staying in hostels and bedsits during championships doesn't mean Britain is economically prudent with taxpayer money, it means it's poor.
Lol. UKA selected Issy Boffey for the 800 even though Alex Bell (who ran 1:57 and made the final in Tokyo) was third at British champs (beating Boffey by 1.5 seconds) and has the qualifying standard. Boffey is a good talent so I'm not knocking her, but where's the meritocracy in that decision?
I'm glad they selected Megan Keith who only ran the 5k standard on Sunday but skipped British champs to go win Euro u23s.
Furious British athlete threatens legal action over UK Athletics ‘robbing’ individuals of places
UK Athletics has been warned that it faces a talent drain of athletes unless it reverses the controversial selection policy that is said to be ‘robbing’ individuals of their places....
Furious British athlete threatens legal action over UK Athletics ‘robbing’ individuals of places
UK Athletics has been warned that it faces a talent drain of athletes unless it reverses the controversial selection policy that is said to be ‘robbing’ individuals of their places....
Furious British athlete threatens legal action over UK Athletics ‘robbing’ individuals of places
UK Athletics has been warned that it faces a talent drain of athletes unless it reverses the controversial selection policy that is said to be ‘robbing’ individuals of their places....
These are the athletes who qualified but were not selected to the Great Britain and Northern Ireland Team according to world athletics. Some made comments to Telegraph.Co.UK Reporters.
The Great Britain and Northern Ireland team for the 2023 World Athletics Championships: Women 100m: Dina Asher-Smith (John Blackie, Blackheath & Bromley) Imani-Lara Lansiquot (Ryan Freckleton, Sutton & District) Daryll Neita (Marco Airale, Cambridge Harriers) 200m: Dina Asher-Smith (John Blackie, Blackheath & Bromley) Daryll Neita (Marco Airale, Cambridge Harriers) Bianca Williams (Linford Christie, Thames Valley) 400m: Victoria Ohuruogu (Newham and Essex Beagles) Ama Pipi (Linford Christie, Enfield & Haringey) 800m: Isabelle Boffey (Luke Gunn, Enfield & Haringey) Keely Hodgkinson (Trevor Painter, Leigh) Jemma Reekie (Jon Bigg, Kilbarchan) 1500m: Melissa Courtney-Bryant (Rob Denmark, Poole) Laura Muir (Dundee Hawkhill) *coached by World Class Plan Endurance Performance Manager Steve Vernon and the wider WCP Endurance team at UK Athletics. Katie Snowden (Stephen Haas, Herne Hill) 5000m: Megan Keith (Ross Cairns, Inverness) Amy-Eloise Markovc (Rob Denmark, Wakefield) 10,000m: Eilish McColgan (Liz Nuttall, Dundee Hawkhill) Jessica Warner-Judd (Mick Judd, Blackburn) 3000m Steeplechase: Aimee Pratt (Thomas Dreißigacker, Sale Harriers Manchester) 100m Hurdles: Cindy Sember (Chris Johnson, Woodford Green Essex Ladies) 400m Hurdles: Jessie Knight (Marina Armstrong, Windsor Slough Eton & Hounslow) 4x100m Relay: Dina Asher-Smith (John Blackie, Blackheath & Bromley) Alyson Bell (Anne Scott, Glasgow Jaguars) Imani-Lara Lansiquot (Ryan Freckleton, Sutton & District) Daryll Neita (Marco Airale, Cambridge Harriers) Asha Phillip (Amy Deem, Newham and Essex Beagles) *subject to fitness. Annie Tagoe (Vince Anderson, Thames Valley) Bianca Williams (Linford Christie, Thames Valley) 4x400m Relay: Amber Anning (Chris Johnson, Brighton & Hove) Yemi Mary John (Alan James, Woodford Green Essex Ladies) Jessie Knight (Marina Armstrong, Windsor Slough Eton & Hounslow) Laviai Nielsen (Phillip Unfried, Enfield and Haringey) Victoria Ohuruogu (Newham and Essex Beagles) Ama Pipi (Linford Christie, Enfield & Haringey) Nicole Yeargin (Boogie Johnson, Pitreavie) High Jump: Morgan Lake (Robbie Grabarz, Windsor Slough Eton & Hounslow) Pole Vault: Molly Caudery (Stuart Caudery, Thames Valley) Long Jump: Jazmin Sawyers (Aston Moore, City of Stoke) Heptathlon: Katarina Johnson-Thompson (Aston Moore, Liverpool) Marathon: Natasha Cockram (Robert Hawkins, Micky Morris Racing Team)
Men 100m: Eugene Amo-Dadzie (Steve Fudge, Woodford Green Essex Ladies) Zharnel Hughes (Glen Mills, Shaftesbury Barnet) Reece Prescod (Marco Airale, Enfield & Haringey) 200m: Zharnel Hughes (Glen Mills, Shaftesbury Barnet) 400m: Matthew Hudson-Smith (Gary Evans, Birchfield) 800m: Max Burgin (Ian Burgin, Halifax) Ben Pattison (Dave Ragan, Basingstoke and Mid Hants) Daniel Rowden (Jon Bigg, Woodford Green & Essex Ladies) 1500m: Elliot Giles (Jon Bigg, Birchfield) Neil Gourley (Stephen Haas, Giffnock North) Josh Kerr (Danny Mackey, Edinburgh) 110m Hurdles: Tade Ojora (Joanna Hayes, Windsor Slough Eton & Hounslow) 4x100m Relay: Eugene Amo-Dadzie (Steve Fudge, Woodford Green Essex Ladies) Jeremiah Azu (Marco Airale, Cardiff) Jona Efoloko (Clarence Callender, Sale Harriers Manchester) Adam Gemili (Marco Airale, Blackheath and Bromley) Zharnel Hughes (Glen Mills, Shaftesbury Barnet) Reece Prescod (Marco Airale, Enfield & Haringey) 4x400m Relay: Joe Brier (Matt Elias, Swansea) Lewis Davey (Trevor Painter, Newham and Essex Beagles) Charlie Dobson (Benke Blomkvist, Colchester) Alex Haydock-Wilson (Benke Blomkvist, Windsor Slough Eton and Hounslow) Matthew Hudson-Smith (Gary Evans, Birchfield) Rio Mitcham (Leon Baptiste, Birchfield) Discus: Lawrence Okoye (Zane Duquemin, Croydon) xemptyzMixed 4x400m Relay: All athletes involved in the women’s and men’s 4x400m relay squads.
