So Robbo has a 'niggle' and he's on a running podcast but he's not going to talk about running all the way to the Olympics because....some BS about no excuses.
LOL. If an injury happens in the woods and no one podcasts about it, is it even an injury?
I listened to Jess Stenson on IRP this week. She said something about championship racing being heavily weighted in the women's marathon selection.
If this was the case how did they pick Gregson with no championship experience at all let alone a good result. Her only 2 races have been more akin to time trials and she brought her own personal pacers to one of them.
I listened to Jess Stenson on IRP this week. She said something about championship racing being heavily weighted in the women's marathon selection.
If this was the case how did they pick Gregson with no championship experience at all let alone a good result. Her only 2 races have been more akin to time trials and she brought her own personal pacers to one of them.
I thought the same thing. Lisa has been focussing attention on Jess as 'the replacement', but once they all hit the time it was all discretionary. And if you're playing the card of 'ability to come top 10 in a marathon' then it's Diver, Lisa, Jess. Every day of the week. Izzy is more marathon experienced than Gen. Surely you can't take 9th in the Rio steeplechase as relevant evidence for marathon champs experience. Gen came out strongest against a trial too- no bloody wonder.
I'm actually tipping that Jess will be top Aussie by a long way.
I listened to Jess Stenson on IRP this week. She said something about championship racing being heavily weighted in the women's marathon selection.
If this was the case how did they pick Gregson with no championship experience at all let alone a good result. Her only 2 races have been more akin to time trials and she brought her own personal pacers to one of them.
I thought the same thing. Lisa has been focussing attention on Jess as 'the replacement', but once they all hit the time it was all discretionary. And if you're playing the card of 'ability to come top 10 in a marathon' then it's Diver, Lisa, Jess. Every day of the week. Izzy is more marathon experienced than Gen. Surely you can't take 9th in the Rio steeplechase as relevant evidence for marathon champs experience. Gen came out strongest against a trial too- no bloody wonder.
I'm actually tipping that Jess will be top Aussie by a long way.
My gripe isn't necessarily with who they selected, more that the reasoning behind the decision was scuffed. No wonder the National Sports Tribunal found that they didn't apply the nomination criteria properly.
Does anyone know if the AOC just leaves that call to the athlete? Of course he'd want to run. Nike will pay him a load to do so. But when there's another healthy athlete who would do better in this situation- can they pull someone off the team? Is there precedent for this?
Looking at the Athletics Australia document 'Nomination Criteria - Paris 2024 - Athletics', AA has the right to require an athlete to prove their form and fitness after an athlete has been nominated by AA and selected by the AOC.
AA has the further right to de-nominate an athlete and request the AOC to de-select an Athlete.
So it looks like the ball is in AA's court, if they want to hit it.
Relevant extracts from the AA Nomination Criteria document are below (some bolding added).
A link to the full document is also below.
5 Eligibility Criteria 5.1 The National Federation will not nominate an Athlete unless, as at the Nomination Date, the National Federation is satisfied on reasonable grounds that the Athlete: … (m) agrees to comply with any pre-Games preparation policy published by the National Federation’s General Manager - High Performance, including travel plan and travel arrangements outlined for the Games. This policy may include the requirement to prove form and fitness to compete in the Games.
6.8 Additional obligations following nomination (a) Following their nomination, nominated Athletes must meet and continue to meet the following obligations: (i) if requested, prove their fitness to compete in the Games by the achievement of pre-Games form and fitness requirements on a case by case basis, to be set by the General Manager - High Performance and communicated to Athletes; … (collectively, Further Obligations). (b) Failure by a nominated Athlete to meet any of the Further Obligations after his or her nomination may, at the discretion of the General Manager of High Performance, result in a nominated Athlete being de-nominated and/or de-selected from the Team, in accordance with clause 6.9.
6.9 Removal of Nominated Athletes The National Federation may de-nominate an Athlete or request the AOC to de-select an Athlete from the Team for any of the following reasons: … (e) a failure to comply with any pre-Games form and fitness requirements set by the General Manager – High Performance and communicated to Athletes; (f) a failure to comply with any pre-Games competition preparation policy that is provided (including) a failure to meet an agreed pre-departure standard);
Very strange from Robbo on FTK. The Olympics is the main game and he is now not going to talk about how he is going or discuss his traning in the lead up to the Olympics due to a "niggle" or "injury" (we don't really know what it is as he will not talk about it).
Understand he must be frustrated. But if you start a podcast for transparency and a desire to share you story and also post every single workout on Strava but then decide to go dark on both it raises a lot of questions.
If he is not fit, he should 100% give his spot to Andy. Andy looked in great shape on the Gold Coast and a hilly, tough course would suit him with his pedigree in XC.
Also, what is happening with the Melbourne Track Club, Rayner injured, Robbo injured and Ramsden also injured. All injured for the most important months in an Olympic year.
I don't care how big the bonus is, he's a traitor to Australia if he doesn't give his spot to Andy.
100%.
Nothing will come of this and he'll DNF or near-DFL and that will be that. But it's a huge waste of taxpayer money when there's a qualified athlete warming the bench. He's a goose for not just putting FTK on an extended season break.
All runners know the frustration of getting injured right before a big race. FTK listeners (which includes me) would be rapt to hear how Brett Robinson approaches training/diet/psychology etc as he deals with an injury in the lead up to a big race. But to go completely DARK on it instead seems very odd; especially given Brett literally hosts a podcast which spends a large chunk of its time talking about training weeks. It would actually be a breath of fresh air to hear about his approach here. But instead, crickets....
Very strange from Robbo on FTK. The Olympics is the main game and he is now not going to talk about how he is going or discuss his traning in the lead up to the Olympics due to a "niggle" or "injury" (we don't really know what it is as he will not talk about it).
Understand he must be frustrated. But if you start a podcast for transparency and a desire to share you story and also post every single workout on Strava but then decide to go dark on both it raises a lot of questions.
Is he trying to hide his real form from AA?
He very briefly mentioned his back - so I’ll go with a sacrum stressie.
I don't care how big the bonus is, he's a traitor to Australia if he doesn't give his spot to Andy.
He’s coached by Nic. His athletes seem to always get preferential treatment - BR will be no different. No chance he gives up his spot or gets pulled by AA.
You're only talking about distance running, right? Unlike on Let's Run, the Aussie public is not obsessed with distance events.
I think if he is coaching athletes competing for distance spots at a major event, he should not be part of the selection panel, in the interests of transparency. That seems pretty obvious.
I listened to Jess Stenson on IRP this week. She said something about championship racing being heavily weighted in the women's marathon selection.
If this was the case how did they pick Gregson with no championship experience at all let alone a good result. Her only 2 races have been more akin to time trials and she brought her own personal pacers to one of them.
Based on the first podcast - it's pretty obvious Jess/Gen/Sinead have no idea what was taken into account, and what the Tribunal were assessing.
Their discussion about it was mind-numbing... Gen saying "the selectors selected the team so you have to deal with it" about summed up the well-reasoned arguments being put forward.
Its all just so odd and within the small world all these athletes exist in it has to have really soured some friendships/relationships. If the target audience of the podcast are questioning its existance given everything going on, let alone how seemingly none of the three athletes are equiped to have a well-reasoned discussion about the selection... What a way to put the boot into friendships/working relationships among your peers. I'd love to know if any of the three tried to put the brakes on the podcast and delay it a week or two