Sounds as if climate conditions in Macau were better than in Bejing though. At least your friend will have the benefit of the experience which they can take to future events.
Sounds as if climate conditions in Macau were better than in Bejing though. At least your friend will have the benefit of the experience which they can take to future events.
I have no doubt that the UKA reference to Macau was pure spin on their part.
BMC internationalist wrote:
Didn't know shes ding the international too. Yes it would put a spanner in the works for the theory of her changing nationality.
In footballing terms the match might be desribed as non-competitive, i.e. not a championship or qualifier, and therefore might not stop her going off to run for Qatar or Ireland or wherever else she fancies. Not sure how the IAAF rules match up on that.
Athletics rules may well be different to football. Is there a two year blanket ban introduced by the IAAF in the wake of the kenyan athletes tranfering to Qatar and
Bahrain? Anyone got a rule book?
Its all a conspiracy theory anyway.
Why do you think the UKA reference to Macau would be 'pure spin' ? Do you think that the UKA report was written just to fool Emily to going to Macau, when the facilities there were no use to her ?
BOA have named Macau as one of their sites for camps pre-Beijing and I cant see any reason why they or UKA would wish to exagerate the facilities - that could only lead to trouble.
Prior to Athens UKA identified that the facilities offered by BOA in Cyprus were not suitable for endurance, and BOA then arranged an alternative venue on a golf course, about 1 hours drive from the main centre. Hasnt the same thing happened in Macau ?
BMC internationalist- yes, sorry about the misunderstanding. The BMC bit was just a random tidbit of information- the bit about internationals was regarding the international match not the celtic cup junior BMC team.
it wasn't in a prominent part in the article on UKA, but to me, it certainly read as "it's actually quite okay to train for MD here". Perhaps wrong, but that's the impression I got.
"Mark Mitchell (Forres Harriers) and James Brewer (Cheltenham Harriers) both put their qualification for the 800m semi finals down to the time they had spent at the preparation camp at Macau. The evening humidity at the stadium hardly made a dent in their efforts as both had trained in damper conditions at the Macau stadium – and both qualified for the semis albeit in different ways."
I'm sorry but I do not belive for one minute that Mitchell or Brewer put their qualification down to the time they spent at Macau.
I might agree with you, but can you answer the question above about spin in the report. I can see why UKA would want to write up Macau now, but not before the team went.
Good Question wrote:
I might agree with you, but can you answer the question above about spin in the report. I can see why UKA would want to write up Macau now, but not before the team went.
because is was the use of Macau as a holding camp that was the major issue between UKA and Farrow/Pidgeon.
It could be quite conceivable that mitchell and brewer did say something to the effect that it was helpful that they had spent some time accliamitising in humid conditions (as it surely would be useful), things get said at the end of races which although only throwaway phrases can be taken and totally blown out of all proportion. but i certainly don't think that it was the only reason for making the next round. Its not worth getting too excited about.
The report was written ages before Macau became an issue between UKA and Pidgeon, or we are told it was the issue.
So why was there any spin in it ?
what are you on about??? the UKA news item was written yesterday!
I have not seen that many 'preparation reports' but they are usually quite accurate. The one I remember was for the World Cross in Ostende. It started something like -
If when you arrive in your room in Ostende you have a lovely view from your balcony, go back downstairs to reception, you are in the wrong hotel. The hotel was right in the middle of the town and surrounded by factories and offices.
From UKa web site:
"Six athletes are making their Senior debut in Birmingham; Emily Pidgeon (Gloucester AC) in the 3,000m........."
Looks like she's defo in the team then, that only leaves a couple of days for another public row to flare up. Lets hope this one goes smoothly.
I want a job writing reports like that. Absolute Gold.
Supposedly you need to know something about athletics, then you need a sense of humour. Who on earth at UKA was responsible for such crap ?
Good Question wrote:
Macau doesnt seem to have done Sian Edwards much harm ?
The pros and cons of Macau are an irrelevance to the issue.
The issue is the autonomy of the athlete. How much sway should a governing body have over the athlete and their preparation?
Should they be able to determine where they prepare before major champs?
Should they be able to insist on the athlete doing certain races?
Should they be able to veto coaches that don't have the right UKA badge?
Should they be able to take away the athlete's free speech regarding comments about themselves?
To my mind these questions are no brainers. I am truly stunned that so many at UKA seem to think otherwise.
Might UKA know better than the Pidgeon camp? Let's presume, for the sake of argument, that that is so. So what? It should be the athlete that decides how to prepare and reap the rewards or suffer the consequences.
I am neither pro-Pidgeon (never had anything to do with any of the camp) nor anti-UKA (ditto), I just think that the whole "Pidgeon saga" smacks of nannyism, control freakism (if such a phrase exists) and corruption of power at UKA. The Pidgeon camp should be fighting for power - on such issues it is their's by right and it is being forcibly taken from them.
At the end of the day the governing body is there for the benefit of the athletes. The athletes should not be held to ransom by the governing body.
I think that I have some fundemantal disagreements with you, that lead me to other conclusions.
In this weeks AW the editorial suggest that UKA is to blame for the reduction in medals won at the European Championships, compared to previous years. Is it fair and reasonable to hold UKA accountable, then suggest that athletes should be allowed to prepare as they wish, even if their plan is nonsense ?
If UKA athletes win less medals at championships then funding from UK Sport and from sponsorship will drop.
I dont agree with your claims about coaches badges - where does that come from ? As for the other issues - I dont see that Darren Campbells freedom of speech has been restricted, Radcliffe didnt attend the pre-Athens camp, the events that athletes 'have ' to do are mainly trials and Pidgeon was selected for Beijing despite not running the Trials which were a 'must do race'. So I think that you are looking far too closely at the small print in the contract and not at its actual application My question is why ?
EP IS A WORLD RECORD HOLDER!!!
Celtic Cup International, Grangemouth -selected results
Women
100m 1 M Ottey (Slo, guest) 11.92sec, 2 A Boyle (Irl 12.08; 3 S Deacon (Sco) 12.12, (wind -2.6 metres per second)
200m 1 L McConnell (Sco) 23.95, 2 A Boyle (Irl) 24.78; 3 L Doyle (Sco,
guest) 25.02 (-3.0 mps)
400m 1 G Nicol 54.37, 3, F Harding (Wal) 55.29; 3 M Carey (Irl) 55.60
800m 1 J Ross (Sco) 2min 08.24sec, 2 C Gibson (Bank of Scotland development team) 2:09.29; 3 V Barcello (Wal) 2:15.27
4x1500m 1 Ireland (D Byrne 4:22.8, R McGettigan 4:27.1, M Cullen 4:21.1, A Byrne 4:18.9) 17:29.88, 2 Scotland (F Murray 4:25.90, S Scott 4:23.65, N Gauld 4:24.26, H Ovens 4:21.06) 17:34.58 (UK record), 3 British Milers Club seniors (K Wooton 4:32.2, R Ogden 4:29.1, C Entwistle 4:27.1, J Fenn 4:24.4) 17:52.52; 4 BMC Under-20 (J Sparke 4:30.7, S Hopkinson 4:33.7, E Pallant 4:36.9, E Pigeon 4:36.1) 18:17.40 (world jnr best).
High Jump 1 J Crane (Wal) 1.80m; 2 D Ryan (Irl) 1.78; 3 J Nisbet (Sco) 1.73.
Hammer 1 E O¹Keefe (Irl) 69.32m (stadium record); 2 S Webb (Sco) 64.80; 3 L Brannan 60.81
Men
100m 1 D Campbell (Eng, guest) 10.66; 2 N Smith (Sco, guest) 10.84, 3 C Fleming (Sco) 10.93 (-3.0)
600m 1 J Harris (USA, guest) 1min 17.45sec, 2 G Oudney (Sco) 1:18.36; 3 J Nasrat (Wal) 1:18.74
Mile 1 A Webb (USA, guest) 4:02.73; 2 G Murray (Irl, guest) 4:06.62; 3 J Nolan 4:06.85.
Mixed Medley relay (women’s 800m, men’s 2 x 200m, women’s 400m): 1 Scotland (S Hood, N Smith, B Rund, L Doyle) 3:52.16; 2 Wales (S Davies, G Breeze, D Ademuyewo, A Rees) 3:54.92; 3 Ireland (C McGlynn, P McKee, B Doyle, K Harty)
3:55.09
*Team
Triple jump 1 J Carr (Sco, 14.86m) & G Kerr (12.44m) = 27.30m; 2 A Daffurn (BoS development team, 14.14m) & N Mordi (12.54m) = 26.49m; 3 W Roberts (Wal, 14.34) & C Granville (10.94) 25.28m *Long jump 1 D Ritchie (Sco, 7.14m) & G Cooke (5.77m) = 12.81m, 2 S Fleming (Irl, 6.89) & M McLoone (5.45) =12.11; 3 S Benson (BoS development team, 6.59m) & E Henderson (5.51m) = 11.92m
Match result: 1 Scotland 43, 2 Ireland 32, 3 Wales 25
*Jumps were staged as team contests (one male, one female) with each double jump added together to give the best total. The figures in brackets represents the best individual performances by each athlete.
Looking at the results from the weekend and last nights Celtic Cup, there is no way that Emily will run on Sunday at Birmingham. That also begs the question, did Farrow ever want her to run in Beijing and is all of the protest about the holding camp just a red herring. Smell fishy to me anyway.