Pathetic: Great Britain's new motto - "If you can't win, then don't try at all." What a horrible message to send!

To play devil's advocate, they're still sending full youth teams to the upcoming championship.

Also apparently UKA's funding has taken a major hit since the 2012 olympics. Supposedly their funding right now is half of what it was 5 years ago. Maybe between the lack of funding and putting together a bid for the 2017 WCs they don't have the money for full teams and are putting priority on giving junior runners the experience of competing at a world championship. I don't know that's the case but it seems plausible and sounds like they are focused on the future of the sport by bidding for the WCs and sending youth teams.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11111884/Marathon-runner-tasked-with-ensuring-British-athletics-has-a-sporting-chance.html

Any Schlek wrote:

Was this the same Bekele who, the first time he was about to lose a 10K in his life, dropped out at 4k? (And then claimed his "streak" was still alive?)

Was this the same Bekele who ran the Paris Marathon in the spring even when Mo persuaded the London organizers to offer him more £££?

The difference is that Bekele was still nursing an injury and couldn't keep up even to halfway through the race. Farah has shown all year long that he is in good enough shape as anyone else.

Did Mo actually persuade them to offer more money or did he simply suggest that they should?

oeoek wrote:

Any Schlek wrote:

Was this the same Bekele who, the first time he was about to lose a 10K in his life, dropped out at 4k? (And then claimed his "streak" was still alive?)

Was this the same Bekele who ran the Paris Marathon in the spring even when Mo persuaded the London organizers to offer him more £££?

The difference is that Bekele was still nursing an injury

The difference is that Bekele did not feign illness.

oeoek wrote:

Any Schlek wrote:

Was this the same Bekele who, the first time he was about to lose a 10K in his life, dropped out at 4k? (And then claimed his "streak" was still alive?)

Was this the same Bekele who ran the Paris Marathon in the spring even when Mo persuaded the London organizers to offer him more £££?

The difference is that Bekele was still nursing an injury and couldn't keep up even to halfway through the race. Farah has shown all year long that he is in good enough shape as anyone else.

Did Mo actually persuade them to offer more money or did he simply suggest that they should?

He was nursing an injury so severe he couldn't finish, but healed quickly enough to run Brussells and set a world leading time

Manchester wrote:

xenonscreams wrote:

Seems to be working well for Canada with their A+ standard. Lots of world-class Canadian runners beating the top Africans

Although the A+ standard is dumb, Canada is a small country, so it's not reasonable to expect them to have lots of world class runners anyway. Not clear that it's made any difference.

I really don't understand the logic behind making qualifying standards for major championships extra hard on top of the standards the IAAF or IOC has already set. If someone is good enough to go, why not send them? Is it really such a bad thing to finish 15th or 20th in the World instead of top 8?

Is the issues finances? I'm sure most athletes who had the A- standard would be willing to pay their own way if that made the difference over them going or not.

Soprano wrote:

Manchester wrote:

Although the A+ standard is dumb, Canada is a small country, so it's not reasonable to expect them to have lots of world class runners anyway. Not clear that it's made any difference.

I really don't understand the logic behind making qualifying standards for major championships extra hard on top of the standards the IAAF or IOC has already set. If someone is good enough to go, why not send them? Is it really such a bad thing to finish 15th or 20th in the World instead of top 8?

Is the issues finances? I'm sure most athletes who had the A- standard would be willing to pay their own way if that made the difference over them going or not.

The "finance" reason is the biggest joke of them all. They often send a full squad to things like the World Championships or Commonwealth Games... even though basic logic says it costs them just as much.

oeoek wrote:

Any Schlek wrote:

Was this the same Bekele who, the first time he was about to lose a 10K in his life, dropped out at 4k? (And then claimed his "streak" was still alive?)

Was this the same Bekele who ran the Paris Marathon in the spring even when Mo persuaded the London organizers to offer him more £££?

The difference is that Bekele was still nursing an injury and couldn't keep up even to halfway through the race. Farah has shown all year long that he is in good enough shape as anyone else.

How gullible you are. Bekele ran a 26:43 10k just a couple weeks later. His only issue during that race was he was going to get stomped.

Any Schlek wrote:

[

Was this the same Bekele who ran the Paris Marathon in the spring even when Mo persuaded the London organizers to offer him more £££?

That's BS.

As a Brit I am ashamed of this decision. But it is entirely in accordance with UK Athletics' thought processes over recent years. Investment (a misnomer, actually) is made only in athletes considered likely "to medal" (to make a verb out of a noun!) and nobody else. If this means importing athletes like Tiffany Porter that is OK. Careers, reputations not to mention considerable salaries re at stake in the higher reaches of UKA so don't expect any form of forward thinking - or even morally sound thinking!

Manchester wrote:

xenonscreams wrote:

Seems to be working well for Canada with their A+ standard. Lots of world-class Canadian runners beating the top Africans

Although the A+ standard is dumb, Canada is a small country, so it's not reasonable to expect them to have lots of world class runners anyway. Not clear that it's made any difference.

Did you get taught geography?

Canada is actually a large country. Huge.

OP, your headline doesn't make any sense. If their motto was "if you can't win, don't try at all," wouldn't they only send people who had a chance to win instead of sending anyone who could finish in the top 30?

fan of US distance running wrote:

He was nursing an injury so severe he couldn't finish, but healed quickly enough to run Brussells and set a world leading time

Ventolin you are extremely dishonest. For someone that loves to quote Canoga on Farah's abilities, why is it that you ignore what Hermans said about Bekele's ability to get in shape very quickly in just a matter of weeks?

I never said his injury was severe. It doesn't take a severe injury to not be able to race your best just a few weeks later. A muscle strain, Achilles problem, or a swollen ankle can make you pull out of a race but they are very short term (days to weeks to heal) injuries.

Good job on showing us again how much of a dishonest idiot you are.

Here's part of the mission statement of UK Sport (which dishes out the money for high performance athletes):

"At the heart of our investment approach is our philosophy of No Compromise – a commitment to channel the resources needed towards athletes and sports with the greatest chance of succeeding on the world stage, both in the immediate future and in the longer term. No Compromise demands we reinforce excellence, support talent, challenge under-performance and reject mediocrity. Put simply, we strive to invest the right resources, in the right athletes, for the right reasons."

In other words its not about sport, its about winning in sport and "rejecting mediocrity."

not exactly wrote:

OP, your headline doesn't make any sense. If their motto was "if you can't win, don't try at all," wouldn't they only send people who had a chance to win instead of sending anyone who could finish in the top 30?

Well, every federation has limited resources including cash so they must prioritize. Other countries have been doing this for a while.

Another aspect is that by raising the bar, you encourage people to reach higher and succeed. I worked in the cycling world and saw this. When the NGB raised the standards for financial support, we saw performance improve---shocking! Way too many cyclists were doing just enough to keep their stipends and not progressing. Pretty confident that the same thing happens in other sports.

I have no idea how big world XC is in GB, but unless an American wins or at least gets on the podium (as has happened as a team a few times), I doubt it is big in the US even with the running community. How many top US runners skip it and thus the US sends a "B" team?

From everything I have read all UK sports federations are on lean times financially. They invested big leading up to 2012 including paying highly inflated salaries to coaches and staff. Now with funding reduced they are having to make tough decisions.

oeoek wrote:

fan of US distance running wrote:

He was nursing an injury so severe he couldn't finish, but healed quickly enough to run Brussells and set a world leading time

Ventolin you are extremely dishonest. For someone that loves to quote Canoga on Farah's abilities, why is it that you ignore what Hermans said about Bekele's ability to get in shape very quickly in just a matter of weeks?

I never said his injury was severe. It doesn't take a severe injury to not be able to race your best just a few weeks later. A muscle strain, Achilles problem, or a swollen ankle can make you pull out of a race but they are very short term (days to weeks to heal) injuries.

Good job on showing us again how much of a dishonest idiot you are.

why do you keep calling me ventolin?

Why comment at all wrote:

WXC has never been that imporatant a race.

Let me finish this for you......"once the Africans took over".

Tell Dixon, Bedford, Saladbar that WXC wasn't important.

Also, Malmo.......

messi wrote:

Why comment at all wrote:

WXC has never been that imporatant a race.

Let me finish this for you......"once the Africans took over".

Tell Dixon, Bedford, Saladbar that WXC wasn't important.

Also, Malmo.......

and rodgers

Don't be surprised. Some Americans believe Europe is geographically closer to Canada than the U.S.I still have a hard time trying to convince Americans that B.C. alone is larger than California, Oregon and Washington combined.

Eskimaux wrote:

Manchester wrote:

Although the A+ standard is dumb, Canada is a small country, so it's not reasonable to expect them to have lots of world class runners anyway. Not clear that it's made any difference.

Did you get taught geography?

Canada is actually a large country. Huge.