August 19, 2008 at 10:15 am
Surprised this hasn’t been mentioned.
I was originally going to publish this a few days ago to wind up poor old Steve Rowell, but, he doesn’t need it, well, the 100 less GB team is stuffing OZ, lets hope he hasn’t got a TV in his hospital room.
So what do you think. We have a team of relatively unknowns, who can name one of them, but I can’t recall us ever being in third place at this stage of the games, or in third place ever, I cannot come to terms with us being so far ahead of the Russians.
My only concern is that GB’s medal hopes were almost always based on our prowess in track and field, this is where we might come unstuck, why we have lost our world class athletes in this field is very odd, the Athletics Association must be pretty useless if they cannot deliver world class athletes as they have done before, we have a large population, I cannot accept that we haven’t a world beater somewhere in amongst them.
I’m sure that some brave souls will prove me wrong, but I’m not convinced that they will be able to deliver, I just hope I’m proved wrong.
By: MattSoden - 27th August 2008 at 16:32
I didn’t really think much of it, was happy when we were 3rd, but then we became 4th!!
Russia closed it.
I reckon 2012 will be better!
By: Propstrike - 27th August 2008 at 16:12
The Olympic juggernaut is utterly out of control now. The long-debased athletics tournament has become a giant, bloated balloon ( to mix metaphors)which will soon go bang more or less in paralell with the global economy, and is now much more an international willy-waving contest which has lost contact with any notions of perspective, budget or logic.
The ‘ 3 pounds’ waffle, if there is any truth in it, would be 3 x 60 years = Β£180 per person x 60 milllion population. I have no wish to spend my Β£180 on a running, jumping and throwing contest, but seemingly do not have the option to withhold my funds.
Many people love the Olympics, and I wish them well, and applaud the idea of fitness and personal endeavour. However, we (nation GB) cannot afford to kind of contest we seem to be revving up for, and it will become a HUGE waste of resourses if it is not reigned in now.
We should hold it in Hyde Park, with existing paths for running already round the perimeter, open parkland for throwing stuff and the cycleways are also already in place. There is a nice big pond for swimming, and trees you could dive off. Sailing and under-water ping-pong can be easily accomodated
If that fantastic solution is rejected then get real, abandon the UK host concept, and relocate to the home of the Olympics, ie Athens ,where all the facilities are in place, and crying out to be used.
It would be seen by some as a bitter blow to our national prestige, but better than than a half-cocked, semi-finished attempt which cripples us with debt until the end of time. Don’t believe the hype and the VI’s (vested interests) – the Millenium Dome fiasco will be a mere sideshow in comparison
By: swerve - 25th August 2008 at 23:58
The former head of the Italian Olympic Committee, Luciano Barra correctly prediced that team GB would be 10th in 2004, using the results of of the last world championships in each sport and Barra’s perdiction for Team GB this time round is 4th with 48 medals.
I saw Barras projections (he insists they’re not predictions: they’re simply projections of what would happen if the most recent international competition results were repeated at the Olympics) just before it all began. But for Shanaz Reade blowing away the silver she had almost guaranteed to try for a risky gold & crashing out completely, he’d have been spot on in total numbers, but not in all the details. He projected 18 gold, 10 silver, 20 bronze, 48 total: we got 19/13/15/47. His full UK projections –
Archery
Bronze: Individual men
Silver: Team men
Bronze: Team women
Athletics
Bronze: Men’s 4x100m relay
Gold: Women’s 400m
Silver: Women’s 400m
Bronze: Women’s 4x400m relay
Bronze: Heptathlon
Boxing
Gold: Lightweight
Bronze: Light welterweight
Bronze: Bantamweight
Canoeing
Bronze: Slalom men’s K1
Silver: Slalom women’s K1 (2006 result)
Silver: Flatwater men’s K1 500m
Gold: Flatwater men’s K1 1000m
Cycling
Gold: BMX women
Gold: Men’s individual pursuit
Gold: Men’s team pursuit
Gold: Men’s sprint
Silver: Men’s team sprint
Gold: Men’s madison
Gold: Men’s keirin
Gold: Women’s individual pursuit
Gold: Women’s sprint
Equestrian
Gold: Individual three-day event
Silver: Team three-day event
Gymnastics
Bronze: Men’s pommel horse
Bronze: Women’s trampoline
Judo
Bronze: Men’s 81kg
Silver: Men’s 100kg
Modern pentathlon
Bronze: Women
Rowing
Bronze: Men’s lightweight double scull
Bronze: Men’s coxless pairs
Gold: Men’s lightweight coxless four
Bronze: Men’s eight
Bronze: Women’s double scull
Gold: Women’s quadruple scull
Bronze: Women’s eight
Sailing
Gold: Men’s 470
Gold: Men’s Finn
Bronze: Women’s Laser Radial
Gold: Women’s Yngling
Silver: 49er
Swimming
Bronze: Men’s 1500m freestyle
Bronze: Men’s 100m backstroke
Silver: Women’s 200m breaststroke
Silver: Women’s 10km open water
Triathlon
Gold: Women
By: swerve - 25th August 2008 at 23:40
One thing I’ve noted however, almost every medal table on almost every news web site that covers the Olympics from a number of counties shows China first, US second and UK Third….Except the US news sites that show US first, China second and UK fifth (Behind Russia and the Aussies). No…No…No… Number of overall medals don’t count, unless you have the same number of gold and silver medals as another country, then the Bronze ones come into play, Likewise Silvers only come into play when numbers of golds are equal. Gold = Country won the event. Silver & Bronze = well done, but your a Loser.
I like the idea of counting like the Norrington table, giving different numbers of points for gold, silver & bronze. On 3 for a gold, 2 for a silver, & 1 for a bronze, Australia moves ahead of Germany, France goes from 10th to 7th, & Cuba from 28th to 12th. The top 4 stay the same. On total number of medals, Cuba also goes from 28th to 12th. Someone should tell the Yanks – maybe it’ll reduce their enthusiasm for counting that way.
By: BIGVERN1966 - 23rd August 2008 at 17:50
She’s just lost the semi though, weird sport, can’t make head or tail of it, perhaps darts would be a less aggressive alternative.
Rules are quite simple, Pete. Itβs a fight, but you can only use your feet (in the version of the sport done in the Olympics, there are other versions that allow use of the hands as well). Points are scored for getting a foot on to a target area of the opponentβs body. 1 point for the torso, 2 points for the head. The foot also has to hit the target area with some strength, so a light tap or glancing blow will not score a point. Thatβs where the Judges come in. You can use your legs, arms and movement to defend yourself, but a dive or move outside the 10m Sq fighting area to avoid an opponentβs attack will get you a Β½ point penalty. Two penalties, and you loss a point, and your opponent gains one.
Also, if one competitor should knock their opponent down with a scoring kick, and they donβt get up quickly, the ref can do a count and the successful attacker will gain an extra point.
The fight is broken down into 3 two minute rounds, with a 30 second break in between, though first contestant to 12 points, or a lead of a clear 7 points will stop the contest in their favour. Should scores be level at the end of the third round, there is a sudden death 4th round. The fight can timeout for adjustment of protective equipment or treatment of an injury, however the time out is very limited (one minute) and should you fail to re-enter the fighting area in time, there is an instant disqualification, as a Cuban found out today. Worth looking out for that match, as he then pulled a perfect 2 point head kick on the Ref and also had a pop at one of the judges, and looks like both himself and his coach will be banned from the Olympics for life. Video of it here (may not work outside the UK).
Anyhow, the Brit girl did got the Bronze in the end.
I didn’t think Team GB would get more that another 2 Gold medals, and thatβs all they got, Well done, Tim Brabants and James Degale. Looks like I was right about the sprint relay teams as well, Team GB could have exceeded that 48 total. One short, 47 total and a definite 4th place.
That’s the lot I’m afraid, British sport fans, unless Dan Robinson can pull something really special out of the bag in the Marathon tomorrow, though Team GB has beaten the Aussies to 4th in any method of medal counting.
By: laviticus - 23rd August 2008 at 17:16
She’s just lost the semi though, wierd sport, can’t make head or tail of it, perhaps darts would be a less aggresive alternative.
Pulled of a bronze and a yorkshire girl to boot.
By: Pete Truman - 23rd August 2008 at 10:58
british taekwondo team lodge a complaint and get it upheld.
She’s just lost the semi though, wierd sport, can’t make head or tail of it, perhaps darts would be a less aggresive alternative.
By: laviticus - 23rd August 2008 at 10:20
british taekwondo team lodge a complaint and get it upheld.
By: Pete Truman - 22nd August 2008 at 13:34
Well, the Aussies are sports mad, and well funded and they don’t spend most of their money on Football like most of the rest of the world with the exception of the US and the sub continent. South Africa, Rugby Union and Cricket are the main sports, with football coming up behind. India and Pakistan, Cricket rules king, period. As for the rest Football is where the money really is, including the UK. However, thanks to John Major (about the only good thing I can say about the guy), the UK has been able to improve across the board as regards Sport.
I met John Major once, quite frankly a nice genuine bloke, a Tory politician of odd background, but untainted by rape and pillage at Eton, likes steam locos as well.
Boris is on his way to glory by flying over to the closing ceremony on sunday where he will be revelling in Ken Livingstones efforts, as well as having to sit with our much loved PM, please don’t comb your hair Boris, show the ******s up.
Ooh, noticed we are still 2 golds ahead of the Russians, wait till our boxers do the business, that’ll show em’.
By: BIGVERN1966 - 22nd August 2008 at 11:37
I agree with you, we couldn’t expect the Russians not to put in the late spurt that we should have done, they are a big and very proud nation and must be feeling frustrated at not being up there with the leaders until now.
I feel very sorry for our relay team though, especialy as the USA cocked up their change over as well, it’s very easy to get into a tangle with the baton when emotions are fired up, I’ve messed up a few times myself, they must be gutted.
I find it very interesting how some countries medal tallies are so low, it really surprises me for instance that South Africa, cricket and rugby world class players, have won only a silver, Hungary, no golds, Argentina, Brazil, India, Pakistan, nowhere, and even France is way behind us in the medals table.
I’ve critisised our athletes, but looking at the GB performance in comparison to other, comparable nations, we are on another planet. Forget Australia, they don’t compare, their entire GNP must be devoted to sport, and if they feel they can afford it, good for them, but I find a country with a big area but relatively small population, to be achieving so much is a little wierd, they must have some sort of secret elixir, perhaps it’s called a decent and happy lifestyle, or Bondi beach perhaps.
Not knocking you Aussies, good luck to you, it’s great to see how much such a relatively unpopulated country can achieve, how do you do it.
Pity Steve Rowell wasn’t availiable for comment, we could have had a field day. Good on you Steve, you’re missing all this you silly sod.
Well, the Aussies are sports mad, and well funded and they don’t spend most of their money on Football like most of the rest of the world with the exception of the US and the sub continent. South Africa, Rugby Union and Cricket are the main sports, with football coming up behind. India and Pakistan, Cricket rules king, period. As for the rest Football is where the money really is, including the UK. However, thanks to John Major (about the only good thing I can say about the guy), the UK has been able to improve across the board as regards Sport.
By: Pete Truman - 22nd August 2008 at 09:46
They will be third by the end of the games Pete, Can’t see Team GB winning more than another couple of golds max, The Russians have far more prospects for gold in the remaining events and are one gold behind. However UK sports target was 35 to 41 medals with 10 to 12 Golds. As of now Team GB have 40 medals (plus a minimum of 3 bronze medals from the boxing to add to that total) and 17 Golds. The former head of the Italian Olympic Committee, Luciano Barra correctly prediced that team GB would be 10th in 2004, using the results of of the last world championships in each sport and Barra’s perdiction for Team GB this time round is 4th with 48 medals. I think we would have had a not bad chance of almost making that figure with the medal chances we had, until the Mens Sprint Relay threw a very good chance of a medal away.
I agree with you, we couldn’t expect the Russians not to put in the late spurt that we should have done, they are a big and very proud nation and must be feeling frustrated at not being up there with the leaders until now.
I feel very sorry for our relay team though, especialy as the USA cocked up their change over as well, it’s very easy to get into a tangle with the baton when emotions are fired up, I’ve messed up a few times myself, they must be gutted.
I find it very interesting how some countries medal tallies are so low, it really surprises me for instance that South Africa, cricket and rugby world class players, have won only a silver, Hungary, no golds, Argentina, Brazil, India, Pakistan, nowhere, and even France is way behind us in the medals table.
I’ve critisised our athletes, but looking at the GB performance in comparison to other, comparable nations, we are on another planet. Forget Australia, they don’t compare, their entire GNP must be devoted to sport, and if they feel they can afford it, good for them, but I find a country with a big area but relatively small population, to be achieving so much is a little wierd, they must have some sort of secret elixir, perhaps it’s called a decent and happy lifestyle, or Bondi beach perhaps.
Not knocking you Aussies, good luck to you, it’s great to see how much such a relatively unpopulated country can achieve, how do you do it.
Pity Steve Rowell wasn’t availiable for comment, we could have had a field day. Good on you Steve, you’re missing all this you silly sod.
By: Creaking Door - 21st August 2008 at 20:06
It sounds a lot when you say it like that…
…but it only actually represents about three quid per person per year since the games were last held in Britain. π
Three quid I would rather spend on something that interest’s me π
Iβm not that interested in the Olympics myself but I could hardly begrudge the UK spending the money.
After all, how much Me-109E do you get for Β£2.99? π
By: heslop01 - 21st August 2008 at 19:23
I heard that the cost of the London olympics will not cost more than 9.4 BILLION pounds!!!!!:eek:
According to the BBC commentators the opening ceremomy for Beijing cost $20 billion – and that was just for fireworks
By: BIGVERN1966 - 21st August 2008 at 17:52
Strength in numbers doesn’t seem to be helping the Russians, perhaps the strict drug testing is having an effect.
They will be third by the end of the games Pete, Can’t see Team GB winning more than another couple of golds max, The Russians have far more prospects for gold in the remaining events and are one gold behind. However UK sports target was 35 to 41 medals with 10 to 12 Golds. As of now Team GB have 40 medals (plus a minimum of 3 bronze medals from the boxing to add to that total) and 17 Golds. The former head of the Italian Olympic Committee, Luciano Barra correctly prediced that team GB would be 10th in 2004, using the results of of the last world championships in each sport and Barra’s perdiction for Team GB this time round is 4th with 48 medals. I think we would have had a not bad chance of almost making that figure with the medal chances we had, until the Mens Sprint Relay threw a very good chance of a medal away.
By: Me-109E - 21st August 2008 at 17:27
It sounds a lot when you say it like that…
…but it only actually represents about three quid per person per year since the games were last held in Britain. π
Three quid I would rather spend on something that interest’s me π
By: 91Regal - 21st August 2008 at 16:39
Incidentally, I’m really impressed that our so called no hoper has just won a silver medal in the high jump, it gives us confidence, anything could happen after this, it’s the same old story, once the tidal wave gets going, who knows where medals will come from, as long as it isn’t Australia, Steve.
Actually, Pete, that ‘British’ guy formerly represented Jamaica, and only switched allegiance recently (availability of funding?). Have you noticed the amazing amount of former Africans running for various Gulf States? I daresay that’s something to do with finance rather than a lifestyle choice.
By: Pete Truman - 21st August 2008 at 15:47
“BTW: how many silver & bronze do you have?”
Of course we have nowhere near as many as the mighty USA. Or China for that matter.
But then again both of those Countries have around twice as many athletes entered as Great Britain. Strength in numbers? Obviously.
Regards,
kev35
Strength in numbers doesn’t seem to be helping the Russians, perhaps the strict drug testing is having an effect.
By: kev35 - 21st August 2008 at 11:34
“BTW: how many silver & bronze do you have?”
Of course we have nowhere near as many as the mighty USA. Or China for that matter.
But then again both of those Countries have around twice as many athletes entered as Great Britain. Strength in numbers? Obviously.
Regards,
kev35
By: J Boyle - 21st August 2008 at 00:07
Number of overall medals don’t count, unless you have the same number of gold and silver medals as another country, then the Bronze ones come into play, Likewise Silvers only come into play when numbers of golds are equal. Gold = Country won the event. Silver & Bronze = well done, but your a Loser.
I’m not usually anti American, but this really grips my poo. Just face it, the Chinese are whopping your backsides USA.
Huh? You got up on the wrong side of the bed today.
Most U.S. media sites I’ve seen keep track of the Medal count…then break them down by colour.
It’s been like that as long as I can remember…whether the US is doing good or bad in games.
A medal is a medal…be it gold, silver or bronze.
At least in English.
To simply count (or announce or print) the gold medals would be doing a disserviceto the people who have trained for years. As a former TV news person, you never exclude a group. Because if you do, you’ll get calls from their families. π
I’m sure there are a lot of “loser” silver & bronze competitors who would like you make you eat your words.:diablo:
BTW: how many silver & bronze do you have? π
And I don’t care if the Chinese (or anyone else) gets medals that’s not the point of the games…if you’re over 12.
By: BIGVERN1966 - 20th August 2008 at 23:36
But has that not always been the case, why should things be different this year. I agree that the system seems unco-ordinated, but there has always been a well known, familiar athlete that has done the business, not anymore it seems, the media seems to be too obsessed with money making sports. Perhaps some of these footballers who earn more in a day than most of us do in a year should help out the athletes rather than spend it on their bloody kitchen tiles, they can always top up their earnings from exclusives to Hello Magazine if they feel that skint.
Well thatβs the problem, BBC used to do primetime coverage of AAA events back when Coe, Ovett and Cram were in their prime (Goldern Mile meet, for exmaple), hence everybody knew who was who. I haven’t seen that outside major competitions for years, bar the odd Sunday Grandstand on BBC2.Football is one of the major problems, too much focus on that one sport.