purpleronnie Posted 12 August 2012 Posted 12 August 2012 Well we've not exactly dazzled on the track, didn't get the 8 medals they wanted, and even though we did amazing in the velodrome we could have/should have won 3 more cycling medals, 5 if you include bmx in there. I'm not complaining I just think that we shouldn't rest on our laurels and aim for second place in Rio I think they'll be happy with the athletic perofmances, yes we didnt get 8 but 4 golds and 6 medals is pretty good, but I agree we have to push on.
Super_horns Posted 12 August 2012 Posted 12 August 2012 The coach was on 5live and didn't seem too happy but he is a hard task master,
purpleronnie Posted 12 August 2012 Posted 12 August 2012 The coach was on 5live and didn't seem too happy but he is a hard task master, good.
Jordan Posted 13 August 2012 Posted 13 August 2012 Now that it's all said and done... I've got to say that my favorite winner for the home team was Mo Farah. This is partly due to the 5k and 10k being my two favorite distances to run, but also because of how Farah electrified the Olympic Stadium crowd. You're lucky to have such a great sportsman and personality representing your country. My point is, while they've dominated the sports they usually do (to an astonishing degree too), they've actually spread out a lot more than the Americans. There's only one problem with your point: it's untrue. The U.S. won gold medals in 15 different events, as defined by the IOC, while China won gold in 13. Also, the U.S. took home medals in a total of 21 sports compared to China's 19. In terms of "disciplines," as defined by the IOC, the U.S. won gold in 13 discipline to China's 11, and both countries won medals in 16 different disciplines. 16 gold medals out of 34 (so far) from swimming alone is ridiculous. It's only because swimming gives out disproportionate amounts of medals compared to the other sports. The Americans might absolutely dominate swimming, but the Chinese are competing for gold in far more disciplines than their American counter-parts, with 150 athletes less than the USA. As for swimming, even though it is very difficult to master multiple styles of swimming, why does swimming get criticized for having a relatively large amount of medal events at the Olympics, but not athletics (100m, 200m, 400m and 800m, not to mention relays and hurdles)? And as for the point about the difference in number of athletes, well, if China had a half-decent athletics program, and the U.S. didn't have the best track-and-field team in the world, perhaps the total number of athletes on each side would be closer. But as it was, we brought 67 more competitors in athletics than they did (even with all of our 125 competitors qualifying with A-standards while China was able to bring some B-standard athletes). Also, we fielded whole squads in three events (women's football, men's volleyball and men's water polo) in which China did not qualify. Oh, and interestingly enough, China also brought two more swimmers to London than the United States. While the Chinese Olympics program has made steady progress over this past generation, the United States remains the world's preeminent sporting power.
Captain... Posted 13 August 2012 Posted 13 August 2012 Now that it's all said and done... I've got to say that my favorite winner for the home team was Mo Farah. This is partly due to the 5k and 10k being my two favorite distances to run, but also because of how Farah electrified the Olympic Stadium crowd. You're lucky to have such a great sportsman and personality representing your country. There's only one problem with your point: it's untrue. The U.S. won gold medals in 15 different events, as defined by the IOC, while China won gold in 13. Also, the U.S. took home medals in a total of 21 sports compared to China's 19. In terms of "disciplines," as defined by the IOC, the U.S. won gold in 13 discipline to China's 11, and both countries won medals in 16 different disciplines. As for swimming, even though it is very difficult to master multiple styles of swimming, why does swimming get criticized for having a relatively large amount of medal events at the Olympics, but not athletics (100m, 200m, 400m and 800m, not to mention relays and hurdles)? And as for the point about the difference in number of athletes, well, if China had a half-decent athletics program, and the U.S. didn't have the best track-and-field team in the world, perhaps the total number of athletes on each side would be closer. But as it was, we brought 67 more competitors in athletics than they did (even with all of our 125 competitors qualifying with A-standards while China was able to bring some B-standard athletes). Also, we fielded whole squads in three events (women's football, men's volleyball and men's water polo) in which China did not qualify. Oh, and interestingly enough, China also brought two more swimmers to London than the United States. While the Chinese Olympics program has made steady progress over this past generation, the United States remains the world's preeminent sporting power. I think one problem with the swimming in the olympics is that one person, Phelps, can compete in 8 events, 3 of them being relays and it just seems you get a disproportionate amount of golds, if you have the best swimmer in the world, Ian Thorpe was similar, 5 medals in Sydney, compare that to the fastest man on the planet, he gets 3 golds. Chris Hoy could have got 3 Golds in the Cycling if they hadn't limited entrants to 1 per country, because of British dominance in Beijing (which I think is disgusting when so many other sports have a dominant country and nobody has done anything about that). I think Swimming needs to cut out some of the races, do we need to see them race over 50m, 100m, 200m, 400m, 800m, and do relays over 100m and 200m. I would cut out the 200m and 50m and do the relays over 100m and 400m, it would just limit the ability of one athlete to clean up in so many events, what Phelps did was amazing, but why is it only swimmers that get the chance to do so, I'm sure Bolt would clean up if there was a 50m race and a 200m relay.
Manwell Pablo Posted 13 August 2012 Posted 13 August 2012 Well we've not exactly dazzled on the track, didn't get the 8 medals they wanted, and even though we did amazing in the velodrome we could have/should have won 3 more cycling medals, 5 if you include bmx in there. I'm not complaining I just think that we shouldn't rest on our laurels and aim for second place in Rio Your dreaming there, 29 medals is a fantastic achievement and we missed out on some we should of perhaps won as well but that always happens at the Olympics. 27 was the most optomstic prediction I saw and they got laughed at by a lot of journos, we had a lot of Luck, we were on home soil which always helps (Look at Chinas medal haul and compare it to London) and a lot of work has gone into to making sure we were at least reasonable succesful in our own games. If we go forward, or even manage to maintain this sort of performance at an Olympic games I will be gob smacked. We aren't going to comepete with two nations that take sport seriously and have much larger populations, better natural conditions and better training facilities than us. We should be happy that we are so far in front of nations of a similar size i.e South Korea France Italy Germany etc.
goose2010 Posted 13 August 2012 Posted 13 August 2012 'Women' shot putter has had her gold medal took off her, tested positive for steroids (I think they just looked at her and realised!) http://www1.skysports.com/olympics/story/21717/7987168
Webbo Posted 13 August 2012 Posted 13 August 2012 'Women' shot putter has had her gold medal took off her, tested positive for steroids (I think they just looked at her and realised!) http://www1.skysport...y/21717/7987168 I remember watching that event, my missus wouldn't believe she was a woman.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.