olympics deprecation thread

I spoke to a patient this week for whom Jessica Ennis and the other female athletes have proved a huge role model, helping her to accept that not all women needed to look like Katie Price/Jordan to be attractive. Body image issues had caused her to self harm and consider breast enhancement at a very early age.

I see lots of positive role models in the GB Olympic team for people who often lack them; black kids in general and women in particular. For every 'posh' Equestrian team member I'm seeing lots of state-educated and urban competitors in athletics, boxing, BMX for example. Even the skinny white Celt won the Tennis!

Using those role models now is what we could be the real value of the Games I think.

Bruce

You should take your blinkers off, and get on topic…

This is the olympics deprecation thread!

And as a ripped off tax payer I have every right to point out the home truths of this folly freak circus.

Especially as the rich and powerful have orchestrated the financial theft from the hard working majority of ordinary honest folk who are deliberately overtaxed and robbed so the scheming wealthy can easily make billions.

This Olympic fiasco isn’t about sport, it’s a mass hysteria con job, and you like thousands of others have been right royally coned.

So why would young people choose Olympic athletes for role models (?) hmmm let me think -

...they don’t have to work for a living, instead they practise their chosen sport which to everyone else is a recreational pass-time for fun, and on top of all that they are millionaires (and esses). What could be nicer!

So we will now have millions of young people growing up on the delusion of being a well minted ubernaut with lots of gold medals to show their many admirers.

Fat chance, especially if they adhere to company policy and eat a MacDonald’s and drink a bottle of burpa-cola everyday.

They don’t need role models this day & age, they need a honest caring society and a proper hum job, that would be a good start.

Debs

Jesus, I only thought characters like you existed on Harry Enfield sketches.

I personally know (only via friends' relatives) of two people in the olympic team, they both have jobs and no income from the sport. They train every available hour and try extremely hard to raise funds for travel, etc. The very absolute peak of athletes (gold winners only) receive any money worth talking about. Greg Rutherford only received kit from Nike and a small amount of money from a protein drink manufacturer, and he's one of out top athletes!

The only person who's deluded is you. Change your tune Debs, you're looking like an idiot.

The reply is from Colm Quinn, paraphrasing what Bradley might have said, it prompted this from Piers Morgan.

I think Piers has missed that point that, it doesn't matter who said it, the fact it is it is spot on.

Debs

Young people have role models, icons, they are 'fans' and 'followers' by nature. In an age where parental relationships are more fragmented I think that media/sport figures are likely to be as important as any.

If you really think that elite athletes don't 'work for a living' you are deluded. Many work full-time, and also train. Some are full-time in order to train harder, and they train in ways that makes most 'work' look ridiculously easy.

Of course most of us will never be elite athletes, but they generally espouse principles that surely even you would respect; discipline, application, persistence, excellence and respect along with healthy lifestyles.

Sporting role models for may just be about confidence. The kids may not want to be them, but they seeing smart succesful young black athletes being lauded as British acheivers  must be good.

Bruce

Apart from Dwain Chambers.

> Apparently, Jessica Ennis has now secured an income potential of 5 million pounds a year!

I can understand the annoyance at this, I think it should be £20 million; Jess is a national treasure. 

The amount of work she has to put in to achieve what she achieved is unbelievable and she deserves every penny. I'm sure Jess will use her income wisely for the benefit of her community and promoting sport throughout Britain and the World. 

This is true of all of our top athletes and many who do not reach the heights. They work and work. And it is not all fun. Some of it sheer grind, but they need to put in those hours to achieve their goal. 

I'm sorry but I can't think of single negative thing about athletes like Jess. Surely, it is good that young people want to emulate the best. Bruce is spot on with his description. 

As for my night out at the Olympic Stadium - what can I say ... it was wonderful. Organisation superb ... what is a queue? I never saw one. OK, Team GB didn't win any medals, but our athletes certainly gave it go with quite a few personal bests. Of course seeing Blake and Bolt win through their heats was magnificent with the Jamaican supporters around me going wild with excitement - almost as much as smaller contingent from France who supported their tean fanatically, but it common with us all gave every athlete their support. Every British athlete was extremely well supported. Every anthem played respected - just as it should be. 

We had seats quite near the finishing line towards the front of the upper tier so the view was tremendous - though the long and high jumps were on the other side. The Javelin competition was spectacular and for me the highlight of the night was Andreas Thorkildsen - though I fel the Dacalathon competitirs were is some danger as hurtled his spear beyond the line and had there been a line another five metres back I'm wondering if he might have cleared that too. Never thought Javelin could be so gripping. 

British performance of the night was Lawrence Clarke - thought he was magnificent and just fractions of a second from a medal in a field that were all seemingly stronger than him. Truly great effort - just listed to his superb after race interview (please click here) - a role model if ever there was one. Full marks to the crowd too, who showed no disappointment he hadn't won a medal, just sheer delight and admiration for him and that he done himself and his country proud - 4th in the world was way beyond expectations. 

So would I say it was one of the best days, I have experienced?

No. I would say it was THE best day I have experienced. 

When are we having the Olympics again? 

Yes and Alan Wells won the 100m

I really rather our kids followed role models that achieved great things for society and for others. That is, people who devote their lives to charity, public service, advancement of science and engineering etc, rather than role models who are paid to undertake a pastime for the purpose of our entertainment. Just my preference.

I have nothing against the athletes. Good luck to them. Jessica Ennis seems nice enough (although I've not met her, nor do I know much about her other than what I see on the TV). I don't doubt that these athletes work very hard indeed. The zero-sum game of athletic competition isn't made any closer or more exciting by a very large remuneration paid to athletes. You could perhaps argue (and I perhaps do) that the top class athletes being paid enough to train full time allows us to see the true pinnacle of achievement in many sports. But beyond what allows them to take a break from a "real job" o pursue their often-short athletic career, remuneration is a little out-of-control for many sports. Would Bolt run slower on $250,000 per year than he does on $?,000,000 per year?

Again, nothing against the athletes (except the cheats), just saying the system is inefficient and wasteful. But good luck to them if they can take advantage of it. I reserve the right to feel like our money is not well spent, though.

> I really rather our kids followed role models that achieved great things

Yes we agree there and our Olympic Athletes have achieved great things

... did you watch Canada just win the Bronze in the football? 

What is real job ... as well as sit near some great people at the Olympic Stadium last night - there were a few corporate types somebody had let in (must have slipped by security). They seemed to think the occasion was about doing silly deals and drinking beer ... well fair enough when they were quiet, but when one of them stood in his seat to collect his beer and obstructed our view of the 1500m then ... well lets just say he didn't stand up during the evening again. If they are not interested in the event don't come - if they want to sit around talking corporate nonsense and drinking beer then go to a pub. In this country, I hear some young people describe entrepreneurs as their role models and I seriously wonder what the world is coming to - I suppose even that is better than want to be in gang

... still back in the real world congratulations to Canada on their bronze in the football and I really hope we can pick up some more medals in the hockey, sailing and equestrian events. 

Remuneration is an odd thing really ... as I've no idea if I'm worth what I'm paid, but I can see some folk at the head of the company who are definitely not. Jess is worth it though because she is the best in the world at what she does ... so it is good if we can move to a system where people are rewarded for success. 

Well not great, like a breakthrough in medical research, designing fabulous bridge that won't fall down, landing a science lab on Mars, working for a vaccination program that saves thousands of lives in Africa or writing a symphony. But yes, great in a sense that the athletes worked hard, competed well and made a lot of people feel good for a little while. Not the athletes that were beaten or who didn't make the team, though. They didn't feel as good.....

Winning a competition may feel great, and may require hard work and dedication beyond what we can imagine. It may inspire people in some way. But at the end of the day, all that was really done was some people won and for that to happen, a lot of people lost.

PS: I couldn't give a rat's about soccer. Especially women's soccer. I don't care who is playing, or who wins.

> Well not great, like a breakthrough in medical research, designing fabulous bridge that won't fall down, working for a vaccination program that saves thousands of lives in Africa 

these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life, but sport and music, these are what we stay alive for. 

> landing a science lab on Mars or writing a symphony.

Would I describe either as great per se ... perhaps, not though both are worthy achievements - there are some symphonies I would describe as great - in particular those of Ludwig Van Beethoven (the father of progressive rock, as documented in an Excellent Adventure) and Jean Sibelius, but they were hits before my mother was born and though she was born a long long time ago ....  

I doubt either a Mars mission or a symphony are necessary to sustain life, but I'm glad both happen.

I think if you'd been there and seen the greatest show on Earth and see how it lifted the spirits of everybody here then you may have a different perspective on London 2012. It is one of those things where you have to have seen it with your own etes and heard it with your own ears to know just how special it was. I met some Canadians on the train home who said London, England, was the greatest city they have ever visited with everybody so vibrant and optimistic about everything ... not something I would generally have thought to be the case, but I think what they were commenting on was the spirit of London 2012. 

All the best, Guy 

>  I couldn't give a rat's about soccer(?). Especially women's soccer. I don't care who is playing, or who wins.

It was football - the Canadian family on the train did and they had tickets - c'mon Winky why not celebrate a wonderful achievement like this (you know you want to) - your team played really well and did you proud - hold your head up (as Rod Argent once sung). 

I agree that music (arts in general), sport, literature, wilderness, beauty etc are important to how we feel and how we enjoy life. Necessary (along with family and friends) for life to be worthwhile and pleasurable.

In the case of sports, although "supporting" a team or player and deriving some vicarious pleasure from their performance is common, I mostly don't get it. I do enjoy watching some sports, and have enjoyed most of the olympics, but I just don't think it is fundamentally significant, nor that it is really worth the incredible cost. In general I'd rather participate than watch. I enjoy participating in sports that can exist outside of the competitive arena. Cycling, skiing, kayaking and running are my main sports. I enjoy each of these without having to be competing in them (although in the case of cycling and running I have competed in the past, and I used to be very competitive in sailing of all types, too). Sports like football, tennis, basketball etc don't have relevance outside of competition. I find that much less appealing. Once we compete, it becomes a zero-sum game. Achievement and satisfaction doesn't have to require that someone is beaten.

I did attend events in Vancouver, and it was hard not to be swept up in the spirit. But VANOC were paranoid bullies and elitist. The volunteers, athletes and visiting spectators were all enthusiastic and well meaning.

I can't take any credit for the performance of the Canadian Women's football (we DO call it Soccer in Canada!) team. I'm not entitled to be proud. If I was the coach, or parent of a player, then perhaps. But I'm just a (non?) spectator who happens to live in the same country. So what?

So, Jessica Ennis, talented, hard working, attractive, charming, articulate and the best in the world at her job is going to be wealthier than others?

OK.

Your above comment is only your party policy misconceived opinions, and also contains insinuations that are designed to discredit my good character due to your inability to keep to the real subject matter.

If you can’t discuss the Olympic farce issue without resorting to insults to other forum members I would suggest you refrain from posting.

I won’t be influenced or frightened away from any mouth and trouser style of internet bullying.

Debs

Here's my take on that. The athletes are indeed remunerated very unfairly.

1) Remuneration is not proportional to effort. It depends on the sport, success and undoubtedly the attractiveness of the athlete. A hottie like Lolo Jones can make a fortune, even if she's not that good. If you're good AND hot like Jessica, then the sky is the limit.

2) There is a huge disparity between what the winners and everyon else can make. The medals aren't gold for nothing.

3) The bloodsucking entourage that accompanies the team soaks up a huge amount of the money available. Officials outnumber athletes by over 5:1 at this circus.

The whole thing remains unfair and corrupt and not to the benefit (financially) of the majority of athletes attending.

A while back, one of the Canadian olympic skiers was flogging a book (not even written by her - and with nothing to do with skiing, bizarrely) at a coffee shop near where I live. I donated $5 (didn't want the book). She thanked me and asked "Don't you think it is awful how little government funding is available for ski racing?". I just nodded and politely excused myself. What I wanted to say was no, I didn't think it awful at all. If you want to ski for a living, fine. But get someone other than the taxpayer to pay you for doing it. Seriously. If no-one will, then maybe skiing isn't such a great career choice.

BTW, did you see the B"MX" race where everyone except one guy crashed out? Now THAT was entertaining.

I think the point he's trying to make Debs (and I am sure you know this really) is that you are a little, well, predictable. The same overt opinion appears on so many threads across an enormously wide range of topics that it is funny Wolfie.

Just saw the 200m mens' final. Why was there someone dressed as a condom hanging around at the end?

Well, everyone seems so willing to crawl up Bolt's bum so perhaps he came prepared..?

Winky,

My point above is its all entertainment. We have to pay for entertainment.

We pay for ballet dancers

we pay for musicians

We pay for fiction book writers

We pay for theatre,, Billy Connelly, Mama Mia

etc etc etc

Do you really believe this world would be a better place without entertainment, especially in these austere times?

Cheers

Don

That’s not true, I haven’t mentioned (or blamed) the bankers in this thread yet 

but the point it, this thread issue is about the great Olympic rip-off, and not about me.

Debs

I never said that we shouldn't be without entertainment. Quite the opposite. And we should pay for entertainment. My beef is with the inefficiencies and disparities of the system by which we currently do so. A more efficient system would give us more entertainment for the same price.

Let's take a quick look at the options:

"User pays" seems to make sense philosophically, but we must recognise that there would likely be a lot less arts and entertainment without some alternative funding model. But otherwise, this is a good place to start. Certainly efficient, and no-one is subsidizing anyone else. When I buy a book or CD I pay full whack.

Government support reallocates money and is undoubtedly useful (perhaps even necessary) to provide a base to allow a thriving arts and entertainment scene. Not costless to administer, and some would argue that their tax dollars shouldn't go towards funding an opera they don't get to see, etc.

Corporate sponsorship makes a LOT less sense. The promotion of brand just destroys overall value for the consumer. It doesn't make the products better, just more expensive. A less-than-zero sum game as corporations must spend their customers' money on marketing and advertising, just to hold market share, because everyone else is doing the same. If anyone thinks that sports and the arts are cheaper because of corporate support, they haven't thought it through.

winky

I quite agree that not just opera but all music should stand or fall on whether an audience is attracted and pays for it directly.

I speak as a music lover, and someone who used to earn enough at the weekend as a freelance to almost double my weekly wage quite often.

I see no reason why someone with not the slightest interest in music should have to pay tax so that opera and symphonic music in general can be provided at still exorbitant prices - subsidized into further existence. Amateur choirs don't get tax-payers money and the membership would pay enough sub each year to raise the necessary "ad hoc" freelance professional orchestra in to provide superb concerts for friends, family and music lovers at surprisingly realistic seat prices! Why opera and big symphony orchestras should be state susidized is beyond me.

Same for the Olympics. If the O;ympics gets a huge chunk of tax-take money, then why not the immensely popular game of football? I would not want to see football state subsized, but there is no reason to subsize the Olympics [or opera], and not football!

ATB from George

Ah but if we could all choose where our tax went then it wouldn't leave the house...