The Olympics is great, but could be much better
By thebigcode, 17 Jul 2012 thebigcode is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- 2012 London Olympics, David Beckham, Olympics, summer olympics
The Games of the XXX Olympiad are just around the corner, and there is a familiar buzz in the air. There’s a sense of excitement and anticipation for what many promote as ‘the greatest show on earth’.
People are talking about the big stories that will emanate from London in July and August.
They are talking about the men’s 100m final and whether Usain Bolt will defend his crown, or will his fellow Jamaican Yohan Blake usurp the king?
They are talking about whether Michael Phelps can bag another swag of gold medals in the pool, and whether the Great Britain team can bag a few more golds than usual at home.
But they are also talking about David Beckham, who was left out of the British football squad for the Games. This begs the question, if one of the biggest stories less than a month out from the Games is about a celebrity who is these days better known for fashion than football being overlooked for selection, then is the Summer Olympic Games in need of a revolution?
The Olympic Games should be about the best athletes in the world coming together every four years to achieve their life goal – winning a gold medal. It should be about athletes reaching the pinnacle of their sport. Is that what the Olympic Games represents today, or is it in need of a refresh, a reload, a revolution?
Football, or soccer, is the logical place to start this thought process. There is little doubt that football is the biggest sport in the world. It is played in almost every country and is followed by more people across the globe than any other sport. But does this popularity alone mandate its inclusion in the Summer Olympics?
To help answer this question, lets go right back to the very first Olympic Games in Olympia, Greece in the 8th century BC. People from all around the Greek Empire came to compete in athletic events and represent their town, village or city. They also competed in the nude, but that is not the kind of revolution we need these days (sports clothing is a good revolution, especially for weightlifting). The warriors back then were the best athletes their cities and villages had to offer, competing for the only glory on offer on at the time.
Fast forward to the first ‘modern’ Olympic Games, in Athens in 1896. Fourteen nations competed in 41 events, from athletics and swimming to gymnastics and wrestling. The Games grew stronger and stronger from 1906 onwards until it became the massive corporate sporting event it is today. Over 11,000 athletes from 204 nations competed at the Beijing Games, with roughly the same numbers estimated in London this summer.
Somewhere along the line, as the Games became a corporate juggernaut, something was lost. Back in the 8th century it was the best athletes coming to the biggest event in the world.
From 1896 through much of the 20th century, it was the best of the best representing their country at the highest level. This is the essence of the Olympic Games – the best athletes, representing their country, at the highest possible level. But that ideal has been slowly corrupted by sports being included at the Games that don’t deserve to be there.
Back to football and our friend Beckham. Football is the biggest sport in the world has its own event (the FIFA World Cup) where the best players from all around the globe represent their country at the highest level. This should disqualify the sport from the Olympics.
The evidence is clear. FIFA, football’s world governing body, actively ensures that their World Cup is the only game in town when it comes to truly worldwide international football by stipulating that only three players over the age of 23 can represent their country at the Olympic Games. Fair enough, that’s their prerogative – so ditch it from the Olympics. This would enrich the Games, not detract from it.
Young footballers the world over grow up dreaming of representing their country at the World Cup. They don’t dream of winning Olympic gold, they dream of lifting the trophy like Pele and Maradona before them. That’s fine, great even, but that culture should disqualify the sport from the Games.
This is the criteria that should be used to determine sports to be played at the Olympics:
a. Is the sport popular in enough countries and with a significant amount of the world’s population? These terms may be difficult to adequately spell out, but lets roll with it for now; and
b. Is winning the gold medal at the Olympic Games the pinnacle of the sport?
If the answer is no to either of these questions, the sport does not qualify for the Olympics. Thank you linesmen and thank you ball boys.
Which is a nice segue to tennis, another leading candidate to be booted from the Games. Tennis players dream of winning Wimbledon, the US Open, the French Open and the Australian Open. They even have an international tournament where they can represent their country in the Davis Cup. No one cares about the Olympic gold medal. Tennis is gone. Can anyone name who won the men and women’s gold medals in 2008 without looking it up?
There are others too which should fall by the wayside to allow for the revolution and a more streamlined Games. Synchronised swimming wouldn’t make it past the first criteria, and in that group you could probably lump one of taekwondo and judo. Do we really need both Asian martial arts in this new, revolutionised Games?
This is without even mentioning wrestling, which is at least a traditional Olympic sport (and tradition should always count for something).
So far we have eliminated five sports from London’s list of 26. The number 21 has a nice ring to it, however we need to look to the future and the 2016 Games in Rio de Janeiro to see the real problem. Two new sports have been added to the Games of the XXXI Olympiad – rugby sevens and golf.
Rugby sevens is a great sport, one that is on the rise and gaining in popularity, particularly in Asia. But unfortunately it falls into the same category as soccer, and falls down in the second leg of our criteria. Rugby sevens is still rugby, and all the players on the field would take winning the Rugby World Cup over winning gold at the Olympics.
Golf, too, would not pass the second test. Golfers not only strive to win one of the four major tournaments across the world, but also have international tournaments in the Ryder and President Cups. The Olympic motto is: Citius, Altius, Fortius, or Faster, Higher, Stronger. Not ‘a longer drive’.
The inclusion of these sports devalue the credibility and spirit of the Olympic Games. We want to see athletes who have dedicated their lives to winning gold. Those who have been driven to the pool by their parents since they were six and swum endless hours and kilometres looking at the black line.
We want sprinters who have spent their professional lives at the track, working meticulously on their start and hours in the gym building their power. We want long jumpers and high jumpers, shooters and archers, gymnasts and cyclers.
These athletes don’t have World Cups, professional tournaments and leagues that are watched by millions around the world every year. The Olympic Games is their time to shine. When was the last time you watched cycling in a velodrome?
When was the last time you watched a 4 x 100m relay on the track? When was the last time you watched a marathon, a weightlifting event or a long jump competition?
An Olympic gold medal should be the pinnacle, it should mean everything. It’s not just another trophy to add to the cabinet.
If a revolution can sweep through Olympics, then it would truly by the greatest show on Earth.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Olympics articles
- Channel Ten to screen 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics (8)
- Roof problem shuts Rio Olympics stadium
- Tame swimming antics show Australia’s tired of ‘scandals’ (27)
- Olympic wrestling down for the count (3)
- Magnussen admits Olympic mistakes
- ASADA powers fall short, says Coates
- Schlanger’s unlikely saviour (2)
- Channel Ten to screen 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics (8)
- Olympic wrestling down for the count (3)
- Shane Heal, the USA and the Golden Generation of Australian Basketball (15)
- London 2012: 30 things from the 30th Olympiad (1)
- Fools gold: Australia’s First Footy Olympics (8)
- How Australian sport can change the world (7)
- Reminders from London (0)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- 2012 London Olympics, David Beckham, Olympics, summer olympics

July 17th 2012 @ 7:26am
MV Dave said | July 17th 2012 @ 7:26am | Report comment
Of all the sports mentioned Football, Tennis and Golf are big enough that they don’t need the Olympics. However it seems the Olympics want Football because it consistently draws the most spectators for what is essentially an U/23 competition.
Cycling has its own World Championships plus the TDF so it may also be scrapped according to your criteria. Rugby 7s is a joke inclusion as Rugby is not a high profile sport in enough countries (largely Commonwealth countries),Baseball would have equal right to be in if Rugby is.
To me the games will involve watching the Athletics, some Rowing, Football, Swimming and Cycling…not too fussed about the rest.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:46am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:46am | Report comment
I thought long and hard about cycling – it is certainly a border line one. I think track cycling (in the velodrome) would stay in, but road cycling could be under threat. The element that saved it for me was that in the Olympics you are riding for your country, where as at the world champs/Tour de France etc you are riding for yourself or for a privately owned team like BMC, Sky or Orica GreenEdge.
Does soccer really draw the crowds? I think it would depend where it was. Perhaps in London and Europe it would, and certainly in Brazil it will. I don’t recall the crowds being all the big in Sydney.
Agree with what you say about the essence of the Games being athletics, rowing, swimming and cycling – those events which most people only watch every four years!
July 17th 2012 @ 9:38am
Johnno said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:38am | Report comment
the big code soccer crowds were big by and large. The final which cameroon won got around 105,000 fans. Australia vs italy at the MCG also got a big crowd.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:05am
Tigranes said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Yeah the gold medal match was a sellout – I was there, Cameroon beat Spain
July 17th 2012 @ 10:12am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:12am | Report comment
Fair enough – thanks for pointing that out.
July 27th 2012 @ 11:41am
kid said | July 27th 2012 @ 11:41am | Report comment
Sellout or not ball sports is not what the olympics should be about. It should be limited to events where a single person competes for a single skill that can be measured in distance or time. Here are a few suggestions. Swiming should have only freestyle as it should measure who can swim the fastest not who can swim the fastest while imitating a frog. Diving should be who can jump from the highest point, not who can look the silliest while risking their life. Wrestling/boxing should be MMA cage fighting. Walking should be held in the olympic stadium grandstand after drinking 3 pints at the start of the opening ceremony and having to hold on until it finished to be able to go to the toilet. Of course dual goldmedalist will have also sculled their pints the fastest placing the empty cups on their head. gymnast should be made to contort their body into a ball and roll down a hill the fastest. which makes me wonder why cheese rolling is not an olympic sport. Equestrian should be 1200m down the ascot straight, (go black caviar!). Any others?
July 27th 2012 @ 12:27pm
GrecoRoman said | July 27th 2012 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
“Wrestling/boxing should be MMA cage fighting.”
- I agree in dropping boxing, but Wrestling needs to stay, MMA is about winning the UFC at the moment. The Olympics should be the pinnacle event of your sport.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:18am
Tigranes said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
MV Dave
re: rugby sevens the Olympics delegates obviously think differantly to you thankfully.
Apparently the Brazilian government has substantially increased the funding for Brazilian rugby for 2016, so thats another organisation that obviously thinks differantly to you.
At the least it will give nations like Samoa and Tonga the chance to win medals – as opposed to events that wealthier countries get to win – equestrian and yachting.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:46am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
I am a rugby fan first and foremost, and I can confirm that the Brazilian Government and big business are pouring funds into the sport because they want to do well at their home Games in 2016 (rugby is bigger in Brazil than many would realise – in Sao Paulo there is a two division league featuring 16 teams).
And while the IRB would be loving the exposure that rugby being included in the Games, does it really deserve to be there? On a selfish level I am happy it is, because I love the sport, but it doesn’t meet my criteria above.
Certainly it is very debatable whether it is popular enough in enough countries, and while the Gold medal would be nice for the players, it’s not what their main focus is. Can’t we do better than that as a spectacle?
July 17th 2012 @ 5:21pm
MV Dave said | July 17th 2012 @ 5:21pm | Report comment
So the reason for permitting a sport such as Rugby 7s into the Olympics is to give a couple of Pacific Island nations a chance to win a medal?? Whilst Rugby 7s might be big in some small nations l don’t think that is a good enough reason for inclusion…Baseball should be in if that’s the case with all the small central American countries given the chance to win a medal.
BTW It wouldn’t overly concern me as a spectator/viewer if football wasn’t in the Olympics…we have so many great tournaments as it is…but as l said in my original post it is the IOC that want football not the other way around.
July 23rd 2012 @ 3:04am
James said | July 23rd 2012 @ 3:04am | Report comment
so are you suggesting MV Dave that Synchronized swimming is more of of a global sport than Rugby? what are you smoking?
Rugby world cup i the 3rd biggest sporting event. Its there like football to draw the numbers. There are over 20 countries competing in rugby 7s.
Baseball is only popular in the US, Japan and Cuba. Its a minority sport in many countries.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:06am
Johnno said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:06am | Report comment
-You ditch the big sports ike sevens rugby, and soccer, well there goes your tv ratings, and the olympics is about making money and tv rights now. You ditch the big money spinners then you will be left the country will be left with a big budget black hole.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:43am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:43am | Report comment
Good point – but do people really watch or attend the Olympic games for sports like rugby and soccer? I would argue they don’t, and are more likely to go for things like swimming and athletics, that don’t have their own competitions which are larger than the Olympics.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:55am
Johnno said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Well big code to say they don’t, the evidence is in the pie that they do. As tv ratings for soccer a high, is soccer the pinnacle of the olympics I don’t know, but the crowds and tv ratings $$$$ are high for soccer.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:23am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:23am | Report comment
Yep I acknowledge attendance figures from Sydney above. I still think that the Games should be about sports reaching their pinnacle, and when you have a Mickey Mouse U23′s tournament it devalues the medal and the Olympics as a whole.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:08am
peeeko said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:08am | Report comment
ummm. sevens rugby hasnt even been in the olympics yet
July 17th 2012 @ 1:07pm
AIS said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Of course it was. Just ask Johnno.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:50am
sheek said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
BC,
Interesting article on several levels.
I’m also skeptical about the need for sports like football, rugby, baseball, tennis (which all have highly publicised world cups or majors or finals series), to be in the Olympic games. Even basketball. While I’m a rugby fan, if football’s inclusion is dubious, then so is rugby’s.
Where do you draw the line on a sport’s inclusion or exclusion (money drawing power probably)? But as I’m sure you’re aware, it’s all about maximising the profit potential of the games.
As much as I love the spectacle & drama of the Olympics, I’m also sadly aware so much of it is a sham.
You mentioned the Ancient Olympics. Even these were eventually abandoned when greed & corruption eventually made the Ancient Olympics unworkable. I suppose eventually the same will happen with the Modern Olympics. Although when we will reach this point is anyone’s guess.
I was discussing the Olympics this very morning with my teenage daughter as I was driving her to school. I mentioned how the drug maskers are many steps ahead of the drug testers. There’s also the very real scenario whereby the IOC, & for that matter, many ruling sports bodies, don’t have the real desire & inclination to expose drug cheats.
If they did, then they might expose many, if not most of the finest athletes in the Olympics movement. Usually, some poor unfortunate & uneducated (in drug taking terms) middle of the road athletes will be caught, which will give the impression the drug testers are on top of things.
But the big fish are protected. And how much would exposing them hurt the bottom line? Hugely! And at the end of the day, it’s all about the money, isn’t it?
Someone might say, what about Ben Johnson? Ben had no-one to blame but himself. He panicked, & took a drug when he knew he shouldn’t (in competition). He broke the SECRET protocols, & paid the price. If there’s one thing the IOC, or any ruling sports body hates, is being embarrassed. Once embarrassed, the IOC hunted down Johnson.
Allegedly, all 3 place getters from the 1988 100m final – Johnson, Carl Lewis & Linford Christie – were on the juice. Only Johnson paid the price, & only because he broke the secret protocols. Imagine if Lewis (1984 winner) & Christie (1992 winner) were also exposed.
That’s the kind of publicity the IOC is happy to suppress & never see the light of day. On the other hand, Lance Armstrong is being chased (silent French cycling officials behind the scenes) because it really irked them no end, some yank won their greatest cycling race so often.
Back to the Olympics, & I suggest everyone enjoy the Olympics for the spectacle & human drama (there’ll be plenty of both). But just don’t take any of it too seriously. Anyway, enough cynicism from me today……….
July 17th 2012 @ 10:21am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Thanks for your in depth and well thought out comment Sheek, you raise some very good points.
The Games has certainly become a corporate juggernaut, and I think the event is worse off for it. The IOC (along with the other big sporting organisations like FIFA and to a lesser extent the IRB) are far from being transparent decision makers – except it is clear they are all about making money.
While I would like to be an idealist, the reality is money needs to be made to make the event a success. I would argue that the event in itself is incredibly popular, and the ‘Olympic’ brand would continue to make money even if some of the bigger sports, like soccer, were excluded.
As for doping, it is a constant battle for all sports, one that required constant vigilance. I think we are in a better place at the moment than we were in the 80s, 90s and early 00s, but people thought that back in Sydney and look what happened with Marion Jones. That Usain Bolt and Donovan Bailey are the only men’s 100m champs in 30 years to not have their name tainted by drugs is evident of just how large the problem was.
I don’t know what the answer is, except to continue pouring funds into R & D so testing continues to improve and help that sportsmanship still means something – which it clearly does to some in the Tour de France, as evidenced by the excellent behavior of race leader Bradley Wiggins in the ‘tack stage’.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:27am
sheek said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
Well BC,
One argument is this, & it’s yet to be definitely proven beyond doubt – if Armstrong is a drug-taker, he’s still the best anyway, if you assume most of the best riders are on the juice. So Armstrong’s still the best, whether they’re all clean, or all on the juice.
Ditto athletics. Ditto many other sports.
This is what sports doctor Tony Miller (an Australian) advocated many years ago – legalise doping, & then everyone’s back on the same level.
Of course, this kind of argument raises more questions than it will ever solve……….
July 17th 2012 @ 10:42am
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:42am | Report comment
If we legalise doping though, what’s the point? Where does it stop? Which drugs are allowed and which aren’t? When can robots compete? (Now that would be an event!)
I was watching the Tour de France today and the commentators were noting the lack of pace in the stage. They said this was a throw back to the old days of cycling, before doping, where the riders simply couldn’t go all out every single day of le Tour.
Perhaps a return to the slow pace on some stages is evidence the sport is cleaning up? We can only hope.
July 17th 2012 @ 5:43pm
Tom Callaghan said | July 17th 2012 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
THE BIG CODE
Morning Biggo!
I understand that you are a ‘rookie’. Biggie, your article exudes rookiness! You say that home advantage wiill allow GB to win more golds than usual. In a sense this true. GB is likely to surpass the total of 19 golds won at Beijing, which was good enough to gain fourth place on the medal table, but I suspect that your remark is evidence of unfounded Australian condescension towards British sport.
Lack of home advantage in Beijing did not prevent Britain finishing above major sporting nations such as France and Germanyin addition to Australia which has been on the retreat in sporting terms since Sydney in 2000.
I understand that sporting statisticians throughout the world expect GB to surpass the number of golds gained in Beijing and possibly finish third on the medals table. This will be a highpoint in the rising graph of sporting success enjoyed by British sport since the low point of Atlanta in 1996: three Ashes series,the attainment of number one status in test cricket and T20, a rugby world cup won on turf where the Australian team might be expected to perform better than usual,high placings in a variety of worldand European sporting medal tables including boxing, swimming rowing, athletics,modern pentathlon, taekwando,triathlon etc:even the under performing football team is ranked fourth in the world by FIFA..
The ability of Australians to cling to a belief in special sporting prowess in face of overwhelming sporting evidence to the contrary never ceaes to amaze me. I remember that it was only a few months ago that contributors to the Roar were congratulating themselves that it would ‘take an earthquake in the stadium to stop Sally Pearson gaining gold in the 100 metres hurdles’……..
July 17th 2012 @ 9:28pm
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:28pm | Report comment
Morning Tom!
That remark about whether or not GB will win more medals was just an introductory one. I would have said it about the hosts no matter which country was hosting. So thanks for your psychoanalysis but I think you jumped the gun a little.
The article was about something else entirely, and in fact didn’t mention Australia’s sporting prowess at all! GB had an awesome Beijing Games, especially in the velodrome. Their cycling team will be expected to do brilliantly again, among plenty of others.
Having said that, your post shows why Aussies enjoy beating England (not so much the other Home Nations) so much, and here’s hoping we finish above them on the medal tally!
July 17th 2012 @ 3:17pm
cg26 said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Interesting article.
First of all I recently bought an academic textbook, believe it or not, on the Olympic Games and what I have garnered so far is that there’s really no point referring to the Ancient Olympics when trying to define the Modern ones. The ideals we think they are about are mainly modern inventions.
Re rugby sevens, I think it’s a sufficiently different sport that often draws on a different type of player. There was a Rugby Sevens World Cup but they have agreed to scrap it if it’s in the Olympics so I think it meets that criteria.
Golf….. I can only assume they expect it to make money. Barely even a sport in my opinion. Maybe there should be two categories of Olympic sport – regular ones and money-makers, ie golf, soccer, tennis (I assume lots of people watch the tennis). They would need a more PC name for the category but I don’t think people would really care apart from that…..
July 18th 2012 @ 12:25am
thebigcode said | July 18th 2012 @ 12:25am | Report comment
I like it CG26. Maybe we can call it the ‘Money Games’. It can run before or after the Olympics (or maybe the same time) and people can just watch on TV…
As for Rugby Sevens, they still have the world sevens tour, which is a great even that includes the Hong Kong Sevens. It would be a shame if this had to be scrapped in order for the sport to compete in the Games – so the alternative of not including it in the Games seems better to me!
July 18th 2012 @ 4:43pm
cg26 said | July 18th 2012 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
AFAIK they are not scrapping the world tour, just removing the ‘World Cup’ label from one event.
They could very drily call it the Corinthian Games or something! At the same time would be fine… just not adding to the medal count.
July 17th 2012 @ 3:36pm
WoobliesFan said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:36pm | Report comment
Here’s my rant :
I missed the Chinese and Athens Olympics…completely and utterly…on purpose….had zero interest.
The memory I have of these games is Greece’s track sweethearts doing a runner from the doping authorities, Phelps’ 8 gold medals (he was beaten by that SERB btw), some chinese guy randomly stabbing a sporting official and Bolt’s double in Beijing…..oh, and that Aussie female rower giving up…..that’s it…actually, one more – the basketball….loving watching the Boomers.
I loved Sydney 2000…I have fond memories of LA, even though we now know good old Carl U.S.A Lewis was hitting the “sauce” like a champion.
The whole Greece meltdown…WOW!…..proves how much a crock of crap the Athens Olympics were….what a lunatic decision to hold the games in a county that was, for all intents and purposes, in a terrible financial state, on the verge (if not there already) of total bankruptcy and social unrest.
Man, I’m am so cynical of The Olympics……I can’t stand the notion of a drug-free mission statement when you have the 100m sprints, weightlifting….they should make steroids legal and just end this useless facade…. let the athletes jab in the dressing rooms….cypionate, deca… they do it in the shadows anyways. Everyone’s doing it…see doco on Seoul Olympics 100m final for a nice dose of reality.
I think most of all what I despise is the IOC….Samaranch is old-school, dark ages governance….the bureaucracy around him is ridiculous…the bidding for games…what an insestual, corrput process that is.
As for the London Olympics…..Whoopie Doodle Dee….whose broadcasting them anyway?…9?…..Christ, what an imbecile bunch of talking heads they’ll line up for us…Sutcliffe, Fattie….who else?…ummm, oh yes, EDDIE McGUIRE…horrible.
End rant…..
July 17th 2012 @ 9:34pm
thebigcode said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
I love a good rant WoobliesFan.
I am sure you’re not alone in your cynicism. As I said above, if we allow doping then what’s the point of sport? It crosses the line in my opinion, and we should never stop trying to purge it from sport. There is some evidence now that this is happening – but hopefully it doesn’t come out in a decade that everyone is now doping.
The IOC is an absurd bureaucracy that is too big for its own boots. Jacques Rogge is the current president (Juan Antonio Samaranch stepped down after Athens I believe) but things haven’t really changed. This is a problem with all big international sports organisations: FIFA, UEFA, IRB etc. People in the highest echelons of sports administrations seem to be more interested in golden handshakes and money under the table than anything else…
July 17th 2012 @ 9:43pm
Tom Callaghan said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:43pm | Report comment
THE BIGCODE
Thanks for your replyBIG.
I’m lost for words! The magnanimity of your reply has quite disarmed me…….
July 18th 2012 @ 2:46pm
DanMan said | July 18th 2012 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
Swimming needs to be trimmed.
Cannot understand why we have 4 different ways to get from one end of the pool to the other, 3 ways clearly inferior to the other.
July 18th 2012 @ 4:45pm
cg26 said | July 18th 2012 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
It would be fine if only the same people didn’t win medals in several different strokes. You don’t see the same people winning sprinting & hurdling races over the same distance, but clearly you can be good at all the swimming strokes at once and there is no point awarding so many gold medals to the same people.
July 18th 2012 @ 5:01pm
DanMan said | July 18th 2012 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
Nah the 3 other strokes are stupid. there is no 100m hop, 800m skip etc. There is walking tho . . . sport????
July 19th 2012 @ 1:49am
thebigcode said | July 19th 2012 @ 1:49am | Report comment
It’s a good point, one I have heard before. I understand freestyle, breathstroke and backstroke are all unique strokes that require different skill. E.g., breathstroke is more aerobic than freestyle, which is mostly aerobic. Breahstroke is a survival stroke, freestyle is getting from one point to the other. Breathstroke is to swimming what hurdles is to running….maybe.
But butterfly should be ditched. It serves no purpose. It is a variation on freestyle that looks stupid. We could improve the IM by having it bookended with freestyle so it goes freestyle-backstroke-breathstroke-freestyle. Same for the relays.
July 19th 2012 @ 1:16pm
Jocelyn McLennan said | July 19th 2012 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
A walking race is like trying to see who can whisper the loudest!.
July 27th 2012 @ 12:23pm
GrecoRoman said | July 27th 2012 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
You may not be aware, but Judo and Wrestling are two quite large international participation sports. We don’t really have a strong history of participation in this country so inevitably you ‘exclusion list’ is biased to some degree. There are all sorts of different games and sports, but only the various forms of wrestling are indigenous to every culture in man’s historical development. The wrestlers and Judokas at the Olympics are some of the finest athletes on the planet. The Olympics is their pinnacle event and millions of people around the world will be watching their country’s participants in these 2 sports just as closely as we in Australia follow the swimmers, runners, hockey players, etc.
July 27th 2012 @ 1:28pm
Johnno said | July 27th 2012 @ 1:28pm | Report comment
-Greco roman to say ditch boxing i don;t agree with. Olympic boxing has a colourful and controversial tradition and a rich history. As does wrestling and judo. And greco-roman wrestling, all fine athletes too.
And to say boxing should be ditched over wrestling and greco roman wrestling and judo i have 2 things to say to you.
-The Olmypics are now about modern history and tv ratings and capitalism and money making $$$$, not ancient history and the ancient olympics.
-And boxing i think generates higher tv ratings than any of the forms of wrestling and judo. So therefore Olympcis is about money and capitalism and want the fans want. then if anything wrestling and judo should be cut, as money making is no 1 greco roman. Don’t believe me , all the stadiums have to be paid for by the tax payers a lot of them and the high tv ratings sports help pay for the whole shebang of the 2 week sports event called the Olympics.