Athletics Weekly

Athletics placings table

This forum has been closed and continues at ... nt-events/

Re: Athletics placings table

Postby SteveK26 » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:44 am

I'm not a particular fan of CVC, nor do I have a clue how much money has been spent over the last Olympic cycle on athletics.

But one thing seems fairly clear to me. The British team is stronger and healthier, with far more talented youngsters coming through, than it was before Beijing. No reference to 'placings tables' will change my view of what I have seen this year. It has been good on the number of records set, and good from a perspective of more strength across a wider range of events.
Its potentially the best British team for a long, long time, and in my view it will get better in the next few years.

Whether that is because of (or despite) UKA , I have no idea. But no way have we gone backwards . When the next major champs roll around we will boast two reigning world champions and three Olympic champions.Five different athletes. You can call me a 'flag waver', or suggest I'm looking through rose-tinted glasses, I dont care... I'm saying what I see.
Posts: 2921
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:04 pm

Re: Athletics placings table

Postby BigGut » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:28 am

I am not defending UKA when I say this I am merely pointing out a very basic fact. Spouting on about £25m spent since Beijing is completely and utterly irrelevant. Therelevant figure is how much EXTRA was spent when compared to the 4 years to Beijing. If you are going to look at marginal return you MUST compare it to marginal cost.

Does anybody have this?
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm


Return to Current events (Legacy Only)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest



Athletics Weekly Limited © 2010. Terms of use

Design by The Church of London