Joining Radcliffe, Yamaguchi and Overall.
trickstat wrote:The women's squad is made up of an Oxford graduate (MY), a Cambridge graduate (CH) and a Loughborough modern languages graduate who is fluent in French and German (PR). A riposte to those ignorant types who think that sportspeople tend to be academically challenged. Not that anybody viewing this board is going to be one of those people!
usedtoit33 wrote:I have a lot of sympathy for Lee Merrien. I really want him to compete in London. The thing is, if you open it up to one person who hasn't met the required standard, do you open it to all? Are we sending (and no offence to Lee) the best team who'll compete on the big stage or not?
Whether you agree or not, the implication of the qualification guidelines set by UKA is having the best team, not the biggest.
Personally, emotionally I think Lee Merrien should be selected, but rationally my head says no. It's really tough. And I don't think that the Olympics these days are necessarily about 'taking part', unfortunately.
mump boy wrote:I have always advocated selecting as big a team as possible BUT this sets a poor precedent coming so early in the season. There is now less of an incentive to aim for the A criteria as everyone knows you can just appeal and get included. I heard that UKA turned down the appeal but BOA over ruled, is this correct ?
I can't imagine CVC being very happy. I would have preferred a quiet word in Merrien's ear that his selection would be announced along with the rest of the team (which will inevitably include everyone possible)
The Selection Panel was asked to reconsider if exceptional circumstances existed, as it could under the policy. The UKA Selection Panel therefore reconvened and following consideration of all relevant facts and using its expert opinion, exercised its discretion to nominate Lee Merrien to the BOA.
sidelined wrote:Geoff, surely the key difference between Merrien's case and the hypothetical ones you cite is that Merrien achieved two IAAF A standards during the selection period. UKA's standard was higher. In the field events, UKA's standards are the same as the IAAF's so there is far less room for latitude. On the track UKA usually only imposes a higher standard than the IAAF when the domestic standard in an event is high. But the standard in the men's marathon is distressingly low.
I hope Merrien's selection doesn't set a precedent. One reason for thinking that it won't is that in every other event athletes have more chances to get it right. If an athlete has competed 10 or 15 times and hasn't got it right then...tough.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 2 guests