Athletics Weekly

Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

News, reports and results from the UK and the rest of the world

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby BigGut » Tue May 15, 2012 11:44 pm

Furlong,

How do the cycling people rate outdoor performances against one another. It's not science, in many cases they don't eve look at the race performances, they look at power outputs and other non result based figures.

They can do this because THERE ARE NO QUALIFYING STANDARDS IN CYCLING!!!!!!!

I isn't comparable at all. It's like selecting shot putter s on who can bench press the most or steeplechasers on who has the best VO2 max. We don't do that in athletics because we have tape measures and stopwatches and standards that have to be achieved.

The idea that cycling wouldn't accept a trials being at an arena that wasn't ideal is ridiculous, primarily because they DO NOT HAVE ANY TRIALS!!!! The purpose of the trials is to pit the top athletes against eachother to see who does best. There are no baramatric readings or allowances for differing venues. They all throw at the same venue in the same comp and the only comparison that matters is with the people they are competing against that day. Getting the standard is not restricted to this particular day. They don't need to look at whether this wind reading or altitude made a difference ,you achieve the qualifying standards and beat the opposition in the trials you go, simple.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby fangio » Tue May 15, 2012 11:52 pm

Furlong

Read the link, it has nothing to do with the situation in athletics. It is about how to decide between two riders for an event as GBR can only send on cyclist. There are no qualification standards for cycling and they need to distinguish between cyclists when the country has qualified.

That has absolutely nothign whatsover to do with the situation for throwers at the trials. teh trials are where athletes compete head to head to try to get a top 2 place, that will guarantee them as slot if they have a current A standard. do you really not see how that is very different?

As to cycling seeing it of significance, they would see it as of zero significance, as a head to head competition has the same barometric pressure etc the competitiors are competing at the same time, there are no variables to adjust for. They are not talking about comparing head to heads they are talking about comparing races at different venues at different times. A very different situation.

If two or more throwers get the standard and UKA have to make a choice I ma sure they will look at when where and in what condiditons the 2 throwers throws were made. What the hell that has to do with cycling supposedly making UKA look like clowns I do not know, but you seem to be short of actually making any statements as to how the article shows this, very similarly to another throws obsessed poster who would post links, make statemtnst but never actually post anything specfically linking the link article to his statement wharsoever. He also felt it was best to start 4 threads on the same topic having go at UKA about anything he could make up off the top of his head.
fangio
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:39 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby djlovesyou » Wed May 16, 2012 12:39 pm

What are the chances that anyone that would be going to London is going to miss out because of this hill?

50%? 1% 0.00001%? Is it a big enough difference to warrant your obsession?

Do you even know what the difference in height between the throwing area and the landing area is?

Why do you keep comparing it to cycling? The two cannot be compared - they compete on slow tracks and fast tracks around the world.
djlovesyou
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby BigGut » Wed May 16, 2012 1:22 pm

Furlong,

Please stop pretending you know anything about cycling. When they compete indoors in a highly controlled environment of course they have this data. You do realise that to have this data the air pressure and humidity in cyclign arenas are strictly controlled. You cannot even enter the Olympic arena during pursuit events, there is a lock out to prevent changing the readings. That provides a perfectly even environment. On the otherhand we perform outdoors and we can't do that. We simply have limits which must not be exceeded. The IAAF don't say, this is the qualifying time with 0 wind, this is the time with +0.1, 0.2, 0.3 or on a 1 year old mondo, 2 year old mondo, or in a high stadium, or low staium. If UKA were ever to select based on science rather than results you would go absolutely ballistic, yet this is what you are praising from cycling.

As people have pointed out time and again there are other opportunities to get the standards and the trials is about finishing top 2. There is no comparison with cycling what so ever. The qualifying is different, the selection is different, the environment is different.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby sidelined » Wed May 16, 2012 1:41 pm

fangio wrote:Furlong
What the hell that has to do with cycling supposedly making UKA look like clowns I do not know, but you seem to be short of actually making any statements as to how the article shows this, very similarly to another throws obsessed poster who would post links, make statemtnst but never actually post anything specfically linking the link article to his statement wharsoever. He also felt it was best to start 4 threads on the same topic having go at UKA about anything he could make up off the top of his head.


I'm beginning to wonder if furlong has been recently reincarnated...
sidelined
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 8:19 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Fri May 18, 2012 7:31 pm

I've not been on for a couple of days because of night shifts. But I have spoken to a couple of the coaches who are on the throws programme nationally up here.
I now know who bevone is and some of the ineraction he has had with these coaches.

Bevone I will neither look, nor reply to a personal message from you. One of the guys here says he had some verbal with you on another forum and you PM'd him and threatened him. So it is here in the public forum you must speak.

You still have not answered my question as to who the two part time coaches with England Athletics for the throws that no one would want to listen to?

I also phoned Welsh Athletics and found that not only is Scot Simson is place, but that he was there. Not as you said, not in post until the end of the season. More misinformation.

So the names please?
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Fri May 18, 2012 7:40 pm

bevone wrote:If okoye wins a medal at 2012 it will be because of his school and coach and little of anything to do with uka who have failed to fund him properly according to the transworld sport interview on him because he was not with a uka approved coach.


More misinformation.

Okoyers coach has a coaching license, had been to National Mentoring events and may well be on the programme. he also went with Okoyer to the USA for a month recently. That does not sound like an unapproved coach or not being funded? I've also been told you went to the USA for a month last year, paid for by UKA. So what is your problem?
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby javman » Fri May 18, 2012 8:09 pm

Damocles,

Bevone is referring to the 2 javelin mentors who are Tim Newenham and David Parker. I know them both very well. Tim for at least 20 years and David for around 10. Both are excellent coaches whom I would trust implicitly with any athletes I was helping. Tim has been coaching javelin for over 25 years, has been an ex national coach, and has also branched out his general coaching knowledge to the elite tennis world. David, although slightly newer in the javelin coaching context is quite an expert in his field. Both within the EIS as a S&C coach and has a very talented group up North, of which he has 5 javelin throwers in the Loughboroough International.

Unsure why Bev is alluding to not trusting them. Neither in their role as mentors are interested in coaching other throwers. Whilst I see the use of the mentor system, I personally don't think that it has taken off as well as perhaps EA wished for. It is a real shame that there are a lack of heavy throws mentors, with only Malcolm Fenton stepping up to cover all 3. Fom my perspective I see some fairly big coaches egos in the heavy throws area with a distinct lack oftrust, which is disappointing, but I also understand some of the reasons for this (perhaps one for another thread).

Fom what I see the throws needs a leader to oversee all of the throws disciplines and bring together the plethora of very good throws coaches we do have. However, there are limited contenders for this role, and a big role it would be. I also detect a bit of a disconnect from UKA in looking after the throws, I really don't think they get it.
javman
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 9:56 am

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby tootingmick » Sat May 19, 2012 12:15 pm

Just moving topic above'junk'
tootingmick
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:23 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby bevone » Sat May 19, 2012 1:36 pm

Javman and damocles

YOu brought jav up - i was talking about the heavy throws - I merely pointed out that htye had a naitnalcoah adn mentor (now 2 mentors) when heavy throws have 1 from 6 positions filled.

FYI I have no problem with either of these guys - tim and david I have known for years - and my dad even taught dave''s dad at uni and have always been a vocal supporter of dave and supported him on this site when he was throwing and always greet him warmly when we meet. However I am honest enough to say that I would not particularly seek them out for advice and would not expect either of them to contact me to offer advice or mentor me. I was actually their tutor for their L4 coaching course which was canelled due to lack of numbers several year ago. However they are not the coaches who I have any particular issue with as they are competent coaches from my experience. MY pm explains all that -so i suggest you read it. No threatening behaviour or insults or dont you want to read the truth? So I have not insulted either of these two.

Read the PM and maybe some of your questions will be answered. YOu have a very naive view of coaching. I do not insult anyone and i defy you to find a post that does. I would be interested to know who i threatened as i dont have much to do with the northern coaches simply because of geography. I heard of a uka coach punching incident up north but that was nothing to do with me.

Scott is a mate of mine and told me he was still doing his uka role with the welsh role initially as it says here below. My understanding was that it was until the end of the season - maybe he meant the indoor season but as I know it he was part time until ... Maybe you could produce a news report to state he is in full time employment in cardiff?

http://www.welshathletics.org/coaches/c ... inted.aspx

this is all getting a bit boring so if you want to continue it on a pm i will happily discusss it in a respectful manner. You cannot sit behind your keyboard and tell me what i have experienced - I will glady give you a few examples of how people are treated and what being a uka 'approved coach is'. Unless you are involved you cannot possibly know how innacurate your views are - the truth is not inconvenient casualty? I have not been rude to you so I would appreciate the same respect in return
bevone
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: UK

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby javman » Sat May 19, 2012 3:50 pm

Bev, thanks for clarifying mea culpe in misunderstanding.

From what I see the key aspect is a distinct lack of throws coaches being involved at that level, which is a shame. As I have written previously, there is no leader for the throws. Without this then you will get nowhere rapidly.

All credit to John and Lawrence. Great results so far. Despite the system; well perhaps, though i am sure the system will help where it can.
javman
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 9:56 am

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby bevone » Sat May 19, 2012 4:23 pm

Cheers tom

As you know I have always supported the jav coaches and quality and recently posted that i thought we had either 5-10 or 10-15 coaches in this country who could coach to olympic level and medal athletes. I agree with all you said there - which is what i have been saying as well. I do believe they should or should have appoited a head throws, a shot and disc coach at uka and eng level for a point of contact.

cheers nije
bevone
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: UK

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Tue May 22, 2012 4:04 pm

javman wrote:Damocles,

Bevone is referring to the 2 javelin mentors who are Tim Newnham and Dave Parker. I know them both very well. Tim for at least 20 years and David for around 10. Both are excellent coaches whom I would trust implicitly with any athletes I was helping.


Bevone is referring to two England coaches " England seem to follow suit with only a couple of part time coaches who most wouldnt want any advice from" Bevone did not know that the javelin had two coach mentors, so he can only be referring to one of them. You say both of these javelin coaches are excellent and Bevone says he helped teach one or both of them, so if he is referring to one of these, then it seems his help was not noteworthy, as he decries them himself?

So bevone, as you seem to have trouble informing us of the names of these part time coaches, which is strange, as you seen to have no problem denouncing them, I'll make it easier for you by multiple choice...

You meant?

(a) Tim Newnham and Dave Parker
(b) Tim Newnhan and Malcom Fenton
(c) Dave Parker and Malcom Fenton
(d) You had no idea what you were talking about

As I've requested several times now. An answer please.

Several posters have spoken of their being no throws lead in UKA. A check of the UKA Website reveals that a post exactly titled 'THrows Lead' does exist and the holder is Shawn Pickering? Again this is easy to find out, so why don't posters just do some simple research, and the answer is usually found? What you post here cannot be taken seriously, when you back it with such misinformation.

"Unless you are involved you cannot possibly know how innacurate your views are - the truth is not inconvenient casualty? I have not been rude to you so I would appreciate the same respect in return" (Bevone) You seem to have summed your posts here most accurately. Pointing out that your facts are flawed is not being rude, it is merely being accurate.
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Tue May 22, 2012 4:13 pm

bevone wrote:this is all getting a bit boring so if you want to continue it on a pm i will happily discusss it in a respectful manner. You cannot sit behind your keyboard and tell me what i have experienced - I will glady give you a few examples of how people are treated and what being a uka 'approved coach is'. Unless you are involved you cannot possibly know how innacurate your views are - the truth is not inconvenient casualty? I have not been rude to you so I would appreciate the same respect in return


Give us the examples and your experiences on here, where in the open they can be verified and tested, you get no respect for whispers behind people's backs?

I to am bored, as you continue to post 'expert comment', which time and again is shown to be false.
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby bevone » Tue May 22, 2012 5:37 pm

YOu brought jav up - i was talking about the heavy throws

Pretty clear what i said so why do you persist in going on about the javelin?

' I was actually their tutor for their L4 coaching course which was canelled due to lack of numbers several year ago.'

No claim to teaching them - again pretty clear so read the text properly!

'Bev, thanks for clarifying mea culpe in misunderstanding' was javman's later response when I clarified your inaccurate statements.

YOu really must learn to read things through - you are just mischief making now a WUM!

Please stop there! No more
bevone
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: UK

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby gruffalo » Thu May 24, 2012 7:38 pm

I think people should get real about athletics compared to other Olympic events. T&F has the easiest qualification of all Olympic events.

T&F athletes only have to beat an arbitrary time/mark to get an "A" or "B" mark and in most events even the "A" mark is not world class. More so on the track than in the field. In addition you can send 3 athletes who have attained an "A" mark (non world class) without any relevant world class competitive qualification.

An athlete can run an "A" class time over a long period of qualification time with no comparison in relation to those competitors they meet at OG or WC. An athlete doesn't even have to compete over the season to maintain a world ranking, as in other sports, which would mark their relative World class standing and their qualification to to participate in OG Qualification events.

As far as Team GB is concerned an athlete could just do whatever they want over the season, turn up at the trials, win the trials running an "A" standard and qualify for the OG

Where Team GB has no competitiveness in an event this athletes selection is almost automatically guaranteed even if they don't take part in the trials but have attained the "A" standard at some point over the qualification period. For the huge majority of Olympic events "Athletes" have to qualify by competing against other competitors from other countries. Take rowing where entries are determined by a limited number of World Championship qualifying events. If you are not successful against the other competitors you don't qualify and Team GB, like all countries, is only allowed 1 entry. If this same requirement was applied to athletics probably 80% of UK T&F athletes would not make it to the OG.

You can see how ridiculous this is when at the last OG 80 athletes were deemed "Olympic qualified" for the 100m.

If the same rules were applied to T&F the wheat would be cut from the chaff prior to the games and we would see more realistic selection policies with only 16 athletes allowed to compete up to 800m

T&F however is seen as the blue riband event at the OG and the IOC like to think they are promoting "Sport for all"
gruffalo
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby trickstat » Thu May 24, 2012 10:11 pm

Gruffalo - which is why the standards, numbers of athletes and rounds etc at the OG are so different from the World Champs! Ooops actually they're fairly similar, as I think they are in many sports.

Probably the main reasons some sports have more competitors than others at the OG is pure practicality. For instance, to have as many competitors in a boxing, judo or taekwondo category as in the 100m would require too many contests both in terms of time available in venues that are sometimes used by 2 sports during the games and for the participants well-being. Sports like rowing, canoeing and sailing use equipment that takes up significant storage space therefore necessitating strict limits on numbers.

Athletics, like swimming(I presume), is able to use qualifying standards for entry in a way that just is not plausible for sports like rowing and cycling.

One slot for a country in the rowing eights, means Olympian status for eight mesomorphs and a short coxswain! Not doing them down in any way as I admire rowers a lot, but that soon mounts up in terms of rooms required for accommodation.

I could go on but I fear I may bore myself as well as everyone else...
trickstat
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Thu May 24, 2012 10:57 pm

[quote="bevoneYOu really must learn to read things through - you are just mischief making now a WUM!

Please stop there! No more[/quote]

A WUM...... What is that, or is this another question that you will not answer.

I ask again, WHO ARE THE PART TIME COACHES AT ENGLAND WHO NO-ONE WOULD WANT TO LISTEN TO?

An answer please, on this forum, or admit that you made it up and it is YOU who is mischief making?
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby trickstat » Thu May 24, 2012 11:29 pm

Damocles wrote:A WUM...... What is that, or is this another question that you will not answer.


Damocles

WUM = Wind-Up Merchant.

Just answering your query, not passing any comment.
trickstat
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby fangio » Thu May 24, 2012 11:29 pm

Damocles

WUM - Wind Up Merchant
fangio
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:39 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Laps » Fri May 25, 2012 1:03 am

trickstat wrote:Gruffalo - which is why the standards, numbers of athletes and rounds etc at the OG are so different from the World Champs! Ooops actually they're fairly similar, as I think they are in many sports.

Probably the main reasons some sports have more competitors than others at the OG is pure practicality. For instance, to have as many competitors in a boxing, judo or taekwondo category as in the 100m would require too many contests both in terms of time available in venues that are sometimes used by 2 sports during the games and for the participants well-being. Sports like rowing, canoeing and sailing use equipment that takes up significant storage space therefore necessitating strict limits on numbers.

Athletics, like swimming(I presume), is able to use qualifying standards for entry in a way that just is not plausible for sports like rowing and cycling.

One slot for a country in the rowing eights, means Olympian status for eight mesomorphs and a short coxswain! Not doing them down in any way as I admire rowers a lot, but that soon mounts up in terms of rooms required for accommodation.

I could go on but I fear I may bore myself as well as everyone else...


I agree with Gruffalo. Athletics is in a very privileged position in the Olympics to an extent that looks dubious.

Track Cycling has had to reduce the number of events to five mens and five womens from a World Championships schedule of 19 events. This includes losing the Individual Pursuits, which are the Blue Riband events in Track Cycling. In addition only one competitor per country is allowed in each event. This means that genuine gold medal contenders will be excluded, the obvious example being either Chris Hoy or Jason Kenny in the Men's Sprint, but there are also good medal prospects from France, Germany and Australia who won't be selected.

Taekwondo is another sport with very restricted representation. GB Taekwondo can only send a total of four competitors, two men and two women. Today's Times reported that Aaron Cook, European Champion and soon to be ranked No.1 in the World, was likely to miss out because a European Champion in another weight category is likely to be selected instead. The World No.1 not there because there are insufficient places available. How can that be right?

Whilst world class competitors are being excluded from other sports Athletics includes an awful lot of dead wood. UKA will be sending some of them.
Laps
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:01 am

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby trickstat » Sat May 26, 2012 11:23 am

gruffalo wrote:T&F athletes only have to beat an arbitrary time/mark to get an "A" or "B" mark and in most events even the "A" mark is not world class. More so on the track than in the field. In addition you can send 3 athletes who have attained an "A" mark (non world class) without any relevant world class competitive qualification.

An athlete can run an "A" class time over a long period of qualification time with no comparison in relation to those competitors they meet at OG or WC. An athlete doesn't even have to compete over the season to maintain a world ranking, as in other sports, which would mark their relative World class standing and their qualification to to participate in OG Qualification events.


For me this is a good thing rather than bad. Some examples of Olympic champions of the top of my head who I don't think would even have made the games if T&F had a similar qualifying system to many other sports:

Bob Mathias 1948 Decathlon
Ann Packer 1964 800m
Amos Biwott 1968 3000m S/C
Ed Moses 1976 400mH
Steve Lewis 1988 400m
Irina Privalova 2000 400mH
Pamela Jelimo 2008 800m

gruffalo wrote:As far as Team GB is concerned an athlete could just do whatever they want over the season, turn up at the trials, win the trials running an "A" standard and qualify for the OG


I think the same would apply in the vast majority of cases in the vast majority of countries! Put it another way, the athlete has turned up at the event where all the leading contenders know they should be there and has beaten them and done a good performance. I am not saying that trials should be the sole arbiter of selection (e.g. I didn't agree with Wariso over Black in 1998), but they are often the one time that all the contenders meet and must count for quite a lot.
trickstat
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Mon May 28, 2012 6:25 pm

Bevone,

Still waiting for the answers to who the England coaches are who you made accusations about.

Also to the continually made gripe on many postings that you were treated badly by UKA and the stories you could tell.

Until you make this forum privy to these, then they are but, as probably most readers suspect, just stories.
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Damocles » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:44 pm

No reply yet Bevone? makes your talk on hear of being honest and a man of integrity as hollow as your accusations. Don't bore us anymore with your stories of being treated unfairly by NGB's and bearing false witness about coaches, when you obviously cannot back these tales up with any substance.

The boy who cried poach!
Damocles
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby bevone » Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:52 am

Damocles

You are a clown, unworthy of discussing serious issues but if you look through all the coaching roles inuka, eng, wales, scotland, nI, Mid AAa, naaa or scaaa i am sure you will find a fair few bizarre appointments-

As for your reference to poaching - below is evidence of UKA poaching as cvc tells me what is best for me in the text and also is the complete opposite of what was initially claimed- ie the controversial coach was working with coaches and not athletes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympi ... coach.html

Furthermore this extract is from uka

A spokeswoman said: “We identified a need for greater technical input into Brett’s training and a person who could deliver that to the athlete and his coach in a controlled and monitored environment. The athlete has now chosen to work with this coach.”

They identified a need for .... He was uk number 1 for the 2nd year as a senior, world u23 number 1 with a year left in the age group --- how many other UK athletes in this stage of their development have been 'identified by uka for a greater technical input'. I would say that is pretty unambiguous and covers the poaching by uka quite thoroughly along with the aceptance that UKA had introduced and encouraged the coaching relationship in cvc's own words. Possibly a good example of what poaching looks like!

Finally on this poaching issue - i have neve poached any athletes, they have always come to me and if they had a coach are told to sort that out first. Also for the record and Mike Winch who stated on AD site that i poached Brett off John Hillier. The truth is much simpler. His previous coach as a schoolboy up until just after christmas in his first year at uni was Sarah Moore.. Their relationship broke down and he approached the uka and welsh manager to see what his options were and he approached me. It was his decision and I never coerced him in any way. Thus no poaching on my behalf ever.

Now can you just go away as i am not discussing anything with an anonymous poster or take any cowardly abuse for them or are you brave enough to expose yourself. So put up or shut up!
Thanks JOh mulkeenfor your lack of admin of this. this site is slipping back to the bad old days of abusivr posts i fear.
bevone
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: UK

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby ultragirl » Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:34 am

Ignore him bevone, we all know how much poaching goes on and why it goes on, it is rife these days because those who need the best athletes to justify their jobs are encouraged by their bosses who need medalists to keep the money flowing in.
It is a great shame because it has been shown down the ages that we do not need a NGB to produce world beating champions, all we need is support given to the athlete and coach from people of their own choosing and funded with lottery money as this is what the public are led to belive it is for. I love the suggestion of a level playing field one where any athlete and coach can win funding to further their joint careers, this way everyone gets the chance to have a slice of the cake and not just a few especially foriegn ones.
ultragirl
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 11:50 am

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby BigGut » Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:47 am

Ultragirl,

Considering that Bev getting to coach Brett has always been cited as poaching I don't think we all do know how much poaching goes on. Anytime an athlete moves to a UKA/ national coach people scream poaching, but it simply is not the case as Bevs post illustrates.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby Geoff » Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:17 am

I am not sure anyone knows all the reasons behind Brett's move away from Nigel, not even the two concerned! There are a few issues that have not been aired on this forum, and quite rightly so, and I don't think this is the place to continue to delve into the detail of one specific case. Generalised debate, yes, but not personal and over specific.

Without going over all my whitterings on the structure and effectiveness of UKA's policies I will say there appears to have been some changes for the better regarding centralisation. It has been watered down and I think recent results prove we don't need an over centralised structure. Support, educate and coordinate athlete/coach partnerships wherever they may be has to be the basic philosophy - as it always was!
Geoff
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:33 am

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby bevone » Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:14 pm

BG

I simply gave the true reason why brett joined us as i am sure he will attest to - ie no poaching so this assumption that there was some has to be put to bed. I have purposely not mentioned on this forum any details about his leaving as he can do what he wants. This is all water under the bridge and we have all moved on. The telegraph articles are well documented and non of these articles were instigated by me, this in this case Geoff is why I used info that had already been put into the public domain. ie UKA when presented with the facts relented and admitted that they had introduced this coach with the understanding that he was to join this coach as the spokes woman's statement makes clear. Some of these idiots think they can rubbish you and then expect you to lie on their behalf as if that was the honourable thing to do. Damocles, ultra girl you are right should be ignored but he has continued to witter on his own rubbish. I a not sure why he continuing to pursue this - as i believe he is related to of one of the coaches who he thinks I am referring to.

However, some of the coahces are not even registered on any website as they obviously have not been updated. I dont have to be specific about any coahces as it is possiby unfair to identify indivuduals but recent and previous appointments have largey been parahuted into roles and such people are far from competent coaches with little to write on their bio's so how would one epect to be mentored by them or expecct them to organise an event into a better one. One of the national coaches deminished the role of coach in one sentence and then took it back in the next realising that what he sad may have been company line but not what he agreed to either.

I agree with geoff again as it was my belief that over centralisation is and has never been the answer.

FInally, the daily mail or telegraph had a go at athletics adn CVC this week as number participatign at all lelvels is down as is AW readership apparently as is interest adn take up in the sport - some serios questions need answering esp when AAA of Eng or UKA or bth as for £25 per person next year to be affiliated.
bevone
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: UK

Re: Cycling makes UKA look like clowns

Postby BigGut » Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:22 pm

Bev,

I think you have misread what I said. What I am saying is that in reality we don't know how much poaching goes on. I say this because the people who claim that they know how much poaching is going on have often stated you poached Brett from John HIllier, which clearly is not true.

I have made no comment on Brett leaving you, mainly because you both present very different stories and I cannot rightly tell what has occurred when two people directly involved disagree. I'm not taking sides and I am not defending UKA, I just don't know what to believe when two people present such different accounts.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Current events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

 

Athletics Weekly Limited © 2010. Terms of use

Design by The Church of London