Time to change selection criteria

[Andy]

Now that the final list of athletes has been announced for Beijing, I have to say that some of the selections beggar belief. Athletes have to work their butt of to secure qualifying times and distances because these standards are set to ensure that only the best athletes are competing in the Olympics. If you secure a qualifying time/distance you have every right to call yourself an elite athlete and you should be allowed to perform on the biggest stage in world athletics and yet UK Athletics seem to think that it is OK to just leave A standard athletes behind.

It is time that UK Athletics re-examined their selection criteria and get rid of such a subjective approach which produces team lists riddled with double standards and nepotism. Athletics should be about the performances of the individual, not about whether they have fallen out of favour with the national federation – look at Greece who are just praying that somebody runs the A standard in the womens 100m so that they don’t have to take Katerina Thanou.

So my suggestions for reform would include:
Medalists at the World Champs should be pre selected provided that they can show that they are healthy – as happens with British Swimming

Athletes finishing in the top two of the national championships who have secured the A standard this year should be selected. If an athlete finishes within the top two but has not secured the A standard this year, they should be selected if they have performed the A standard within the last 12 months and have secured at least the B standard this year – this is likely to take into account those athletes who have had a slow start to the season and those who have a habit of peaking for big championships.

In events where we have more than three potential team members, the first two places should be decided by the trials with the third place being decided solely on the basis of this years performances – the fastest, furthest or highest athlete should be selected.

[TheRealSub10]

Maybe a reason why the selection criteria are the way they are can be found here:

http://www.british-athletics.co.uk/

Basically the selection criteria allow them to choose anyone they like for whatever reason. Not always a bad thing. Chrisine O is a case in point. Much better than the US system anyway.

[MikeWinch]

So Andy, pretty well back to what we had pre-Collins.

I agree entirely.

[Andy]

What really gets on my nerves is that everyone seems to blindly accept that what Dave Collins says is gospel. What gives him the right to say to Stuart Stokes or Michael East that they are not not good enough represent their country at the Olympics?
Compare the treatment of Collins to that of Bill Sweetnam at British Swimming. Sweetnam was so villified that he was eventually forced out of the job early. Amongst the most vocal critics were the BBC commentators - so when will we get to hear Colin Jackson or Johnathan Edwards questioning the selection policies of UK Athletics and the performance of Dave Collins? As Olympic athletes themselves, they know the hard work and determination required to achieve the qualifying standards and as such should be championing their fellow athletes.

[muscroft5.freeserve.co.uk]

What have we got.??

A dishonest system of selection by people who are no experts on such matters; full of favoritism,illogical,subjective, deliberately unfair preference for their own funded athletes. what the dickens does that man Storey know about the sprints and field events; performance director for endurance events.??

Any bunch of management speak geniuses who can come up with the following should run away and bother another sport


''A rising profile of performances suggesting a Podium finish in an Olympic cycle'' what unutterable bilge as far as an objective criteria is concerned.

The only power that can know such things about future possibilities of an athletes performances is the great Athletics God somewhere.


This rubbish was undoubtedly used to push through a few of the athletes.


We have tried in this country every system of selection in the last 50 years, except the first 3 past the post, if my memeory is correct, which is not suited to us as we dont have enough qualifying athletes to justify that mode of selection

Collins and the selectors knew full well that they could, in their own little management speak world, justify any selection they fancied and the press would say nowt, and that is exactly what happened. The DC saga is over so the Media are on to the next story.

The American system is 98 % fine, and for them is the best. A committee choosing over a hundred athletes would be a PR disaster. Does not stop them winning 12 to 14 Goldies and a hatful of other Medals.!!!

[Sabrosa]

Andy - You are so spot on with your comments

This is a disgrace and I hope the likes of East and Spokes read this to realise they do have support against this utter nonsense.

East made a comment at the start of the year when he lost his funding that if he did get to the Olympics it would be no thanks to UK athletics and I think this has gone against him.

Any athlete who has the A standard (we are talking Olympic A Standard here!!!!!!) should be allowed to go if they have gaps in the team - to get to the Olympics is an amazing acheivement particularly in Track and Field yet people like Collins seem to have completely forgot this.

Who has the right to take it away from these athletes? Who do they think they are? Collins and his bunch of idiots have no idea whatseover (remember the marks out of 10 farce).

It feels like going back to school where teachers have there obvious favourites.....I just feel vey aggrieved on behalf of these athletes.