Athletics Weekly

British team for Osaka

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

British team for Osaka

Postby no1fan » Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:22 am

Here's the first wave selection list for the World Championships:
http://www.ukathletics.net/press-centre ... rticle-75/
no1fan
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:48 pm

Postby lsabre » Tue Jul 31, 2007 2:40 pm

First, for a second day running, this was just amazing appearing on the BBC report on the first wave selections as concerns Greg Rutherford. Somewhere in the middle it has that:
"As well as Douglas, European long-jump silver medallist Greg Rutherford, Sam Ellis and Rhys Williams - European bronze medallists in the 800m and 400m hurdles respectively - will all miss the trip to Japan because of injury."
However, towards the end it reads (selections):
"Long Jump: Greg Rutherford, Chris Tomlinson"!!!!!

Anyway, Greg Rutherford is on the team, but such a contradiction of content in the same report, apparently by the same individual, is somewhat a low point for the standards of such a world-leading news organisation.

As concerns first wave selections, I must admit I have been astonished to see 49 athletes named in the first segment of the team, nonetheless totally bearing out my prediction of between 50 to 60 athletes going to Osaka earlier in spring, which of course was mocked at the time by the known ones on a well-known site. So there are going to be a convoy of taxis heading to Heathrow! Again, Lsabre scored!

The first wave have as follows:

Men:
100m: Marlon Devonish, Craig Pickering
400m: Martyn Rooney, Andrew Steele
800m: Michael Rimmer
1500m: Andy Baddeley
5000m: Mo Farah
Marathon & IAAF World Cup: Peter Riley, Daniel Robinson
3000m steeplechase: Andrew Lemoncello
110m hurdles: Andy Turner
400m hurdles: Dale Garland
High Jump: Martyn Bernard, Germaine Mason
Pole Vault: Steve Lewis
Long Jump: Greg Rutherford, Chris Tomlinson
Triple Jump: Phillips Idowu
4x100m relay: Marlon Devonish, Tyrone Edgar, Mark Lewis-Francis, Craig Pickering
4x400m relay: Tim Benjamin, Martyn Rooney, Andrew Steele, Robert Tobin

Women:
100m: Montel Douglas
200m: Joice Maduaka
400m: Nicola Sanders
800m: Jemma Simpson, Marilyn Okoro
1500m: Abby Westley, Lisa Dobriskey
5000m: Jo Pavey
10,000m: Jo Pavey
Marathon & IAAF World Cup: Tracey Morris, Mara Yamauchi
3000m steeplechase: Helen Clitheroe, Hatti Dean
400m hurdles: Tasha Danvers-Smith
Pole Vault: Kate Dennison
Javelin: Goldie Sayers
Heptathlon: Jessica Ennis, Kelly Sotherton
20km walk: Joanna Jackson
4x100m relay: Montel Douglas, Emily Freeman, Jeanette Kwakye, Joice Maduaka, Laura Turner
4x400m relay: Vicky Barr, Donna Fraser, Lee McConnell, Jenny Meadows, Nicola Sanders

First, I wonder why Jon Brown isn 't named on the team. I was under the impression that he was named after the London marathon and was dut to compete over a half-marathon around this time. Is he to be considered a late selection but on what grounds?
Second, I 'd have liked the selectors to wait a little more on the men 's 400mh slot, as what happens if Steve Green or David Greene, who withdrew late for the Trials, run faster than Dale Garland until the deadline? The latter, incidentally, holds a faster time than Garland and recently won an epic gold at the U23 Europeans.
The fact is that there is still a good number of athletes vying for further places to Osaka, which could swell the team 's ranks substantially. Crucial points are:

The men 's third spot over 100m which is going to be a tighlty contested affair to the end with Mark Lewis-Francis, Simeon Williamson and Tyrone Edgar all showing good form with hardly anything sufficient enough separating them. This should be a most breathtaking contest I reckon!
The men 's 200m as Marlon Devonish isn 't apparently going to double up, where Christian Malcolm is having a late chance to show form and confirm his place. Otherwise, we could see a youngster like Nelson or Fagan getting a late call-up to the side.
The men 's 400m where Tim Benjamin will be looking to book an individual place on Friday at Crystal Palace against the likes of Jeremy Warriner.
Richard Hill could snatch a late qualifier in the 800m showing a rise in form currently, while there are four strong contenders for two places in the 1500m with Stephen Davies, Tom Lancashire, Nick McCormick and Neil Speaight out in a make or break race at Crystal Palace on Friday. Chris Thompson could also get a chance to show his quality in a 5000m somewhere around Europe though his fitness is questionable right now.
Alan Scott could add his name to the 110mh as he already holds the A standard and a solid late display could see him through. Jermayne Mays may also make a late bid in the steeplechase.
In the jumps, Nathan Morgan could definitely land a jump over 8.20m, while there are Tom Parsons and Samson Oni who should fight it out for the third spot in the men 's high jump.
Carl Myerscough is still in with a shout at a berth on the team, as should Nick Nieland in the javelin.
There is also one place to be filled in the 4x100m relay, and two in the longer one.
On the women 's side, I would expect Jeanette Kwakye and Laura Turner to land the A standard in the 100m provided they get a race under proper weather and wind conditions, and Emily Freeman is capable of grabbing a 200m spot along with Kwakye who needs an agonising 0.01 secs faster to make it!
Christine Ohuruogu could even land an individual place if she shows good form in a time trial on Thursday, but should be assured of at least a place in the relay, as she holds the A standard with 50.28 from the Commonwealths last year. Rumours have it that she is in very good shape!
Then, of course, it 's the third spot in the women 's 800m that is going to be decided between Jenny Meadows, who is already named in the long relay, and late challenging Becky Lyne in a fierce showdown in London on Friday. Could Katrina Wooton add her name to the 1500m line-up as well?
There is no news still on Paula Radcliffe, so is she or is she not going to go?
Lee McConnell and Sarah Claxton are going to have their last chances to net an individual berth in the hurdles, along with Jade Johnson in the long jump and Phillipa Roles in the discus.
Finally, there is also a place apiece on offer for the two relays.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby usedtoit33 » Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:16 pm

There are some interesting and probably controversial choices in the line up, the first being Dale Garland over David Greene in the 400mH. However, I think Garland's 49.78 in those difficult conditions is worth a little faster. He did perform better than I expected and I was really pleased for him.

Am I right in thinking only one B qualified athlete can compete in any particular event? The other confusion comes from Lisa Dobriskey and Abbey Westley being selected for the 1500. Can one A and one B qualified athlete compete in the world champs? It's getting confusing for this observer.

In some cases they seem to have relaxed the rules, sensibly I think. The case in point is selecting Clitheroe in the 3000SC. Though she hasn't reached UKA's more stringent A standard, she has beaten the IAAF's target twice this season which is more than some could say.

I notice in the women's sprints that they have only selected women who've achieved the A standard, though I wish they'd waited on the 200. I think Kwakye and Turner are on the verge of a breakthrough and they've suffered heavily at the awful weather conditions. While I think the US and Caribbean relay teams are probably the favourites I think we could probably put together a very good team now.

The selectors do seem to be keeping reasonably close to their stricter standards which is good to see.
usedtoit33
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 9:44 am
Location: Liverpool

Postby lsabre » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:48 am

As concerns selection procedures, a country is allowed to name even two holders of B standards in an event provided there be at least an individual on the team that has hold of the A standard. Which leads to the issue of why Jeanette Kwakye or Laura Turner weren 't named as individual entrants in the first wave when called-up Montell Douglas and Joice Maduaka have the A standard but finished behind the two at the UK Trials.
A quite controversial decision for me was that Richard Buck wasn 't named in the 4x400m relay team having gained third at the UK Champs on the weekend coupled with a PB in the semifinals, also laying out a great performance at the recent U23 European Championships comprising two PBs and a splendid 44.9 anchor leg with the relay!
Lee McConnell has pulled out of the competition to individual places as she doesn 't feel she is going to make herself justice over 400m hurdles in Osaka, thus solely concentrating on the relay.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

UKA Selection criteria

Postby ronnie rhino » Wed Aug 01, 2007 5:45 pm

Isabre,

you only tipped right because UKA have ditched their selection criteria for Osaka. Following are 2008 Olympics selection criteria which surely also applied this year

Ronnie

===============================================

8.1 Achieving a first or second place at the Trials event;
8.2 A performance record of achieving podium/top 8 placing at World
Championship and/or Olympic level;
8.3 Achievement of the ‘A’ standard on multiple occasions within the
Qualifying Period;
8.4 A rising profile of performance suggesting achievement of podium within
an Olympic cycle.
ronnie rhino
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: stretford near leeds

Postby lsabre » Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:31 pm

Well Ronnie, I tipped right just because I don 't tend to see things through blinkers, taking a lot of aspects into account. Some took off on the news of Nathan Douglas injury, feeling their wishes would come true as horrible weather conditions made them a favour in Manchester, but it wasn 't to be for them! There would have been many more A standards on the weekend but for those appalling circumstances, but anyway there will be more delivered in the following days now that the weather comes good at last.
Note also that if there weren 't some unfortunate incidents like Douglas 's the team would have been even larger. But it is going to be larger anyway!
There were always some open clauses in the selection policy, so if you and your sitemates failed to take notice of them it 's not my fault. I thought on your site you had the moto it is facts that count, isn 't it? So the fact is that I beat you comprehensively once more, so accept it once and for all. Anything else? I also see how pitiable moderation (always suited to the demands of a certain 4-5) is on your site, but I won 't demean myself into your wretched policies here.
You are always going to be runners-up and even worse...
Now, if you excuse me, I would like to keep dealing with athletics rather than street-vendors...
Last edited by lsabre on Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby sleady » Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:44 pm

Is it true that Devonish is now out injured?

I heard something about his arm's been twisted in a bizzare "accident" or something..... :roll:
sleady
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:59 pm

Postby lsabre » Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:46 pm

Sorry, I have no knowledge of such a thing...
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Supping deep from the trough of bile and hubris

Postby ronnie rhino » Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:44 pm

Isabre,

I'm too long in the tooth to be offended by your totally OTT remarks.

Just refer to you Steve Crams BBC analysis on Monday, still on their website. He predicts 2 realistic medallists ( Sotherton and Ennis ), 17 - 18 selections in the first wave, with another 6-7 possibles. He's got more knowledge of the sport than either of us put together in our big toes, but at least I can claim that I am nearer the mark than yourself.

You infer that my intermittent postings to athleticsdaily rob me of any sane opinion. Adolf Hitler was successful in silencing his opponents in a similar way.

Auf Wiedersehen ( eigentlich Nimmersehen )

Ronnie
ronnie rhino
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: stretford near leeds

Postby lsabre » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:47 pm

As I 've said, I have the highest respect for Steve Cram, but I still insist he may have been a little too hasty in certain things. As to who is nearer, we are going to see it during the Worlds in Osaka.
As for your salutation, though I wasn 't referring to you, well it perfectly reflects the regime and attitude on your website - doesn 't surprise me at all! Speedy recovery!
Last edited by lsabre on Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby lsabre » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:13 pm

By the way, Ben Green has improved his SB to 1.48.36 in a race earlier today in Gothenburg, Sweden. He finished 6th in the A heat.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby fangio » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:19 pm

"You infer that my intermittent postings to athleticsdaily rob me of any sane opinion. Adolf Hitler was successful in silencing his opponents in a similar way. "

Whereas AD simply ban anyone they don't agree with and then subject them to vile abuse knowing that they cannot respond.

Ronnie this is an open forum, where you are free to post your objections, unliek AD.

Isabre correctly predicted a larger team than a couple of taxis. What I would like to know is which athletes, in your opinion, have not fulfilled the criteria listed, and whether the team would still be more than a couple of taxis if they were taken out of the equation. It would appear to me that it would, and that Isabre was right.

BTW which bits were OTT in your opinion?
fangio
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:39 pm

Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy

Postby BigGut » Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:16 am

Is this the same Ronnie Rhino who supports the argument that top atheletes should not be fast tracked through the basic coaching qualifications? Why is it always the case with this arrogant self serving mob that they on one hand say how these opinions are held by "Two times Olympians" and people who've "got more knowledge of the sport than either of us put together in our big toes" as if their ability to compete makes them automatically more knowledgeable then when the same knowledge is tested and deemed sufficient to skip the very basic early stages of coaching exams they cry foul?

As I have always said this AD mob have very flexible principles which they easily drop when it suits their argument. i.e. no priciples at all.

As for the team size. I reckon that there are more than a couple of taxi fulls already who have been selected based upon meeting:
8.1 Achieving a first or second place at the Trials event;
8.4 A rising profile of performance suggesting achievement of podium within an Olympic cycle.

These atheletes are the ones who are improving and young, coming through the new system for the first time, a product of athletics under UKA and not a legacy from the previous regimes. That is to be applauded.

In addition there are several competitiors who despite injury this year had already met:

8.3 Achievement of the ‘A’ standard on multiple occasions within the
Qualifying Period;

I really don't see how these criteria would drastically reduce the selected squad.

This has always been very very clear to those of us who actually think about what has been said not about what we would like to have been said. It is exactly like the whole registration debate where it was decided by some moronic cretin that UKA would be breaking the Data Protection Act by having the scheme, totally idiotic but served a purpose in once again besmirching UKA, incorrectly as usual.

The facts are that the selection criteria has not had the effect of decimating the team. Has given more flexibility in terms of selecting up and coming athletes, though granted this may not have been ful;ly exploited, and does focus on taking athletes that have or will have realisitic aspirations of making finals.

With our current crop of under 23s and juniors any policy which provides for exposure to major championships for these up and coming athletes should be seen as a good thing.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Postby Jon Mulkeen » Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:07 am

lsabre wrote:As concerns selection procedures, a country is allowed to name even two holders of B standards in an event provided there be at least an individual on the team that has hold of the A standard.
That is incorrect. You can only have one 'B' qualifier in any particular event. So the likely combinations are:

B
A
AB
AA
AAB
AAA

UKA have selected pretty much everyone they could have at this point. Montell Douglas is the only 'A' qualifier in the 100m; Joice Maduaka is the only 'A' qualifier in the 200m. They've left spots open for 'B' qualifiers in both events - which will no doubt be filled after Crystal Palace. If Turner beats Kwakye in the 100m, then Turner will most likely be named on the 100m team and Kwakye will get a spot on the 200m team. But if both athletes dip under the 'A' qualifier in the 100m, they both can go on the 100m team.
Jon Mulkeen
Site Admin
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:50 am

Postby lsabre » Thu Aug 02, 2007 12:46 pm

Well, Jon, I may have been wrong in that and you are right, it was just what I was told by a national coach here in Greece who trains a certain Olympic silver medallist when I asked him of the procedure. He was probably not well informed at the time of asking. I went through it two days ago and saw what was standing anyway, so I am well aware of what is in effect with B standards now.
Anyhow, it doesn 't make much difference, or at all as concerns the British team. If conditions are good tomorrow at Crystal Palace, I reckon both Kwakye and Turner will get the A standard, while the former also contests the 200m.
What I will be eagerly anticipating is a good showing by Nicola Sanders (something around 50.2 will shape a sound launchpad to the Worlds for her), interestingly facing Sanya Richards and Alison Felix among others, Andy Baddeley to produce a new PB against the mighty Alan Webb, plus the three Britons (Davies, Lancashire & Speaight) running further PBs in the 1500m, the Battles of Britain in both the men 's 100m & the women 's 800m featuring Lyne vs Meadows for the third spot, Christian Malcolm to get the A qualifier under his belt as well as Tim Benjamin and a lot more!
As regards overseas athletes, I reckon we could witness a big world record by Tyson Gay over 100m (fingers crossed conditions are good tomorrow) and I wonder what Alan Webb is capable of on the back of that 1.43.84 in Heusden on Saturday!
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby Jon Mulkeen » Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:02 pm

Alan Webb isn't on the startlists any more.
Jon Mulkeen
Site Admin
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:50 am

Inconsistencies

Postby ronnie rhino » Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:09 pm

Isabre / Fangio / Big Gut

Clearly you are miffed that I post on both this site and AD,

I owe no allegiance to either, nor is AD my own ! I trust both forums are open, I've not been banned by either.

Sorry my opinions don't agree with your own. I wasn't aware that Gordon Brown had banned free speech.

Btw, I wasn't aware that I had made any comments about fast tracking coaches. Certainly not in 2007. Tho if you are monitoring my comments over the years so closely, I am humbled.

Up the Rhinos !

Ronnie
ronnie rhino
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: stretford near leeds

Postby lsabre » Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:19 pm

Ronnie,
I am not annoyed at all by the fact that you are posting on AD, as I have friends who still post there as well as other forums. There are still quality people posting there like Bev, Palladin, Kermit, Nevets, Damouk, Sportsman to name a few. The bad thing is that their quality tends to be overshadowed by the unsportmanship line enforced by some 4-5 "toughies", who are empowered to act according to their will. But where someone choses to post is entirely his own right and I have no objection to that.
The fact with your post yesterday was that it was simultaneously posted on AD, presented as their spearhead act against me, so it looked pretty much like you acted in the capacity of an errand-boy for them. So, you have to see that your posts, wherever are put up, are not used for any other purpose than your own.
Speaking of posts piracy further, I have come upon a couple of my posts put up here on AW that were copied by a certain someone as his own reports on AD! These guys are really unbelievable, on the one hand running me down in every possible way, while on the other using my posts as their own reports on events!
I have no problem if you do not agree on certain matters with me, as we cannot agree on just everything. I used to be on a good footing with you so I wouldn 't like that to change.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Back on topic

Postby MatthewFM » Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:25 am

Does anyone know when the rules changed on this? It used to be the case that you could only pick someone with the 'B' standard as long as no one with the 'A' standard was selected.
MatthewFM
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:28 am
Location: Peterborough

Postby Jon Mulkeen » Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:30 am

It changed this year.
Jon Mulkeen
Site Admin
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:50 am

Postby lsabre » Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:23 am

According to Craig Pickering, in an interview of his on BBC, Simeon Williamson is known to have flown out to Bangkok to compete at the World Student Games, which would virtually rule him out of the run for the third spot in the men 's 100m on the World Championships team. That would see Mark Lewis-Francis even closer to individual selection provided he beats Tyrone Edgar at Crystal Palace later today.
Richard Buck is also on the team to Bangkok thus having not been named on the World Championships squad.
What is unknown, however, is whether the two are going to be selected for the respective relay teams, as in particular the 4x400m one is in need of options at the moment and Buck seems he could provide a sound one on his recent 44.9 anchor leg at the U23 Europeans.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby BigGut » Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:45 am

Ronnie,

As part of an organisation which on principal I wholly disagree with, ARC, because I believe splitting my sport is a very bad idea, I do keep an eye on what you have to say.

Don't get me wrong I am sure that guys like you and Ian Champion have the best of intentions, I just don't happen to think that splitting the sport has any benefits for the sport of road running.

Nothing to do with you actually posting.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Postby fangio » Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:51 pm

Ronnie

Actually I don't mind if you poast on any sites anywhere, I thnk you will find I was drawing a comparison the openess of the two forums. You had said " You infer that my intermittent postings to athleticsdaily rob me of any sane opinion. Adolf Hitler was successful in silencing his opponents in a similar way. "

Which brought AD into the equation and talked about silencing critics. i felt it necessary to point ou that AD has a much better way, if you disagree with the individuals who moderate the site they ban you and then insult you when you have no right of reply. this is an open forum, AD certainly is not.

With regard to "Sorry my opinions don't agree with your own. I wasn't aware that Gordon Brown had banned free speech. " I don't believe that I or anyone else has told you to be silent, I think I have actually asked you questions about your opinion, they were nto rhetorical, I would actually like your answers. this is not AD you can express your opinion here, and you are allowed to ask questions.

I note on AD 3kchaser's time is almost up, as he dared to ask what the allegations against Peter Arnott was. Seems a perfectly reasonable question when assessing the topic, but apparently that's causing troiuble. the only acceptable line being UKA are worng and should be got rid of.
fangio
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:39 pm

Postby Jon Mulkeen » Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:57 pm

Guys, this discussion should really be taking place by private message, email or at least in a separate topic.
Thanks.
Jon Mulkeen
Site Admin
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:50 am

Postby BigGut » Sat Aug 04, 2007 5:58 pm

Ronnie,

You claim that Isabre was only right because of UKA ditching their selection policy. So can you tell me which athletes you do not believe meet the criteria set by UKA, although it should be noted it was criteria for Beijing you quoted.

Isabre said that there would be more than the couple of taxis sent to the champs so if you can please show me the 39 athletes who should not be going according to the criteria. Then perhaps you can claim that the "knockers" were right and Isabre was wrong. Until then your post is just another unfounded attack.

Seems that the idiots on AD think thought that Isabre was in fact this sites admin guy Jon. What diference his identity makes to the excellent results and analysis provided by this guy makes I have no idea. It is also very ironic since the main accusser is James Montgomery who fervently refuses to say who he is and although he has been accussed of being John Bicourt, a man who failed to get posts in the administration and may well be coloured by it, seems to always fall short of actually saying he isn't. The only comments I have seen from him are asking people to stop saying that he is, not actually denying he is.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Osaka no goes ?

Postby ronnie rhino » Sat Aug 04, 2007 6:57 pm

I waited for last nights performances at CP, so here's my list of athletes
who I don't believe meet Dave Collins hardline criteria of the winter :

Rooney, Garland, Bernard, Mason, Lewis, Rutherford, Douglas, Maduaka, Pavey ( 5k ), Clitheroe and Dennison.

These athletes have not performed at the high level require by Collins this summer, and in particular at the events over the last 2 weekends.

If they can perform at or above PB level in Osaka, I will gladly eat my hide.

And please don't just call me a knocker. I have proudly followed UK athletes all over the world for the last 20 years and more. Which is I why I am calling for some realism.

Ronnie
ronnie rhino
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: stretford near leeds

Postby lsabre » Sat Aug 04, 2007 7:03 pm

Well, I think I will start confusing my own identity in a little while! So far I have known to be identified with a hidden British editor, a would-be UKA member, a pundit making a transition to the British media, and now with ... Jon? What else are they going to make up? Will they decide on something at last?
Well Jon, I am really sorry for that but there 's really nothing I can do about it...
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Postby lsabre » Sat Aug 04, 2007 7:17 pm

By the way, Emeka Udechuku has landed the Osaka B qualifier earlier today with a 63.37m throw at the British League Premiership match at Copthall, Barnet. He could be now the first male thrower to make the team to Osaka, with Carl Myerscough also hoping to land a 20-meter before the deadline.
Andy Frost is turning a late surge into the season as he reached out to a massive SB of 72.27m but is still well short of the B standard.
Fierce winds held back athletes with Andy Turner producing a 21.45 secs 200m run while Chris Lambert set 21.05 into a -2.1 m/s headwind! Samson Oni will need to get another meeting before the team is finalised as he could manage only 2.23 under the conditions in the high jump.
Rabah Yusuf, who could be representing Britain next season, defied the windy conditions to a solid 46.60 clocking over 400m, while Conrad Williams ran 46.85 secs a mere day after his 46.80 at Crystal Palace - that 's some consistency! Darren StClair, 4th in the U23 Europeans over 800m, displayed a solid vein of speed in producing a lifetime best of 47.83 despite the windy conditions, which augurs fine for an assault on his PB next week possibly at Stretford.
Last edited by lsabre on Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
lsabre
 
Posts: 5886
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Thanks Ronnie

Postby BigGut » Sat Aug 04, 2007 7:22 pm

I think it is fair to say that the likes of Rutherford, Rooney and to some extent Dennison probably meet the criteria of being those with future potential. It could also be argued that Lewis also meets this criteria, he is certainly our best new hope in the event for some years, however I do agree that the Pole Vaulters do seem to be getting a slightly easier ride in.

As for the others that is 7 atheltes. Taking us down to 42 and there are obviously at least 3 to add to the squad in Lyne/Meadows, MLF/Williamson, Ohurugu? and possibly Benjamin. I still reckon that as a result the hysteria over the new selection criteria and the couple of taxis comment have been shown to be far from the truth.

This squad will have by your own admission at least 45 members all their within the new criteria. That is despite the injuries and other setbacks to Williams, Douglas, Macey, Radcliffe, Ellis and others. So I will quite gladly say that athletics in this country is not in as black a hole as people delight in making out it is. Perhaps if people started to stop crying wolf and exaggerrating then their salient points could begin to look like they may hold merit. As it is it is hard to take anyone seriously who exaggerrates so readily and delights in portrayng the worst possible scenario, and I don't mean you Ronnie.
BigGut
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:16 pm

Postby Jon Mulkeen » Sat Aug 04, 2007 8:42 pm

BigGut wrote:Seems that the idiots on AD think thought that Isabre was in fact this sites admin guy Jon.
LOL. If anyone wants to see the proof (IP address look-up) that Lsabre and I are not the same person, I'll happily provide it.
Jon Mulkeen
Site Admin
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:50 am

Next

Return to Current events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 4 guests

 

Athletics Weekly Limited © 2010. Terms of use

Design by The Church of London