# Olympic Games that are not games



## jasconius (9 Aug 2012)

Surely 'sports' like dressage, gymnastics, gymnastic-rhythmic, gymnastic - artistic, synchronised swimming, diving etc, should be dropped from the games.
While I am a keen sports fan, I just don't see these activities as sport.
They are surely more of an art form than sport. There is no physical contact with or against the other contestants.

I would also be doubtful about sailing - this is more of a pastime than a sport.

I see that in Rio 2016, they are going to include golf !

They may as well introduce motorsport F1 as well, 

Having vented my spleen, The London Games are the best ever!

Just noticed that Rugby Union 7's will be in Rio as well - that's a bit more like it!


----------



## Crugers (10 Aug 2012)

jasconius said:


> _...There is no physical contact with or against the other contestants...._


I'm in partial agreement with you...

I do think javelin, discus, hammer and shot put(t) would be much more exciting if there was an "opponent" at the other end of the field...


----------



## blueband (10 Aug 2012)

i wouldnt call sailing just a passtime. its a very big sport all over the world.


----------



## Newbie! (10 Aug 2012)

I'm agree about dresage and synchronized swimming to an extent but I think that because I dont understand the science of each sport and how long it takes to train etc. I think gymnastics is absolutely a sport and belongs there. I could never dream to do what those guys do.

I think that sports that already have major competitions elsewhere should be removed...tennis, soccer to name but a few.

Either way, I've enjoyed the games immensely. The inclusion of these games hasnt bothered me, I just opt not to watch them.


----------



## ninsaga (10 Aug 2012)

Saw last night that BMX biking is an olympic sport also! what next - rollerskating!


----------



## TarfHead (10 Aug 2012)

jasconius said:


> There is no physical contact with or against the other contestants.


 
Where was the physical contact between Usain Bolt and the others ? I get your point, but narrowing the argument down to physical contact is, IMHO, weakening the argument.


----------



## ringledman (10 Aug 2012)

jasconius said:


> I would also be doubtful about sailing - this is more of a pastime than a sport.



What! Sailing is one of the most physically demanding of all the sports at the olympics. 

You are in the boat for a full week and the stamina required to keep the boat upright in force 6+ winds is immense. 

To compete at the olympics the top sailors will spend the whole winter in the gym. 

Add in the mental demands of tactics, match racing the opponents, reading wind and tidal shifts and it is up there and surpasses the demands of near on all the other sports.


----------



## Sunny (10 Aug 2012)

The problem here is very few people have tried to do any of these sports so it is difficult to comprehend the physical effort and skill required. I have no problem with any of these sports being part of the games but I do agree that any sport where an olympic medal is not the pinnacle should be removed. Also, I think the Olympic games have become too big and costly to host.

Having said that, I cannot bring myself to watch Greco-Roman wrestling!


----------



## Shawady (10 Aug 2012)

The funny thing abut these olympics is that I watched sports that I would not normally watch just because there was an irish competitor. The sailing on Monday was exciting to watch even though I know bugger all about it.
Katie Taylor was impressive but this was the first time I actally watched a full fight even though she was a 4 times world champion.


----------



## T McGibney (10 Aug 2012)

About time they had a Quiz at the Olympics. We have rights too.


----------



## Purple (10 Aug 2012)

Track and field, athletics and things that are derived from combat are, for me, the core of what the games are about.

I'd have sailing before I'd have soccor or rugby.


----------



## Firefly (10 Aug 2012)

I think it's kinda hard to watch and get excited for professional athletes in soccer, tennis & basketball at the Olympics - they have their own "majors" and the Olympics is a sort-of add-on. For athletics, gymnastics and the like, the Olympics is their career defining event.

God help us when Golf is an Olympic sport.


----------



## Sunny (10 Aug 2012)

Sitting here watching the BMX biking. Makes me what to root out my own BMX from 25 years ago!


----------



## Purple (10 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> Sitting here watching the BMX biking. Makes me what to root out my own BMX from 25 years ago!



If you do stick it on YouTube and give us all a laugh


----------



## Purple (10 Aug 2012)

Firefly said:


> I think it's kinda hard to watch and get excited for professional athletes in soccer, tennis & basketball at the Olympics - they have their own "majors" and the Olympics is a sort-of add-on. For athletics, gymnastics and the like, the Olympics is their career defining event.
> 
> God help us when Golf is an Olympic sport.



Yea, I'd agree with that.


----------



## Deiseblue (10 Aug 2012)

Perhaps football should not be included as the olympic tournament ranks well below the Euros , the World Cup & other international tournaments but personally I give thanks that it has.

The Mexico Senegal , USA Canada & Brazil Honduras games were marvellous to watch & those games allied to the performances of the Irish boxers have been the highlights for me.


----------



## ninsaga (10 Aug 2012)

Shawady said:


> .......The sailing on Monday was exciting to watch even though I know bugger all about it......



expert commentary here which explains how it works


----------



## ajapale (10 Aug 2012)

Is "horse dancing" an Olympic sport?


----------



## Purple (11 Aug 2012)

ajapale said:


> Is "horse dancing" an Olympic sport?



Yes, it's called dressage.


----------



## Leper (11 Aug 2012)

The way things are going with the Olympics Ludo and Snakes & Ladders will soon be added as "sports" - personally, I believe the Olympics Sports should be confined to Track and Field events only.


----------



## DrMoriarty (11 Aug 2012)

ajapale said:


> Is "horse dancing" an Olympic sport?


It goes back to the 15th century. See here.


----------



## mandelbrot (11 Aug 2012)

Just spotted what for me is the biggest joke event of the whole thing - "race walking"!!??

Thanks to technology like Sky+ boxes with High Definition picture that can be paused and played in slow motion, can see that almost every stride they take involves them being momentarily off the ground... therefore they're not walking, they're running. Which pretty much renders the entire event pointless.


----------



## Delboy (11 Aug 2012)

the modern pentathlon.....watched some of it this eve and have to say it struck me as 1 of the most made up events of all. 
a bit of shooting with laser guns!, some pony showjumping with horses you've just met, fencing of the sword variety (not of the sledge hammer and paling post!), a short swim and a short run made up of cross-country and around the showjumping arena

bizarre


----------



## gianni (11 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> Just spotted what for me is the biggest joke event of the whole thing - "race walking"!!??
> 
> Thanks to technology like Sky+ boxes with High Definition picture that can be paused and played in slow motion, can see that almost every stride they take involves them being momentarily off the ground... therefore they're not walking, they're running. Which pretty much renders the entire event pointless.



There are judges around the course to inspect whether or not you lose contact with the ground (as the Irish competitor found out to his cost). Wouldn't be my favourite sport but I definitely wouldn't consider it a joke.


----------



## mandelbrot (12 Aug 2012)

gianni said:


> There are judges around the course to inspect whether or not you lose contact with the ground (as the Irish competitor found out to his cost). Wouldn't be my favourite sport but I definitely wouldn't consider it a joke.



I think you've missed my point there Gianni: it's irrelevant what the on-course judges spot, or more importantly, fail to spot. You me and the dogs on the street with a remote control to hand can clearly see that some/all of the competitors are not in fact walking. Therefore the event is a nonsense.

For example I slowed down the last 5 mins of the womens 20k race this evening, and both of the Russian ladies (the top 2) could clearly be seen to be off the ground on pretty much every stride - they were running. How do you deal with that?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (12 Aug 2012)

Darts? Snooker? Horse Racing?

The soccer definitely doesn't do it for me.  By negotiation with FIFA the criteria are designed to ensure that it is inferior to the WC.

Tennis, at least there are no restrictions on entry, but somehow I think Murray would swap his Gold medal for a Wimledon crown any day, and not just for the monetary gain.  Golf will be the same.

Notice how China led for most of the two weeks but the USA stormed ahead when we got to the "proper" games. 

Besides Katie, I think Mo Farrah is the man of the games.  Usain Bolt?  First of all I much prefer the long distances and they are much more demanding but I also have this niggling feeling that Carl Lewis is right, how can a nation of 2.7M people be so dominant in the sprints.  Unfortunately we know that the sprints are particularly amenable to the use of drugs.  Michael Phelps?  There are too many swimming medals anyway but I suppose he must be up there for man of the games.

Agree that the modern pentathlon is a stupid piece of fluff.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (12 Aug 2012)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> There are too many swimming medals anyway.


Let me explain.

Backstroke, Breaststroke, Butterfly, Freestyle and Medley

Why not have on the track, Running Backwards, Running with Arms Folded, Egg and Spoon, Sack Race and of course Medley.


----------



## blueband (12 Aug 2012)

or to put it another way, do we really need an olypmpic games at all! what purpose dose it serve?


----------



## Sunny (12 Aug 2012)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Let me explain.
> 
> Backstroke, Breaststroke, Butterfly, Freestyle and Medley
> 
> Why not have on the track, Running Backwards, Running with Arms Folded, Egg and Spoon, Sack Race and of course Medley.



Try being able to swim all those different strokes with the completely different technique. Then try and win Olympic medals against people who specialise in just one event. What Phelps has achieved in the last 4 Olympics has been nothing short of astounding. Not saying he is the best Olympian ever or that his achievements are greater than anyone else but he shouldn't have them dismissed either simply because he can compete in so many different events. No different to Bolt competing in the 100, 200, relay and next olympics possibly the 400m.


----------



## Sunny (12 Aug 2012)

Also Carl Lewis is a fine one to be throwing out accusations of drug use considering what we now know of him.


----------



## Complainer (12 Aug 2012)

gianni said:


> There are judges around the course to inspect whether or not you lose contact with the ground (as the Irish competitor found out to his cost). Wouldn't be my favourite sport but I definitely wouldn't consider it a joke.





mandelbrot said:


> I think you've missed my point there Gianni: it's irrelevant what the on-course judges spot, or more importantly, fail to spot. You me and the dogs on the street with a remote control to hand can clearly see that some/all of the competitors are not in fact walking. Therefore the event is a nonsense.
> 
> For example I slowed down the last 5 mins of the womens 20k race this evening, and both of the Russian ladies (the top 2) could clearly be seen to be off the ground on pretty much every stride - they were running. How do you deal with that?


Yes, Gianni missed the point completely. He fails to understand that AAM posters will obviously know more about most issues than the full-time professionals who have devoted their entire lives to these issues. Why would the judges, or the competing walkers, or their coaches, or their families know more about this issue than a 'hurler on the ditch' AAM poster?


----------



## DB74 (12 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> Yes, Gianni missed the point completely. He fails to understand that AAM posters will obviously know more about most issues than the full-time professionals who have devoted their entire lives to these issues. Why would the judges, or the competing walkers, or their coaches, or their families know more about this issue than a 'hurler on the ditch' AAM poster?



So judges, and by extension umpires and referees and all other sporting officials,  don't make errors then?

Video evidence has highlighted numerous error and mistakes made by officials in several sports so why would walking be any different?


----------



## gianni (12 Aug 2012)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Let me explain.
> 
> Backstroke, Breaststroke, Butterfly, Freestyle and Medley
> 
> Why not have on the track, Running Backwards, Running with Arms Folded, Egg and Spoon, Sack Race and of course Medley.



Would running 110m hurdles be considered the same as running 100m flat ? Surely they are different 'types' of running ?


----------



## Sunny (12 Aug 2012)

DB74 said:


> So judges, and by extension umpires and referees and all other sporting officials,  don't make errors then?
> 
> Video evidence has highlighted numerous error and mistakes made by officials in several sports so why would walking be any different?



It's not an error. The rules clearly state it has to be obvious to the naked eye that the two feet are leaving the ground. Not on slow motion on sky plus.


----------



## orka (12 Aug 2012)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> but I also have this niggling feeling that Carl Lewis is right, how can a nation of 2.7M people be so dominant in the sprints.


Genetics? Evolution? Specialisation in a country where sprinting is THE sport? (And agree with Sunny re Carl Lewis - really, he feels fit to cast aspersions?) 

Genetics must play a big part in the success of the Jamaicans - I don't believe that any amount of drugs would turn even the most talented Irish sprinter into a Usain Bolt. Slavery can also be 'thanked' for a speeded-up evolution: huge numbers of West Africans were taken as slaves and only the super-strong, genetically gifted survived the horrors they endured - and it is their descendents in the Caribbean and the US that are dominating sprinting today. Another reason is the dominance of sprinting as THE sport in Jamaica - that's what their kids aspire to be - not footballers or rugby players. So they identify their stars early and train them extremely well in an environment with plenty of local competition.

The Irish Times had an interesting article on this yesterday http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2012/0811/1224321968042.html


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> It's not an error. The rules clearly state it has to be obvious to the naked eye that the two feet are leaving the ground. Not on slow motion on sky plus.



And why do the rules state that? Because when they were formulated there was no technology available apart from the naked eye to tell who's walking and who's running.

Such technology exists now (and I don't just mean cameras - surely they could use some kind of sensors for the footwear?). It seems to me that not making an attempt to utilise it, when we can all plainly see that they aren't really walking at all, of it makes a complete mockery of their sport.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

Why don't you learn the technique and then do it for 50k without getting disqualified before calling it a joke. Robert Heffernans performance was outstanding and doesn't deserve mocking from people sitting behind a keyboard.


----------



## Complainer (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> And why do the rules state that?


Perhaps because they feel that important decisions about the sport should be made by people who know and understand the sport, rather than armchair experts armed with their Sky remote?


----------



## Purple (13 Aug 2012)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Let me explain.
> 
> Backstroke, Breaststroke, Butterfly, Freestyle and Medley
> 
> Why not have on the track, Running Backwards, Running with Arms Folded, Egg and Spoon, Sack Race and of course Medley.



So running the 100 meters is the same as running the 5000 meters?
Different styles and skills.


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> Perhaps because they feel that important decisions about the sport should be made by people who know and understand the sport, rather than armchair experts armed with their Sky remote?


 
So not because there was no technology available at the time they set up the sport then?


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> So not because there was no technology available at the time they set up the sport then?


 
Why do most sports not use technology for every decison even though it exists? Does that not make a mockery of every sport using your logic. 

The sport allows a certain leeway by using the human eye as the judge instead of technology because it is incapable of picking up the tiniest of infractions. I think if the feet are off the ground for anything less than 30 miliseconds and the eye can't see it. The athletes know this and might well work on their technique to take advantage of this but that doesn't make a mockery of their sport. Why don't you try and see how easy it is and let us know.


----------



## orka (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> So not because there was no technology available at the time they set up the sport then?


It would be virtually impossible to have 'the technology' at every race/training session (I presume many athletes start this when they are young, at local athletic clubs) so you would have different assessments at the big races than at training/smaller local events which would be a bit of a farce - you train to the best of you/your coach's assessment and then get pulled up for the first time at a big race after years of success in smaller races for something you genuinely didn't know you were doing?

[I put 'the technology' in quotes because what we are talking about here is not actually technology making the assessment but again the human eye looking at a slowed-down picture.  Maybe if there were special shoes that assessed movement/position of feet and which didn't cost a mad amount of money, that could move the sport on.]


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> Why don't you learn the technique and then do it for 50k without getting disqualified before calling it a joke. Robert Heffernans performance was outstanding and doesn't deserve mocking from people sitting behind a keyboard.


 
I'm not mocking anyone's performance, and the times they clock are incredible - they "walk" faster than most people could run.

My problem remains that for all I know Rob Heffernan or other people further down the field did actually walk while those in the medal placings trotted / jogged, but since they mostly only show the athletes at the front of the field it's hard to say.

Out of curiosity, Sunny and Complainer, would you both be so vehement if the sport was fencing, and I was suggesting they should use electronic means to do the scoring (assuming they hadn't cottoned on to it decades ago), and scoring was still being done according to the judges' eyes...


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> Why do most sports not use technology for every decison even though it exists? Does that not make a mockery of every sport using your logic.
> 
> The sport allows a certain leeway by using the human eye as the judge instead of technology because it is incapable of picking up the tiniest of infractions. I think if the feet are off the ground for anything less than 30 miliseconds and the eye can't see it. The athletes know this and might well work on their technique to take advantage of this but that doesn't make a mockery of their sport. Why don't you try and see how easy it is and let us know.


 
You keep harping on about the difficulty of it to support your argument; I'm not saying it isn't difficult, sure it wouldn't be an Olympic event if it wasn't difficult!!

Most sports have some level of subjectivity in interpreting the rules because the absolute can't be defined - like what constitutes a fair tackle in contact sports - and for that you need a human referee.

But for questions like whether a ball has crossed a line or not I absolutely think at professional level events whatever technology is reasonably available should be used. Done correctly it improves a sport - look at the use of the TMO in rugby.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> I'm not mocking anyone's performance, and the times they clock are incredible - they "walk" faster than most people could run.
> 
> ...


 
You called the sport that he has worked his butt off trying to be good at for the best part of 20 years a mockery. That is mocking someone's achievement.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> You keep harping on about the difficulty of it to support your argument; I'm not saying it isn't difficult, sure it wouldn't be an Olympic event if it wasn't difficult!!
> 
> Most sports have some level of subjectivity in interpreting the rules because the absolute can't be defined - like what constitutes a fair tackle in contact sports - and for that you need a human referee.
> 
> But for questions like whether a ball has crossed a line or not I absolutely think at professional level events whatever technology is reasonably available should be used. Done correctly it improves a sport - look at the use of the TMO in rugby.


 
There are plenty of sports that don't use technology even if it is there. NZ lost a rugby world cup because of forward pass that everyone could see sitting at home. Soccer still doesn't have goal line technology. The Umpires eyes in baseball are all that matters when it comes to making calls. We won 4 boxing medals in a sport that uses judges to decide if a point was scored. I could go on and on.......

The rules of racewalking are there for everyone to read. You don't have to agree with them. But you don't have to ridicule it either.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> My problem remains that for all I know Rob Heffernan or other people further down the field did actually walk while those in the medal placings trotted / jogged, but since they mostly only show the athletes at the front of the field it's hard to say.


 
We do know because there are judges around the track. Are you saying they wouldn't see someone jogging or trotting???


----------



## micmclo (13 Aug 2012)

orka said:


> Genetics? Evolution?
> 
> Genetics must play a big part in the success of the Jamaicans - I don't believe that any amount of drugs would turn even the most talented Irish sprinter into a Usain Bolt. Slavery can also be 'thanked' for a speeded-up evolution: huge numbers of West Africans were taken as slaves and only the super-strong, genetically gifted survived the horrors they endured - and it is their descendents in the Caribbean and the US that are dominating sprinting today.



There was an American sports presenter Jimmy the Greek who said that in the eighties and was sacked, vilified, career destroyed and he died a few years later a broken man

Michael Johnson said the same theory two months ago and not a word said

I guess only some people are allowed talk about things


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> We do know because there are judges around the track. Are you saying they wouldn't see someone jogging or trotting???


 
No, I'm saying that if their feet are both off the ground at the same time then they ARE trotting / jogging / running, so the name of the sport is a misnomer. Maybe that's what my problem is, I feel misled!

I sat there on Saturday afternoon watching the last 20 minutes of the Women's 20km, and after a couple of minutes of looking at their feet I said to myself they are definitely off the ground - that was with my naked eye - the pause button on Sky+ only confirmed what I already believed I could see.

Maybe I should be a judge - I'd clean up the sport


----------



## Shawady (13 Aug 2012)

micmclo said:


> There was an American sports presenter Jimmy the Greek who said that in the eighties and was sacked, vilified, career destroyed and he died a few years later a broken man
> 
> Michael Johnson said the same theory two months ago and not a word said
> 
> I guess only some people are allowed talk about things


 
Yeah seen that documentary a few weeks ago. Apparantly Jamaica was one of the last stops on the trade route so only the 'toughest of the toughest' made it that far on the journey.

Re: Orka's point that sprinting is such a popular sport in Jamaica, it is worth pointing out that the All Blacks would be seen as the top rugby nation and New Zealand only has a population of 4 million. So it is pausible that even when small nations specialise  one sport they can perform at the highest level worldwide.


----------



## Leo (13 Aug 2012)

Firefly said:


> I think it's kinda hard to watch and get excited for professional athletes in soccer, tennis & basketball at the Olympics - they have their own "majors" and the Olympics is a sort-of add-on. For athletics, gymnastics and the like, the Olympics is their career defining event.


 
Athletics, gymnastics and all the other Olympic events all have their continental and world championship events. We've also come a long way since the days of the amateur ethos. The vast majority of participants in the Olympics are professional, yes, even the BMX riders! 

Just because many of these events aren't mainstream with the media coverage that goes with it, doesn't mean the Olympics is all they have. And also, just because football and tennis have mass coverage, doesn't mean those competing don't feel the Olympics is something special/ career defining.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

Leo said:


> Athletics, gymnastics and all the other Olympic events all have their continental and world championship events. We've also come a long way since the days of the amateur ethos. The vast majority of participants in the Olympics are professional, yes, even the BMX riders!
> 
> Just because many of these events aren't mainstream with the media coverage that goes with it, doesn't mean the Olympics is all they have. And also, just because football and tennis have mass coverage, doesn't mean those competing don't feel the Olympics is something special/ career defining.


 
Yes but the Olympics is still the pinnacle of their sport. Ask any athlete whether they would like to be world champion or olympic champion. Same with most minority sports. The vast majority of these sports operate on a 4 year cycle with the Olympics being the holy grail. 

No top golfer or top tennis player would ever think that winning an Olympic medal was more important than winning a grad slam event. History will judge them on winning grand slams. Not olympic titles. Ryan Giggs wouldn't have swapped one premiership title with Man Utd for a gold medal with Great Britain. The US basketball players would not swap a NBA title for an Olympic medal (although basketball is a strange case because the Olympics is so big for other Countries). I am sure they all think it would be nice to win a medal but they don't dedicate their life to getting one.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> Maybe I should be a judge - I'd clean up the sport


 
The first olympic event with no finishers!


----------



## TarfHead (13 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> No top golfer or top tennis player would ever think that winning an Olympic medal was more important than winning a grad slam event.


 
Well, golf gets us back to that debate of '_games that are not sport_', but my blatant trolling can be ignored  ! No golfer has ever grown up with the dream of winning an Olympic medal. Ditto rugby players. Tennis, less so, but a tennis player's career will continue to measured by grand slam tournament accomplishments.

For NBA players, there is a difference. First there's a chance to represent their country. Then there's the opportunity to hang out with a different elite and live a different life. I've heard of accounts of NBA superstars being seen on the Tube in London and few or no-one hassling them for a photo or an autograph. And there's the chance of redemption after their previous failure to bring home the gold.

One thing that only occured to me this morning - Annalise Murphy, one of the best performers to return home empty handed, was on RTE on Saturday night. I assume the sailors were seperate to what went on in London. After all the huffing and puffing aboiut a homecoming, there was probably just family and friends to greet her when she arrived home.


----------



## Complainer (13 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> Out of curiosity, Sunny and Complainer, would you both be so vehement if the sport was fencing, and I was suggesting they should use electronic means to do the scoring (assuming they hadn't cottoned on to it decades ago), and scoring was still being done according to the judges' eyes...


I would be equally vehement, on the assumption that you know nothing about fencing. If you know nothing about it, don't assume that having a Sky remote makes you an expert. Have some trust.



TarfHead said:


> One thing that only occured to me this morning - Annalise Murphy, one of the best performers to return home empty handed, was on RTE on Saturday night. I assume the sailors were seperate to what went on in London. After all the huffing and puffing aboiut a homecoming, there was probably just family and friends to greet her when she arrived home.


The problem with the sailing was that most people just didn't get it, given the unusual rules. However, once I saw this explanation, it all made sense;

[broken link removed]


----------



## DerKaiser (13 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> I would be equally vehement, on the assumption that you know nothing about fencing. If you know nothing about it, don't assume that having a Sky remote makes you an expert. Have some trust.
> 
> 
> The problem with the sailing was that most people just didn't get it, given the unusual rules. However, once I saw this explanation, it all made sense;
> ...



Good link - The Viper is on form in this one.


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> I would be equally vehement, on the assumption that you know nothing about fencing. If you know nothing about it, don't assume that having a Sky remote makes you an expert. Have some trust.



Trust in whom?

I don't need to know anything about fencing to know that it makes perfect sense that you use technology to decide which person makes contact with the other one first, given that the naked eye cannot be depended on. That particular penny dropped on the governing bodies of that sport several decades ago. In my opinion all sports should try to leverage technology where possible where it can add to the quality of decision making and to ensure fairness and that the best individual / team wins.

Equally, race walking is not a complicated sport, any more so than most athletic events; the rules are few and simple. The difference between me and an expert is that they actually understand the techniques employed. But as for the rules, 1 foot on the ground (according to the naked eye), and knee straight... doesn't exactly require a PhD to get the jist?

As for the Sky remote, all it did was confirm what I thought when watching Rob Heffernan race in Beijing 4 years ago, "it looks to me like those guys are off the ground..."


----------



## elefantfresh (14 Aug 2012)

> Jimmy the Greek



He played the bookie in Cannonball Run!


----------



## Firefly (14 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> Why would the judges, or the competing walkers, or their coaches, or their families know more about this issue than a 'hurler on the ditch' AAM poster?


 


Complainer said:


> Perhaps because they feel that important decisions about the sport should be made by people who know and understand the sport, rather than armchair experts armed with their Sky remote?


 


Complainer said:


> I would be equally vehement, on the assumption that you know nothing about fencing. If you know nothing about it, don't assume that having a Sky remote makes you an expert. Have some trust.


 
I find your repeated use of the "armchair" expert digs in this thread (and others too ) an attempt to undermine poster's credibility. Having trust, as you say, is one thing, but it's also prudent to be sceptical. If enough people disagree with something and voice their disagreement, changes can and usual will prevail. All you have to look at is the trade union movement!

In relation to sport, obviously, athletes, coaches & referees know an aweful lot more about a sport than the average punter/fan. I don't think anyone would argue with this and I think at this stage we get your point. However, sport, in its nature is, by and large, totally dependant on the subjective opinion of the referee. 

An exception here (recently) is in golf where Pagraig Harrington was disqualified from the Abu Dhabi Championship after a home viewer spotted PH replacing a ball incorrectly on the green. Another example in golf concerns Graeme McDowell http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/g...ck-after-bizarre-penalty-bmw-pga-championship. Wimbledon also introduced playback facilities for players requesting confirmation of serves. I guess the challenge regarding technology is how much of it to allow so as to increase fairness but also not adversely affect the flow of the game. 

In the case of walking there is an interesting article here http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/11/s...alking-is-more-complicated-than-it-seems.html which details the issue of both feet off the ground as visible via freeze-frame photos. However, "Rule 230 of the I.A.A.F. rule book states that “racewalking is a progression of steps so taken that the walker makes contact with the ground so that no visible (to the human eye) loss of contact occurs.” “To the human eye” is the critical part because it underscores the subjective nature of judging the sport." So they have it covered for now. As this is a pretty minority sport and only gets noticed in the main every 4 years changing this rule may take some time, or may not change at all. 

I don't think there is anything wrong with someone having an opinon about it though. For me, I think it is a deserved Olympic sport. I don't think the rules should be changed either


----------



## micmclo (14 Aug 2012)

I'm obese, lazy and too fond of pints

Can we get Darts into the Olympics, the "athletes" will represent me


----------



## Complainer (14 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> Trust in whom?


Trust in those who have devoted their personal and professional lives to the sport for years. Trust that they know just a little bit more about it than you or the other armchair experts.


----------



## mandelbrot (15 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> Trust in those who have devoted their personal and professional lives to the sport for years. Trust that they know just a little bit more about it than you or the other armchair experts.



Ill stick to a healthy level of skepticism thanks all the same. Officials in sporting organisations are first cousins to politicians when it comes down to it, in my experience. Phrases like "vested interests", "groupthink", "maintaining the status quo", and "threatened by change" spring to mind... 

How am I an "armchair expert" - I'm only pointing out a fact, which for some reason you've taken grave exception to! It's not my fault racewalking isn't actually walking, and if you must know I was standing by the ironing board when I became an expert..! 

I don't know whether you feel "expert" enough to express an opinion, but how do you feel about goal-line technology for soccer? I hope I'm expert enough to have an opinion... Maybe we should exchange credentials at this point!


----------



## Purple (18 Aug 2012)

Complainer, why continue to question the right of posters to hold an opinion? Why the digs at people on so many threads when you disagree with them? 
There are many occasions when I disagree with you but I would never question your right to express your opinion. This time it's sport but on many other threads it's the health service, the public sector, politics etc. You seem to think that people should be experts before they are allowed to express an opinion. That's not the way a free society works, that's not the way democracy works and, on a much smaller level, that's not the way a discussion forum works. Question the opinion but not the right of the individual to hold or express that opinion.


----------



## Complainer (19 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> Ill stick to a healthy level of skepticism thanks all the same. Officials in sporting organisations are first cousins to politicians when it comes down to it, in my experience. Phrases like "vested interests", "groupthink", "maintaining the status quo", and "threatened by change" spring to mind...


I'd share some of your skepticism about officials in organisations, but at least, they have some knowledge of how the thing works. If you had ever run one of these races, or you were a county champion, or one of your kids was involved for a few years, then you might know enough to add something to the debate. If your main expertise is via the RTE commentators and your Sky remote, then I really don't see any value in that expertise. I don't know why anyone would expect to pontificate about something that they have no experience in.



mandelbrot said:


> I don't know whether you feel "expert" enough to express an opinion, but how do you feel about goal-line technology for soccer? I hope I'm expert enough to have an opinion... Maybe we should exchange credentials at this point!



Sorry, I wouldn't know the goal-line technology if I tripped over it, so I'll leave it to others who do. Maybe I just don't get the 'sports' thing of why everybody considers themselves to be expert, everyone knows better than Trapatoni or Keane or Ferguson or whoever.


----------



## DB74 (19 Aug 2012)

Complainer said:


> Maybe I just don't get the 'sports' thing



Leave it to the experts then


----------

