Olympic Games that are not games

mandelbrot said:
So not because there was no technology available at the time they set up the sport then?
Click to expand...

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.
 
mandelbrot said:
So not because there was no technology available at the time they set up the sport then?
Click to expand...
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.]
 
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.
Click to expand...

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...
 

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

...
Click to expand...

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.
 

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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

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

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
 

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.
 

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 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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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;

[broken link removed]
 

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

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..."
 
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?
Click to expand...

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?
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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
 
I'm obese, lazy and too fond of pints

Can we get Darts into the Olympics, the "athletes" will represent me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register