Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Changes ahead? Scathing review into UKA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.b...t/amp/54562195

    'Big shift' in UK Sport funding for Olympics and Paralympics

    It looks like the various reviews into how effect UK Sport funding is at delivering success, indeed defining ‘success’, have started to come to conclusions and changes are being suggested. The article doesn’t go into much detail but I can’t fault their aim to achieve medals in a wider range of sports.

    The one obvious downside to moving towards a 12 year cycle is that funding decisions that could affect how well we do down the line will be made in the near future. Say we do poorly in the swimming pool in Tokyo and a decision is made to reduce funding levels, any world class athletes that do emerge in 7-8 years might not receive the backing that the current model provides. This new system needs to be versatile enough to allow for these types of fluctuation

    Comment


    • #17
      Looks like Britain’s golden age of lottery-funded sporting success is coming to an end. These changes will just divert money from successful athletes & programmes to box-ticking quangocrats.

      Comment


      • #18
        "When it comes to the funding decisions that we take, things like an enhanced integrity system, more athlete support, better provision for mental health, those things will be the first names on the team sheet when it comes to our investments of funding," he said.

        As I wrote at the start of this thread the medal chances will be slipping away to be replaced by.....the PC brigade, box ticking and virtue signalling?
        In future we will be measuring UK sporting success by a graph showing a reduction in athletes complaints.
        These I take largely to be the Snowflake generation and old school coaching and management becoming incompatible. Not a crisis which required major surgery.

        Lets hope that view is too pessimistic because as soon as the medals dry up so will the money.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Laps View Post
          A bleak future for Athletics at elite level. It has been hanging on by its fingertips to the funding and medal chances. Those things are slipping away to be replaced by.....the PC brigade, box ticking and virtue signalling?
          The PC brigade run the whole country almost; their virtue signalling, if you use such a phrase ,sums up a ghastly bunch of self important woke sh**e .

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Laps View Post
            "When it comes to the funding decisions that we take, things like an enhanced integrity system, more athlete support, better provision for mental health, those things will be the first names on the team sheet when it comes to our investments of funding," he said.

            As I wrote at the start of this thread the medal chances will be slipping away to be replaced by.....the PC brigade, box ticking and virtue signalling?
            In future we will be measuring UK sporting success by a graph showing a reduction in athletes complaints.
            These I take largely to be the Snowflake generation and old school coaching and management becoming incompatible. Not a crisis which required major surgery.

            Lets hope that view is too pessimistic because as soon as the medals dry up so will the money.
            if you get the constant moaning by certain sports personages as soon as the coaches start demanding intense efforts and the over used words about so called" bullying" are hawked over the frigging media you will see the price that will be paid, starting I reckon next year in Tokyo.

            Comment


            • #21
              I'm constantly irritated by self-centred, easily offended young people, so I understand the criticism of 'snowflakes. However, I would say that young athletes - whether you find them at club or elite level - are the best of their generation. Most of the people on this forum used to train and compete as athletes - or still do. Training hurts every bit as much as it ever did and race day is every bit as nerve wracking as it ever was. That builds character. If anything it is harder for kids nowadays because it is such a contrast to the rest of their lifestyle.

              Can you name any snowflakes on our current team? I'd go as far as to say they are a darn sight tougher than many of the moneyed athletes we had in the 80s and 90s. We had plenty of prima donnas back then.

              Comment


              • #22
                Uk Athletics moves to a “More Eilish McColgans, fewer Dina Asher-Smiths” strategy. I’m sure a greater focus on athlete well-being and less on winning races will be just the thing to bring the crowds flocking back post-COVID.

                https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/54786162

                Comment


                • #23
                  Surely what we need is both?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Occasional Hope View Post
                    Surely what we need is both?
                    It is a universal rule of life that if you gave quangocrats a choice between doing one difficult thing - winning medals - and one easy thing - looking after athlete’s welfare - they will always, always choose to do the easy thing. It’s a requirement of sporting success that a large number of unsuccessful athletes must make room for a small number of successful ones. Naturally this is never popular amongst the larger number.

                    British Sport’s Golden Age 2000-2016 is now officially dead & buried.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Grassmarket View Post

                      It is a universal rule of life that if you gave quangocrats a choice between doing one difficult thing - winning medals - and one easy thing - looking after athlete’s welfare - they will always, always choose to do the easy thing. It’s a requirement of sporting success that a large number of unsuccessful athletes must make room for a small number of successful ones. Naturally this is never popular amongst the larger number.

                      British Sport’s Golden Age 2000-2016 is now officially dead & buried.
                      how true sir.!!!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Grassmarket View Post

                        It is a universal rule of life that if you gave quangocrats a choice between doing one difficult thing - winning medals - and one easy thing - looking after athlete’s welfare - they will always, always choose to do the easy thing. It’s a requirement of sporting success that a large number of unsuccessful athletes must make room for a small number of successful ones. Naturally this is never popular amongst the larger number.

                        British Sport’s Golden Age 2000-2016 is now officially dead & buried.
                        This makes no sense whatsoever. UKA have been roundly critised for years for focussing solely on medals (the "difficult" thing apparently) which you seem to be suggesting they'd never choose to do.

                        Comment


                        • Laps
                          Laps commented
                          Editing a comment
                          larkim
                          Grassmarket's point makes sense to me.
                          Your's doesn't because UKA had no choice but to use the bulk of the money it received to fund elite athletes for the purpose of winning medals. UKA always had UK Sport standing over them with a big whip. Whether UKA could have achieved a lot more for the grass roots, coaching and broader development across the events and still done UK Sport's bidding is a matter of opinion. There were signs eg in selection policy that they resisted some UK Sport pressure (compare with swimming, cycling selecting only finals (or future finals) contenders, no no-hopers).

                          You can expect the most successful coaches (medals) across the sports to not put up with the new obsessions and interference and they will go elsewhere. That process is already under way imo.

                        • larkim
                          larkim commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Laps - as a general comment though, many / most / lots of ardent fans of athletics in the UK have spent the last 10 years complaining about the fact that UKA just chases medals, and in that criticism most of them have failed to make the valid point that you address; there was little choice about having a focus on medal goals at major champs as that was led by the funding approach. I also don't agree that they'd opt voluntarily to do something "easy". Glory is always sought after because quangos know they need to keep a level of relevance to ensure their funding.

                        • trickstat
                          trickstat commented
                          Editing a comment
                          If a country has the worst athlete welfare in the world it will not have consistent success as too many athletes will be driven away. Either from the sport or, if the opportunity exists, to another country. I will agree that it takes a lot more than outstanding athlete welfare to have a high level of success.

                          I don't know whether this is an indirect acknowledgement of prior failings or not.

                      • #27
                        Yeah, Laps is right. UK Sport - the Lottery - funds elite Sport. Sport England, Scotland etc. funds grassroots. But now elite sport won’t be medal focussed, then medals will be rarer.

                        Comment


                        • #28
                          Another instance of how lottery funding will now be used to push a socio-political agenda rather than sporting success.

                          https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/54911500

                          Comment


                          • #29
                            Originally posted by Grassmarket View Post
                            Another instance of how lottery funding will now be used to push a socio-political agenda rather than sporting success.

                            https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/54911500
                            I'm fine with a 'socio-political' agenda if it enables more of the great and potentially great female coaches to gain opportunities to excel. Not sure why you would imply that female coaches won't deliver sporting success. Perhaps you can expand?

                            Comment


                            • #30
                              Originally posted by LoveSprints1 View Post

                              I'm fine with a 'socio-political' agenda if it enables more of the great and potentially great female coaches to gain opportunities to excel. Not sure why you would imply that female coaches won't deliver sporting success. Perhaps you can expand?
                              If.

                              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconic_phrase
                              Last edited by Grassmarket; 13-11-20, 21:06.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X