Buckner promises smaller teams

[Ladyloz]

Fully recognise the importance that relay success has in maintaining funding levels. However, there should be some way of using the funding so that the team isn't so rigidly fixed. There is significant possibility of new faces emerging who are likely to bring more footspeed to the relay pool. Especially with the 4x100 we need to make it so that they can get the practice time too. It's fair to point out that a well drilled team can often beat another that is faster on paper, but there comes a point when some new blood needs to be brought in to get the chance to develop those pairings too - someone like Eugene Amo Dadzie should at least be given the chance to show what he can do with a bit of relay practice for example.

I think this has been happening already in the last year with the men, bringing in the likes of Azu and Efoloko. Even Prescod getting a run out (am not sure what the story is there going forward as he isn't on relay funding now but hopefully given his present form he is involved).

Women definitely could do with new blood and some decent back up however.

[Paps]

Fully recognise the importance that relay success has in maintaining funding levels. However, there should be some way of using the funding so that the team isn't so rigidly fixed. There is significant possibility of new faces emerging who are likely to bring more footspeed to the relay pool. Especially with the 4x100 we need to make it so that they can get the practice time too. It's fair to point out that a well drilled team can often beat another that is faster on paper, but there comes a point when some new blood needs to be brought in to get the chance to develop those pairings too - someone like Eugene Amo Dadzie should at least be given the chance to show what he can do with a bit of relay practice for example.

[Stew-Coach]

Just for fun, if either of the two relays teams get a medal this weekend, not a single one of them is funded!

The women present this weekend, (ignore your Bias upon them!) haven't even been included within the general relay discussion groups (which if you read the selection criteria is indeed on of the requirements!)


Obviously this is not the "world" stage in question but does raise questions on the current relay program IMO and the ability (slight) of the underdogs getting's medals

[marra]

Not to mention that a large part of the very success in swimming has been the success of the relay teams (leading to occasions where some swimmers have even sacrificed individual races to prioritise the chance of a relay medal). Not to mention, if we're honest, a generational talent in Peaty.

Hell, even in cycling you could argue that our success started showing most consistently in the team events first, which then spread outwards to greater individual success.

I think we should absolutely be doing our level best to get relay teams in every event we can. That's literally the last area I'd be looking at funding cuts. It's only in the last few years that it seems that we've taken them as seriously as we should.

[MysteryBrick]

Yeah, it's easy to say snarkily, but if I were running the sport I would absolutely make sure the 5 relay teams were as good as possible purely with the above context in mind.

[Laps]

Amusing comments on reducing relay funding.
There seems a snag with that though.
It's lottery money.
UK Sport hold the purse strings.
Crudely put medals = money
No medals = no money
Several sports were defunded for not playing that game.
So the governing body need to do everything they can to push relay success.
With our relative strength in depth in 100m and 400m it is a reasonably reliable source of medals.

Setting high qualification standards seemed to work a treat in swimming.
Whether it can work in Athletics with its somewhat 'amateur' ethos is debatable.

[Ladyloz]

I have some sympathy with the idea of reducing relay funding but there are always going to be exceptions where you can perhaps justify it.

Asha Philip is a great example. She has never made a global final outdoors and you would be hard pushed to have justified individual funding for her for a number of years now but she has remained an integral part of the success of our 4x1 team and still to this day there is no obvious replacement for her coming through. When you consider how injury nearly ruined her career before it really started and how she worked her way back slowly to being a top class sprinter I for one do not begrudge her a single penny of the funding she has received

[jjimbojames]

They’re exciting (to some, me included) to talk about - but that doesn’t mean people think so much funding should be funnelled that way at the expense of other events!

I think paying for camps and a payment for attending the camps, where they include a wider group of people and then decide on the actual squad closer to the time, would cut costs massively and make people fight for their place…which would also see the individuals stronger as a result

[marilyn1]

Relay teams = predictable medals = secure jobs for bureaucrats.

a bit surprised at the comments on relays; i have thought for some time that my slight indifference to relays was not reciprocated on this Forum.!

[marilyn1]

Redirecting relay funding into, I dunno, funding the heavy throws better, or channelling some of it into redeveloping the athletics stadium in Crystal Palace, wouldn't be a bad idea...

now thats a thought provoking idea.!!!

[Ursus]

Redirecting relay funding into, I dunno, funding the heavy throws better, or channelling some of it into redeveloping the athletics stadium in Crystal Palace, wouldn't be a bad idea...

Yes on both counts.

Surely somewhere there must be a billionaire athletics fan who’d love to put their (company) name to a redeveloped CP. Wonder if anyone’s thought to give Jim Ratcliffe a call?

[Grassmarket]

If you want a controversial view, Philipo - how about this: I'd stop funding the relay teams. Take teams by all means but redirect all that money to other events.

Relay teams = predictable medals = secure jobs for bureaucrats.

[RunUnlimited]

Redirecting relay funding into, I dunno, funding the heavy throws better, or channelling some of it into redeveloping the athletics stadium in Crystal Palace, wouldn't be a bad idea...

[Ursus]

If you want a controversial view, Philipo - how about this: I'd stop funding the relay teams. Take teams by all means but redirect all that money to other events.

Where do I sign??

[Sovietvest]

Very brave , Ursus. If I had expounded such views, I know a heap of shit woud have fallen on my head from numerous posters, as has happened previously.
I think that you selected a perfectly appropriate athlete to make your point,an athlete
who has been very fortunate to have been selected in the past at national level on a fairly flimsy basis.

I think both of you are being perfectly reasonable if you're suggesting that athletes whose careers have peaked and are unlikely to get beyond the heats, possibly should not be selected. I certainly would prioritise up-and-coming athletes.

At first sight, like you, I would have put Beth in that category. However, upon closer inspection I see that she qualified for Eugene because she ran just inside 22.80 in the qualification window - 22.78 in Tokyo in August 2021. So, she didn't get in because of a WA invite. She was however, ranked high enough to get an invite that way, too. She's still ranked 21st and had risen as high as 14. Also, prior to Eugene she showed she was in good form with a 22.49 (+3.5 m/s) at the Trails in 2022. That's worth quicker than 22.80 in legal conditions.

The 200 is a funny one. Below the very top 8-10 women who compete regularly on the European circuit (so many of the best are in the NCAA system or never leave the US) there is quite a drop off in standards. So ranking points aren't as hard to come by as they are in other some events.

If you want a controversial view, Philipo - how about this: I'd stop funding the relay teams. Take teams by all means but redirect all that money to other events.