Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

British athletics name 72-strong team for doha world championships

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Afrothletics View Post
    Interestingly Michael Obasuyi of Belgium has received an IAAF invite for the 110mH and had it accepted - his best this season is 13.54 - same time as Cameron Fillery, meaning he'll get an invite too. Wonder if he fits the bill of 'podium potential' for British Athletics??
    This one had niggled with me as I couldn't see any logic. But on the provisional lists I can't see Obasuyi, so are you certain he was invited and accepted? Hough (aus) and Kanai (jpn) appear to be the only two who have made the selection beyond the 13:46 quali time, with the four athletes slower than them all being their nation's only entrants, so I presume these are "univesality" athletes.

    I wonder if Obasuyi had come to the wrong conclusion in the same way that Nick Willis had, that there were more spaces available to them because they hadn't considered the take up of places by slower, single-representative athletes.

    Comment


    • #77
      Mark English tweeted overnight that he's going, presumably a late invitation accepted by the Irish federation.

      Comment


      • #78
        British Athletics just sent Jade Lally an email saying they'd turned down an invitation for her to compete in Doha because the don't think she can win a medal. They seem not to know that she gave birth nine weeks ago. They really have no idea what they're doing. I'm amazed they've ever filled in a 4 x 400 team sheet correctly. Here's the email and her response:


        Comment


        • larkim
          larkim commented
          Editing a comment
          As ludicrous as that email looks in some ways, at the end of the day they have set a policy and have to give a decision outcome in line with that policy. They can’t say “your current post partum state means you won’t be in a position to compete” because that’s not allowed for in the policy. UKA only have themselves to blame of course for putting up that policy in the first place, and it would be great to be able to get the invitation rejection clause removed from future policies.

      • #79
        British Athletics communications team fails again...

        Really poor social media
        Really poor marketing of events
        Bloody REPRESENT on everything in sight

        And now emails like this to athletes that have just had a baby...

        What gives British Athletics the right to tell anybody that they don't believe they have what it takes to win a medal? Will decisions now be based on this algorithm that they have devised which they don't need to disclose to the public for fear of giving away some kind of "advantage"? Please....

        I fully recommend everyone to email them to give them a piece of their mind. As fans of the sport we are entitled to give our feedback for how our sport is being represented.

        Comment


        • #80
          Originally posted by Runner88 View Post
          British Athletics communications team fails again...

          Really poor social media
          Really poor marketing of events
          Bloody REPRESENT on everything in sight

          And now emails like this to athletes that have just had a baby...

          What gives British Athletics the right to tell anybody that they don't believe they have what it takes to win a medal? Will decisions now be based on this algorithm that they have devised which they don't need to disclose to the public for fear of giving away some kind of "advantage"? Please....

          I fully recommend everyone to email them to give them a piece of their mind. As fans of the sport we are entitled to give our feedback for how our sport is being represented.
          0ne of the reasons UKAcontinue to make fools of themselves, apart from the tits they employ, is the obsession with modern day administrators with setting up the utter dri nonsense systems which have produced the most appalling rot seen above from UKA abou data systems, bloody "platforms" and "funnels" and the other shite about their fabulous data system having enabled them to determine those athletes who will develop and produce the goods. What arrogant idiots are they, who know nothing of the human spirit, mental aptitudes, that almost randomly produce our occasional British outstanding athletes., never mind their obvious inability, via data systems to know those athletes who will enjoy careers not blighted by constant injuries.

          Comment


          • #81
            Other social media forums suggest the IAAF is still offering out invitations in an attempt to bolster field sizes, and running up against problems where even athletes are refusing the invitations because they have already taken steps to close their seasons.

            It does seem that the "invitation" process is flawed, and it would be far better to simply say "Quali standard is XX, and if XX is not achieved by YY athletes, then the quali standard is being ranked in the top ZZ athletes (after the 3 per nation has been removed)." The concept of being "invited" just doesn't work.

            Comment


            • #82
              Yes indeed - let's hope this is another lesson learned in regards to the plans to expand the numbers being invited rather than auto qualifying for Tokyo,

              Comment

              Working...
              X