Jump to content

Olympic Games 2020


Punksnotdead
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

Andy Burnham complained about the skateboarding and got a barrage of abuse for not supporting sports that can actually be played by working class people. 

Yeah, I saw that - I was surprised at that. Only earlier in the day I'd had my aunt saying "but what's the point of it?" - to which I could only respond "what's the point of running around a track?" 🙄 

I don't understand anyone writing off the skateboarding. It takes skill that I can't even imagine possessing - I know how to run, but stand me on a skateboard and I would be on my ass within seconds. I just love watching it - same as I love watching snowboarding. It's thrilling! I'm especially excited for the Park Skating rounds to begin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

Poor really. I’m always a bit iffy with sports that can be judged subjectively, but skateboarding is hardly an outlier in that regard. And surely more people skateboard in the world than snowboard, which has been an Olympic sport since the year dot. All for keeping it with the times.

Yes to be fair he had lots of people offer to let him come to their skateparks and he seemed willing to engage with them and he did say after watching dressage he wouldn't complain about skateboarding again 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, WestCountryGirl said:

 I'd had my aunt saying "but what's the point of it?" - to which I could only respond "what's the point of running around a track?" 🙄 

I don't understand anyone writing off the skateboarding. It takes skill that I can't even imagine possessing - I know how to run, but stand me on a skateboard and I would be on my ass within seconds. I just love watching it - same as I love watching snowboarding. It's thrilling! I'm especially excited for the Park Skating rounds to begin. 

What's the point of any of them really?  Lots of skill involved in lots of them but it's not like we as a species would die out if people stopped throwing discus or doing long jump either. They are things we do to show we can and push us to our limits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I can never be comfortable with is writing off sports because they're predominantly "for" rich people.  It's always great that more egalitarian and open sports become more recognised, but there's no reason that should be at the expense of other sports.

Possibly something I feel a bit as I've spent 30 years being told rugby is for posh boys (I'm not) and Mrs Q used to do eventing (also not posh).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

What's the point of any of them really?  Lots of skill involved in lots of them but it's not like we as a species would die out if people stopped throwing discus or doing long jump either. They are things we do to show we can and push us to our limits. 

Well exactly, that was my point! For some, as you say, they're a challenge and a way to best themselves. For me - as un-sporty a person as they come - sport is pure entertainment, and I so appreciate those who put themselves out there. I love the Olympics for seeing the pure joy and heartache and exhilaration, and to cheer on and get invested in people I didn't know the names of five minutes before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Quark said:

One thing I can never be comfortable with is writing off sports because they're predominantly "for" rich people.  It's always great that more egalitarian and open sports become more recognised, but there's no reason that should be at the expense of other sports.

Possibly something I feel a bit as I've spent 30 years being told rugby is for posh boys (I'm not) and Mrs Q used to do eventing (also not posh).

I get what you're saying and agree to an extent, however there are certain sports that have more of a class barrier to participation.

Rugby, cricket, come across as posh due to the generalisation of a rugby player being more upper class than that of say a football player. However, to actually play the sport, you don't need to be 'rich'.

For sports like equestrianism, polo, sailing, etc. there is a much starker class divide. There are lots of kids who may have an interest in these sports but it becomes less feasible due to the cost associated with starting out, training, etc. Of course you don't need to own a boat or a horse to become elite at these sports (although it must surely help), but in terms of cost it is much dearer than sticking a pair of £25 football boots on your kid!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, northernringo said:

I get what you're saying and agree to an extent, however there are certain sports that have more of a class barrier to participation.

Rugby, cricket, come across as posh due to the generalisation of a rugby player being more upper class than that of say a football player. However, to actually play the sport, you don't need to be 'rich'.

For sports like equestrianism, polo, sailing, etc. there is a much starker class divide. There are lots of kids who may have an interest in these sports but it becomes less feasible due to the cost associated with starting out, training, etc. Of course you don't need to own a boat or a horse to become elite at these sports (although it must surely help), but in terms of cost it is much dearer than sticking a pair of £25 football boots on your kid!

Oh absolutely, and I'm not arguing that at all.  If you haven't got a bit of dough there's no way you're competing at any significant level (if at all) in those sports.

But my point is that I don't see that as a reason to write them off.  If they were held up as being inherently better than more inclusive sports precisely because only a certain kind of person can get involved then they'd 100% deserve to be pilloried. But as it stands they just happen to be sports that exist.

I'm all for punching upwards instead of downwards, but I don;t always think it's justified.

Look at it this way. It's perfectly acceptable to write off polo and the like as being for posh kids whose parents have bought them a horse, and mock the sport and its participants accordingly. But people get (rightly) annoyed if football is generalised as being for poor people looking for the only viable way out of a dead end life on a housing estate.

Don't know if that's making sense or not!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to sport, enjoyment is in the eye of the beholder. For example I love watching the swimming and the boxing whereas I find gymnastics pretty boring.
 

What I really wanted to say though is that actively arguing against a sport being included in the olympics is the domain of complete arseholes. There’s no reason for making that argument other than undermining the hard work of the participants and making the fans feel shit. If you don’t like a sport just don’t watch it.

 

For all I care they could be introducing tiddlywinks and chess. I won’t be watching but there’s no reason not to include them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Quark said:

One thing I can never be comfortable with is writing off sports because they're predominantly "for" rich people.  It's always great that more egalitarian and open sports become more recognised, but there's no reason that should be at the expense of other sports.

Possibly something I feel a bit as I've spent 30 years being told rugby is for posh boys (I'm not) and Mrs Q used to do eventing (also not posh).

No I understand that although I also get the other side of it where you get people who get great adulation for doing something that they do only get to do by virtue of being filthy rich and never having to worry about the prospect of getting a proper job. It's nice to see some credit being given to sports that can be more egalitarian as let's face it it almost everyone can do it then you are really up against the best of the best although at elite sport level most are the preserve of if not the rich at least the comfortably off. Going to competitions and training etc becomes expensive in every sport hence the lottery funding in GB. 

 

 I went to a school that was a real mixed bag. It definitely served the worst communities in our area and we had an International rugby referee as our year head and so (for the boys only  - despite our protests*) they had access to a very good rugby coach. 

*I absolutely never wanted to play rugby but being told I couldn't did irritate me 😄 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Quark said:

Oh absolutely, and I'm not arguing that at all.  If you haven't got a bit of dough there's no way you're competing at any significant level (if at all) in those sports.

But my point is that I don't see that as a reason to write them off.  If they were held up as being inherently better than more inclusive sports precisely because only a certain kind of person can get involved then they'd 100% deserve to be pilloried. But as it stands they just happen to be sports that exist.

I'm all for punching upwards instead of downwards, but I don;t always think it's justified.

Look at it this way. It's perfectly acceptable to write off polo and the like as being for posh kids whose parents have bought them a horse, and mock the sport and its participants accordingly. But people get (rightly) annoyed if football is generalised as being for poor people looking for the only viable way out of a dead end life on a housing estate.

Don't know if that's making sense or not!

Yep when I was a kid I was obsessed with horses. I managed to get my pocket money raised from £5 to £6 so I could spend it all on 1 hour horse riding but 1 hour a week is never going to make a great horse rider. Not everyone who owns a horse is mega wealthy I knew some people working in call centres who had a horse but they spent every spare penny on them but most people who can have a horse are at the very least quite comfortable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

When it comes to sport, enjoyment is in the eye of the beholder. For example I love watching the swimming and the boxing whereas I find gymnastics pretty boring.
 

What I really wanted to say though is that actively arguing against a sport being included in the olympics is the domain of complete arseholes. There’s no reason for making that argument other than undermining the hard work of the participants and making the fans feel shit. If you don’t like a sport just don’t watch it.

 

For all I care they could be introducing tiddlywinks and chess. I won’t be watching but there’s no reason not to include them. 

Oh I quite agree. Life's too short to moan about not liking something. Leave it to the people who do like it and watch what you love instead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, gigpusher said:

Oh I quite agree. Life's too short to moan about not liking something. Leave it to the people who do like it and watch what you love instead. 

We need a book on the life theories of Gigpusher. Need me some of your relentless positivity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Quark said:

We need a book on the life theories of Gigpusher. Need me some of your relentless positivity!

Oh believe me it has been challenged this last year 🙂 but my big mantra is spend your time and money on the things you love. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not saying the dancing horses thing is elitist or anything but the rider going for gold for GB is Charlotte Dujardin. 
Doesn’t that translate literally to Two Gardens’? Us mere mortals have to make do with one, if we’re lucky 😂

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Skelts said:

I’m not saying the dancing horses thing is elitist or anything but the rider going for gold for GB is Charlotte Dujardin. 
Doesn’t that translate literally to Two Gardens’? Us mere mortals have to make do with one, if we’re lucky 😂

Can’t these horses dance to a bit of prodigy to make it a bit more normal for us 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Skelts said:

I’m not saying the dancing horses thing is elitist or anything but the rider going for gold for GB is Charlotte Dujardin. 
Doesn’t that translate literally to Two Gardens’? Us mere mortals have to make do with one, if we’re lucky 😂

Considering that the olympic team actually had a member of the Royal family in it at one point. That tells you everything you need to know about the “sport”

2 hours ago, st dan said:

Give them some tranquilliser - thats got a track record of making people dance a bit more.

 

Horse tranquilliser tends to have the opposite effect on us in the clubbing generation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Skelts said:

I’m not saying the dancing horses thing is elitist or anything but the rider going for gold for GB is Charlotte Dujardin. 
Doesn’t that translate literally to Two Gardens’? Us mere mortals have to make do with one, if we’re lucky 😂

I’ve got two garden sheds

so I am Christophe Deux Abri de Jardin.  How’s that for posh? 

Those monty python fans will remember Arthur two sheds Jackson!

Edited by Ayrshire Chris
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...