BBC Sports Personality of the Year

First topic message reminder :

The BBC have announced this year’s nominations for the Sports Personality of the Year and they are as follows:


Alistair Cook
Amir Khan
Andrew Strauss
Andy Murray
Dai Greene
Darren Clarke
Luke Donald
Mark Cavendish
Mo Farah
Rory McIlroy

I’d like to ask people who are knowledgeable on any of the above nominations to submit to me a brief paragraph or two with the nominees achievements over the past 12 months and the reasons for why they should be included. If you are interested in this please PM me.

Do you agree with the nominees? Are there any glaring omissions? And most importantly who do you think will win?

CaledonianCraig wrote:If the award were about achievements and people who have only reached the very heights of their sport should win it then why did David Beckham win it? I never saw him lift the World Cup for England?

Because of what he achieved at Utd?

Y I Man wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:If the award were about achievements and people who have only reached the very heights of their sport should win it then why did David Beckham win it? I never saw him lift the World Cup for England?

Because of what he achieved at Utd?

Yes but it did not include the pinnacle of the sport - the World Cup. Domestic trophies but not the big one as far as football goes.

Just thought I would point that out for all those that reckon Murray has to win a slam to be considered. He has won countless titles on the same scale as Beckham won trophies but it would seem that Beckham can win the award but Murray can't be considered. Hardly fair I'd say.

David Beckham has done a fair bit to promote English football with the latest (admittedly unsuccessful bid for the WC), and indeed British sport abroad and he is a global name.

Beckham was also part of the excellent Manchester United squad who won the treble (was it is 1999?) when they lifted the Premier League Trophy, the FA Cup and the Champions League. The latter when they beat Bayern Munich in the closing minutes it was Beckham's brilliant corner that set up the winning goal. Similarily, it was the outstanding kick from midfield from Beckham that ensured England qualified (on their last chance) to Euro, some year or other.

For the treble alone - no other club has done that (have they??) and Beckham was one of the high profile stars at United at that time.

I'd like to see Andy win a big one, and then I am sure he would be one of the hot favourites to win SPOTY - in the meatime, they are dozens of athletes who have done as well, or better than him in their sports who are not in the list at all.

Beckham won it because of his performance against Greece which led us to the 2002 World Cup.

Thanks Scottrf - couldn't remember exactly - I live with several football fanatics so I have absorbed some of the information osmosis style over the years!

Yes but it did not win them the World Cup Scott.

And it is fair to say that Andy Murray equally single-handedly is promoting British men's tennis and a tennis academy is now up and running near to his home town. Murray has won umpteen Masters Cups (often beaten the likes of Federer/Nadal or Djokovic to win) and is in the top six most successful Masters Cup players of all-time, he is also one of about six tennis players in tennis history to reach the slam semis at all four slams in a calendar year and is the best male player Britain has produced for seventy odd years.

As for the point about there being many athletes in their sports at the moment that have done better than Andy I say that can't be proven. Murray is playing against legends of the sport and quite possibly the highest calibre that men's tennis has seen. Now for the likes of Khan (boxing) he hasn't had to face the greatest boxers of all-time at his weight to get where he is and marvellous though it was for England to retain the Ashes the Australian side they beat were mediocre unlike the opposition Andy Murray has to face to win a slam.

I don't think Andy should or will win the SPOTY award but to say he doesn't warrant being in the list is unfair considering his achievements. Look at Luke Donald (okay world No.1) but no major wins so should that disqualify him from the list?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Yes but it did not win them the World Cup Scott.

And it is fair to say that Andy Murray equally single-handedly is promoting British men's tennis and a tennis academy is now up and running near to his home town. Murray has won umpteen Masters Cups (often beaten the likes of Federer/Nadal or Djokovic to win) and is in the top six most successful Masters Cup players of all-time, he is also one of about six tennis players in tennis history to reach the slam semis at all four slams in a calendar year and is the best male player Britain has produced for seventy odd years.

As for the point about there being many athletes in their sports at the moment that have done better than Andy I say that can't be proven. Murray is playing against legends of the sport and quite possibly the highest calibre that men's tennis has seen. Now for the likes of Khan (boxing) he hasn't had to face the greatest boxers of all-time at his weight to get where he is and marvellous though it was for England to retain the Ashes the Australian side they beat were mediocre unlike the opposition Andy Murray has to face to win a slam.

I don't think Andy should or will win the SPOTY award but to say he doesn't warrant being in the list is unfair considering his achievements. Look at Luke Donald (okay world No.1) but no major wins so should that disqualify him from the list?

The award isn't solely about achievement. It is for "the sportsman or woman whose actions have most captured the public's imagination".

There's little doubt that was Beckham that year.

Well people on this topic would beg to differ when it comes to achievements as they feel Andy shouldn't be there as he hasn't won a slam. I agree though it should not be all about achievement but others have differing views.

The major emphasis of the British public is in Wimbledon and he didn't make the final. I also think he's someone the public find it hard to get behind.

Yes that is true in that as far as a large part of the British public goes tennis is Wimbledon and nothing more which is wholly untrue and is down to their own ignorance. As you say a section of the British public refuse to get behind him and a large part of that was down to the 2006 World Cup remarks that prejudiced people cling to as a reason to hate him. Guess what though? An English Daily Mail journalist and Tim Henman have long since admitted it was all a huge set-up. They ribbed Andy about Scotland not qualifying (not covered by press) and then straight away was asked who he'd be supporting and getting his own back in a tongue in cheek matter and to get his own back said: 'Anyone but England' . A comment that was taken out of context but one that those that choose to hate him will always use it against him. Pathetic really.

To be honest though ask how many non-English can identify with Beckham and the answer would be - not many. However, as there are around 50 million English votes to around five or six million Celtic votes in the SPOTY award the majority is always likely to win out and hence why I don't think Andy will ever win the award whatever he achieves in sport.

CaledonianCraig it's because you believe in us and them. Some English people might be ignorant but I know not all Scots are as dour and miserable as Gordon Brown and Andy Murray are seen to be by the media.

I am a big fan of Jamie Murray (who has won a grandslam) and Kelly Brown (one of Scotland's best rugby players). They have great personalities. I like Chris Hoy too.

It's nothing to do with Murray being Scottish, he simply isn't likeable in the same way other sportsman are. I want to get behind Murray but he needs to give some good reason for people to. I suppose it's tough for him because he has to match the likes of Federer not just in achievements but in support too. Federer is such a joy to watch that it's tough for Murray to match him.

I am sure that on a personal level Murray is a down to earth nice bloke. On the other hand his media image isn't brilliant. Especially on court where he growls and scowls. Most of the photos of him are of him grimacing and growling.

I am personally not a big fan of Beckham. True he hasn't won a world cup but that's because the English football team are hopelessly inept in international football competitions. He did win the treble with Manu which is an impressive achievement because club football does surpass international football in importance.

I find Federers smugness far more intolerable than Murray's dourness.

I find Nadal's gopherishness worse than both

Davie wrote:I find Nadal's gopherishness worse than both

Not to mention his hackneyed Trophy biting. Dreadful celebration. Also annoys me how he adds "no" to the end of every sentance.

Have to say although Im sure they are far from perfect I dont mind Federer, Djoko, Murray or Nadal. They all seem like pretty good guys to me.

Certainly very good examples of sportsmen Diggers and know how to behave.

super realist Federer's smugness? He has won numerous slams and is one of the best tennis players of all time. He plays tennis with effortless ease. Is it any surprise he might come across as a little smug?

No, it's not a surprise at all, but just because he has a reason to be smug, doesn't give him an excuse.

I suspect that Andy Murrays triophy cabinet would be a lot more bare than Beckhams if he'd had to enter all his comeptitons with the next best 10 scottish tennis players. And if he didnt get to enter dozens of comeptitons a year.
Hes had how many chances to win a grandslam event now? Any soccer player does well to get 3 world cups under their belt.
The ide athat Murray is just unlucky to be around at a time when theres other good players is a bit ridiculous. We can only judge peopels acheivements byu the standards of teh cpomeptition of their time. Standards n all sports are improving all the time,. if you arent the best and you arent acheivieng amazing things then you arent doing them.

And more importnatly anyway SPOTY is a popularity contest, thats the whole point. Yes people will be infleunced by acheivements ( thats why the BBC sets the nominees now, to avoid Bernie Slaven winning the internet voite again) but its supopossed to be about the biggest public figure, and Murray is a bit of a non entity even if he is by far the best British tennis player of the modern era.
Hes just never been the biggest acheiver, or the biggest star in British sport in that time. Partly its his personality, partly its the way hes marketted ( his rap was pretty good though, if he promised to do one on the show i might be tempted to vote for him) and partly its because many people find tennis crushingly dull and annoying.
I suspect theres more people in Scotland who would bvote for him just because hes Scottish than there are people in England who wouldnt vote for him just because hes Scottish.

If he stays in the top 10 for the rest of his career he hould be in line for a lifeteime acheivement award, but untill he wins a major he'll never be the number one that year....he'll just be "oh yeah Andy Murray, hes pretty good" to most people.

super_realist wrote:No, it's not a surprise at all, but just because he has a reason to be smug, doesn't give him an excuse.

To be fair some people just look smug, just the way Murray looks dour, it doesnt they are actually smug or dour people.

Diggers wrote:

super_realist wrote:No, it's not a surprise at all, but just because he has a reason to be smug, doesn't give him an excuse.

To be fair some people just look smug, just the way Murray looks dour, it doesnt they are actually smug or dour people.

Suppose so Diggers,
Padraig Harrington looks like he has about 1 braincell rattling around in his head, but is apparently an accountant.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Y I Man wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:If the award were about achievements and people who have only reached the very heights of their sport should win it then why did David Beckham win it? I never saw him lift the World Cup for England?

Because of what he achieved at Utd?

Yes but it did not include the pinnacle of the sport - the World Cup. Domestic trophies but not the big one as far as football goes.

He achieved the pinnacle of club football though CC. He won every domestic, european and world club trophy, as well as league titles in two other countries (can any English footballer in history match that?).

Outside of football he has done countless amounts of promotion of football, charities, Britain, UNICEF etc etc, the list of his achievements on and off the field are more than Murray even if he won a Grand Slam.

He'll never be a household name like Dai Greene though

Total rubbish Tophat.
A Champions League is the pinnacle of domestic football. A major is the pinnacle of tennis.

When Murray wins won his achievements will match Beckhams.

Paul Lambert has a similar list of achievements to Beckham by the way.

super_realist wrote:

Diggers wrote:

super_realist wrote:No, it's not a surprise at all, but just because he has a reason to be smug, doesn't give him an excuse.

To be fair some people just look smug, just the way Murray looks dour, it doesnt they are actually smug or dour people.

Suppose so Diggers,
Padraig Harrington looks like he has about 1 braincell rattling around in his head, but is apparently an accountant.

Most accountants Ive met are smug, dour, and spend a lot of time on the golf course.

super_realist wrote:Total rubbish Tophat.
A Champions League is the pinnacle of domestic football. A major is the pinnacle of tennis.

When Murray wins won his achievements will match Beckhams.

Paul Lambert has a similar list of achievements to Beckham by the way.

How is Champions League domestic you donut??! More than 50% of the matches are played out of the country!

And Paul Lambert?? Winning the Champs Leauge with BD is very good but winning a bunch of DOMESTIC trophies where you're only competing against one club is nothing notable nor has he any off-pitch achievements to speak of. Think you need to extract your head from your arris.

I meant Club Competitions Tophat, or domestic as opposed to International Matches played by countries.

How many leagues has Beckham played in where there was more than one other team realistically competing for the title? None. His time in England had only Arsenal challenging, Real Madrid had Barcelona and he only played small parts at AC, which is effectively a two horse league with the horses changing every few years.

Who cares about off field "achievements" either. Those are nothing to do with sporting ability and therefore shouldn't account for anything in a SPOTY nomination.

I happen to like Beckham, he seems a decent fellow (despite having a ghastly wife) but his sporting achievements have been overplayed, despite his undoubted enthusiasm.
Ryan Giggs has had a far better career and been a far better player than Beckham.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:actually wouldn't have had a problem with Chrissie Wellington being nominated either.

Theres better looking triathletes out there though.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:actually wouldn't have had a problem with Chrissie Wellington being nominated either.

Theres better looking triathletes out there though.

Plus it made absolutely no impression on the general public, which is the key criteria.

super_realist wrote:I meant Club Competitions Tophat, or domestic as opposed to International Matches played by countries.

How many leagues has Beckham played in where there was more than one other team realistically competing for the title? None. His time in England had only Arsenal challenging, Real Madrid had Barcelona and he only played small parts at AC, which is effectively a two horse league with the horses changing every few years.

Who cares about off field "achievements" either. Those are nothing to do with sporting ability and therefore shouldn't account for anything in a SPOTY nomination.

I happen to like Beckham, he seems a decent fellow (despite having a ghastly wife) but his sporting achievements have been overplayed, despite his undoubted enthusiasm.
Ryan Giggs has had a far better career and been a far better player than Beckham.

Has Giggs had a far better career? He spent a fair chunk on the Man U bench and barely made an impact at International level even allowing for the hopeless Welsh sides he was a part of. At least Beckham slept with his own ghastly wife most of the time.
And off the field persona's if not acheivemenst as such do count for something, it is a popularity contest not just a back slapping for world champions. Being a sports perosnality is about more than winning, its also about representing sport and engaging people. The biggest sports stars of the year and not jus those who won the most but those who people remeber and who created the magic moments on and off the field. Why is Flintoff always the guy remebered for the 2005 Ashes win? Because he was a real character and his ridiculous personality captured the publics hearts that year. That Ashes win was bigger news than this years because it came in a dramatic way and signalled the end to decades of Aussie doiminance. Although this years was won away, something that hasnt been done for even longer, and with a bigger margin it wasnt such a big deal somehow. A greater sporting acheivement but less exciteing, and few people outside cricket really know who Cook is because he isnt much of a personality...hes not even globally that big a name within cricket despite his acheivements. You could colour me amazed if Cook wins the award even if he has done things this year no English cricketer has ever done. See also Dai Greene vs Kris Akabussi.

Is it really a popularity contest based on personality when bores like Mansell, Faldo, Giggs, Lennox Lewis and Zara Philips have won?

Has Beckham made an impact at international level either? Over a hundred caps, but never got beyond a QF in any tournament. Hardly a Charlton or Moore is he?

That's not Beckham's fault that we haven't won a world cup though SR

Messi hasn't won the world cup with Argentina. Does that mean he isn't one of the worlds best players either?

No, by the same measure you can't blame Giggs for not playing in a major tournament.

Because his teammates are irrelevant?

Scored in his first World Cup game, assisted both goals vs Portugal in Euro 2000, put us into the 2002 World Cup, scored the winning goal vs Argentina in 2002, pretty much made the winning goal against Paraguay in 2006, made both assists in the next 2-0 game, scored the winning goal in the knockouts vs Ecuador.

No, he made no impact

Give it up, you're clueless.

Y I Man wrote:Messi hasn't won the world cup with Argentina. Does that mean he isn't one of the world best players either?

If Beckham wasn't English there isn't a hope in hell he'd ever have been considered "world class"

He was a very fine player, a touch one dimensional, and very good with a dead ball but he's not in the same class as Messi

Y I Man wrote:Messi hasn't won the world cup with Argentina. Does that mean he isn't one of the worlds best players either?

Messi hasn't even made the semis, exactly the same as Beckham.

Not in the same class as one of the greatest players of all time?

Fair enough, he's useless then.

Your posts are terrible.

Scottrf wrote:Because his teammates are irrelevant?

Scored in his first World Cup game, assisted both goals vs Portugal in Euro 2000, put us into the 2002 World Cup, scored the winning goal vs Argentina in 2002, pretty much made the winning goal against Paraguay in 2006, made both assists in the next 2-0 game, scored the winning goal in the knockouts vs Ecuador.

No, he made no impact

Give it up, you're clueless.

Preposterous, every goal needs players involved in it. He's been good amongst the rank mediocrity of English football, but for every example you made of him contributing there were many other games where he did very little.
It's his job to do what you have quoted, do you expect reward for doing your job? My point is that he's never done anything truly remarkable.
Strange how you forget the bottled tackle v Brazil and missed penalties.

Very good player, but more over-rated than any other player in history.

Peter Seabiscuit wheeler you would be surprised. Cook gets more praise than the likes of Trott and Bell who have had very good years too in cricket.

Cook's records in the Ashes in Australia were incredible.

Bit ludicrous that Golf gets 3 nominations. Wow they can hit a golf ball well! It's almost like lucky dip anyway. Luke Donald has at least shown consistency.

Super_realist you might not realise it but football consists of 11 players in a team.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

One minute you were questioning whether he made any impact at international level and now being directly involved in countless World Cup match winning goals is nothing remarkable.

Honestly I thought you'd just admit being wrong after that post, you're not doing yourself any favours.

beshocked wrote:Peter Seabiscuit wheeler you would be surprised. Cook gets more praise than the likes of Trott and Bell who have had very good years too in cricket.

Cook's records in the Ashes in Australia were incredible.

Bit ludicrous that Golf gets 3 nominations. Wow they can hit a golf ball well! It's almost like lucky dip anyway. Luke Donald has at least shown consistency.

Super_realist you might not realise it but football consists of 11 players in a team.

If you break down any sport you can make silly statements like "wow they can hit a ball well"

"Wow, Dai Greene can jump over fences"

or " Wow, Alistair Cook can stand still for six hours, eat cucumber sandwiches and hit a leather ball every now and then"

I like Beckham, I just don't think he's as good a player as he's made out to be.

And you are entitled to your opinion on him SR, but when you are in the minority and the majority are saying he was one of the worlds best, does that not tell you something?

Not really YI,
I don't deny he's been a good player, but I just can't see that his actual ability is anywhere near what the media made it out to be.

Put him in a Sweden shirt or some similarly performing National team, would you still think he's as good as he's made out to be?

Being an english sportsman is difficult, because people expect and think they are better than they really are.
Unrealistic media sees to that.

When will the winner be announced?

Its got nothing to do with the media. People make their own conclusions based on what they watch.
Put him in a Swedish shirt, and yes I would view him the same.

Just as I view Hazard, Eriksen, Gaitan as some of the best attacking midfielders in Europe, better than the English talent at the same age.

super_realist wrote:Being an english sportsman is difficult, because people expect and think they are better than they really are.
Unrealistic media sees to that.

The media are unrealistic yet you don't seem to think Beckham will have done anything remarkable unless he single handely takes England to a World Cup?

More minority opinion on Beckham:
Terrific Club achievements, with Man Utd at least.
But he should also be judged on his International career which, while excellent, has too many failures (red cards, missed penalties, below-par displays) in crucial situations and dragged on far too long.
All sports have their divas who are treated as bigger than the sport itself. Beckham seems to be football's diva. Doesn't make him anything other than a top class player, just not ranking up there with the very best.

In my opinion Beckham was in football terms a one trick pony. Excellent dead ball delivery but aside from that nothing spectacular. Sure he won a lot for United (what United player around that time didn't). Sure he had highs at international level but also lows such as getting sent off at World Cup etc but in terms of skill Britain has produced far superior players who never won the award. That is my gripe.

As for the claim that Murray has good players to beat - wrong. He has legends to beat two of whom are seen as the greatest players of all-time. Would Luke Donald be world number one with Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus at their peak to compete against - of course not. Would Khan be world champion if Sugar Ray Leonard and Roberto Duran were still boxing at their peak? Of course not. Would Greene have won gold competing against Ed Moses? No. I could say the same about many of the nominations here.