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?

super_realist wrote:

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.

Look Id agree with pretty much all of what both of you say there. The point with Beckham ( like Flintoff) is that he meant more to the public than his actual acheivements of ability. He was (is) a sporting hero. A sports personality.

I agree comepltley that Cook has had an increbile year, not just in the Ashes victory. He does get praise to some extent but when people talk about great cricketers currently ist still guys like SRT ( cant get a century to save his life) who are the global stars, and I do believe that the cricket teams acheivements somewhat passed the wider British public by this time.


And yes we can denigrate any sport just for what the people do. When you break them down they are all pretty ridiculous. At the same time I have some sympathy for the Aussie jibes that Britain were the Olympic champions in sitting down last time around. Lets face it we do target resources and shift young athletes events to target events where technology and a lack of comeptition can help secure gold.

kwinigolfer wrote: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.

SPOTY is a one year award though. The point with Murray is that whilst hes consistenbtly a high acheiver hes never really had an iconic year wheres hes stood out above everyone else as the biggest sports star in Britain. He keeps getting nominated, but doesnt win. Should we just start voting for him out of sympathy?

Scottrf wrote:

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?

No, I think he's had a fine career, however in over a hundred games for England I'd be astounded if he didn't make some of the contributions that he did.
Did he make as many as he should of, perhaps, perhaps not.

Was he a very good player, Undoubtedly, was he as good as he was made out to be, Certainly not.
Do the British media build up the majority of sportsmen to be better than they actually are. Of course.

Nothing against Beckham, I just can't agree that he's as good as people make him out to be. Like I say would we talk about him if he wasn't English, the way that people talk about other players who fall into this supposed "World Class" category?

CaledonianCraig wrote: Would Luke Donald be world number one with Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus at their peak to compete against - of course not.

By that logic, if Andy Murray was having to face today the likes of Sampras, Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Becker, Laver and Lendl then he wouldn't even be in the top 10

super_realist wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

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?

No, I think he's had a fine career, however in over a hundred games for England I'd be astounded if he didn't make some of the contributions that he did.
Did he make as many as he should of, perhaps, perhaps not.

Was he a very good player, Undoubtedly, was he as good as he was made out to be, Certainly not.
Do the British media build up the majority of sportsmen to be better than they actually are. Of course.

Nothing against Beckham, I just can't agree that he's as good as people make him out to be. Like I say would we talk about him if he wasn't English, the way that people talk about other players who fall into this supposed "World Class" category?

Id say most people would say Henrik Larsson was a world class player, had a reasonably similar career to Beckham. Id probably rank Beckham as being at least as good as him, probably better IMO but not much in it.

Mmm, close Diggers, I'd probably put the pair of them as being "upper European Class" if you know what I mean. Very good, just not quite up there with the real top drawer players.

You are right though, very similar careers.

One trick pony in the same way Xavi is a great passer of the ball or Lineker a great goalscorer.

super_realist, no name has ever been less appropriate and no poster has ever summed up the following phrase better than you: "Never argue with an idiot, you'll only be brought down to their level and then beaten by experience".

And to Caledonian (and possibly SR to if I'm picking the vibe right), has there ever been a Scottish person/athlete you Scots haven't blown smoke up the arris of?? Seriously, it's just getting ridiculous.

No I don't think Andy should win the award this time around. My chief gripe was with those talking nonsense saying he didn't merit a place in the short list on the grounds of him not winning a slam. He did what only (I believe) five other tennis players in history have achieved in reaching the semis or better in all four slams this year. Some feat and also is well inside top ten of most successful Masters Cup winners of all-time. A lot of those wins havevseen him beat the very best players in the world to win.

And no Dave not at all. Roger Federer is widely regarded as the greatest tennis player of all-time (better than all of those on your list) and Rafael Nadal has been tipped by many to surpass Federer (though I have my doubts). That is the insane quality Andy has standing in his way so for him to play in such an era and achieve what he has speaks volumes for his talent.

super_realist wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

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?

No, I think he's had a fine career, however in over a hundred games for England I'd be astounded if he didn't make some of the contributions that he did.
Did he make as many as he should of, perhaps, perhaps not.

Was he a very good player, Undoubtedly, was he as good as he was made out to be, Certainly not.
Do the British media build up the majority of sportsmen to be better than they actually are. Of course.

Nothing against Beckham, I just can't agree that he's as good as people make him out to be. Like I say would we talk about him if he wasn't English, the way that people talk about other players who fall into this supposed "World Class" category?

So the English public have decided that Beckham was one of the worlds best because the media hyped him? Absolute rubbish. I can make up my own mind from watching him play, I dont need a journalist to tell me how good or bad players are.

And yes, as I mentioned, I would view him in the same light if he wasn't English.

Of course you can YI, just as I can.

TopHat24/7 wrote:super_realist, no name has ever been less appropriate and no poster has ever summed up the following phrase better than you: "Never argue with an idiot, you'll only be brought down to their level and then beaten by experience".

And to Caledonian (and possibly SR to if I'm picking the vibe right), has there ever been a Scottish person/athlete you Scots haven't blown smoke up the arris of?? Seriously, it's just getting ridiculous.

Speaking of names, You are speaking out of your top hat. Apparently having a different opinion from you makes me an idiot?

Being Scottish means nothing to me. I've a liking for many English sportsmen, and a dislike for many Scots ones. It's irrelevant really where they come from.

I think it's hard to argue that Beckham hasn't been over-rated though, just as Rooney is.

Has there ever been overhyped Scottish sportsmen? Undoubtedly there has been. Does it mean I buy into it? No.

Of course there have been Scottish players/sportsmen who get overly praised in my opinion such as Kris Boyd, Graeme Sourness and Colin Montgomerie spring to mind just like there are some that never got the credit they deserved such as boxer Jim Watt (do believe he held the record for world title defences in the late 70's for example.

s_r:
Except hopefully Rooney will succeed where Beckham ultimately failed, which is to win something for his country instead of being a reason why they fell short.

Nah, England going from perenniel Quarter Finalists to winners of anything is a bit of a stretch even for optimists, especially as he's banned from the group stages of the next tournament.

super_realist wrote:I think it's hard to argue that Beckham hasn't been over-rated though, just as Rooney is.

Cliches again. Copying every man and his dog calling Rooney overrated.

Apart from the experts and other professional footballers of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster_(contemporary_subculture)

Scott, so if I'm copying every man and his dog, then Rooney being over-rated is popular opinion (just not yours)
Apparently having an opinion contrary to yours means I can't possibly have arrived at that decision myself
Quoting Wikipedia is never a good starting point either.

The Germans rate him very highly I hear.

It's the opinion of the masses, the sheep that flock once something becomes fashionable to say.

Which players that have played with or against Rooney have called him overrated?

Do you know what a starting point is?

The Germans thought Hitler was pretty sh1t hot but look where that got them.

super_realist wrote:Apparently having an opinion contrary to yours means I can't possibly have arrived at that decision myself

Not when it adds up with all of the cliches around English media and football.

I'm just waiting for you to tell me England were played off the park by Spain when beating them.

kwinigolfer wrote:The Germans thought Hitler was pretty sh1t hot but look where that got them.

Scottrf wrote:It's the opinion of the masses, the sheep that flock once something becomes fashionable to say.

Which players that have played with or against Rooney have called him overrated?

Do you know what a starting point is?

Scott, for heavens sake, Prove my opinion of Rooney (or Beckham) being over-rated has anything to do with sheep mentality.
It was you who said that you can make up your own mind despite media opinion. Surely I can make mine up too?
Accept people have different opinions.

What professional would publicly say any of their peers is over-rated. Not very professional is it.

Although I see that Sweden are keen to face England in the group stages of next years Euro's because they don't rate them very much.

Scottrf wrote:

super_realist wrote:Apparently having an opinion contrary to yours means I can't possibly have arrived at that decision myself

Not when it adds up with all of the cliches around English media and football.

I'm just waiting for you to tell me England were played off the park by Spain when beating them.

Scott, cliches exist because there is an element of truth in them.
You don't just automatically disagree with something because it also might fit in with some sort of cliche.
Take your tin hat off for goodness sake.

How would I prove it? It's my opinion based on reading your posts.

In the same way anything Spain do is 'technical brilliance' even if they make no chances, and if England beat them it's luck or anti-football. As if they were supposed to beat them by outpassing them.

No one thinks of Beckham as one of the greatest players of all time, he's seen as an icon and a very important player at United and England. All of which he was.

Scottrf wrote:How would I prove it? It's my opinion based on reading your posts.

In the same way anything Spain do is 'technical brilliance' even if they make no chances, and if England beat them it's luck or anti-football. As if they were supposed to beat them by outpassing them.

No one thinks of Beckham as one of the greatest players of all time, he's seen as an icon and a very important player at United and England. All of which he was.

Maybe I just don't rate them as highly as you do, could that be possible? Am I allowed that?
Doesn't mean I'm following the crowd.

Just as well Wayne Wooney and Sir Beckham didnt get nominated this year then eh.

CC Ok yep I buy your line that Lurray desrves a nomination, he is the oustanding Brit and has done pretty well in his sport which is a fairly high profile one. He is a pretty well known figure. Certainly as deserving as the golffolk and if it keeps a woman off the list then all is good.


He is overtated though

super_realist wrote:

Scottrf wrote:How would I prove it? It's my opinion based on reading your posts.

In the same way anything Spain do is 'technical brilliance' even if they make no chances, and if England beat them it's luck or anti-football. As if they were supposed to beat them by outpassing them.

No one thinks of Beckham as one of the greatest players of all time, he's seen as an icon and a very important player at United and England. All of which he was.

Maybe I just don't rate them as highly as you do, could that be possible? Am I allowed that?
Doesn't mean I'm following the crowd.

It does when you don't even know how highly I rate them and already disagree.

It doesn't matter what you think really. I'm allowed an opinion. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant.
I've said both are over-rated, you've disagreed, but just because I think they are such, doesn't mean I formed that opinion based on the presentation of the media.

I agree, thanks for the debate.

It is only a matter of time before David Beckham is indeed knighted.

Imagine Sir Andy Murray.

Worse, Imagine Sir Steven gerrard or Sir John Terry

Id say Rooney is a more overated player than Beckham. Though I do believe Rooney is/was a better player.
Sometimes it seems Rooney is above criticism but I do think he is a bit of a streak player, certainly in terms of his goal scoring it seems like its feast or famine.
Whereas I know plenty of people who have just never rated Beckham that highly.

Think Mike Tindall did himslef out a knighthood even if England had bought home the world cup. Cant imagine hed want to be too close to a sword wielding in law at the minute.

Diggers wrote:Id say Rooney is a more overated player than Beckham. Though I do believe Rooney is/was a better player.
Sometimes it seems Rooney is above criticism but I do think he is a bit of a streak player, certainly in terms of his goal scoring it seems like its feast or famine.

Fair comment, but injuries have a lot to do with that. He's been superb whenever he's had a long injury free period. That's normal in strikers.

Diggers wrote:Id say Rooney is a more overated player than Beckham. Though I do believe Rooney is/was a better player.
Sometimes it seems Rooney is above criticism but I do think he is a bit of a streak player, certainly in terms of his goal scoring it seems like its feast or famine.
Whereas I know plenty of people who have just never rated Beckham that highly.

Difficult to properly assess footballers because the fast majority are very streaky in form.
I think the issue with Rooney is that he can be staggeringly brilliant or absolutely stink the place out like a pub player as he did in the World Cup.

Why would Beckham receive a knighthood?
For services to himself?

If his charitable contributions merit a gong then so be it.

But difficult to see why his football career would merit such an honour until and unless he goes on to achieve greater distinction. As opposed to greater celebrity.

I say Darren Clarke.
I still refer to the 'Personality' in the award title and the fact that it's possible to win your maiden major at 42/43 is astonishing particularly with so many talented young players around these days, plus the turmoil in his personal life in recent years, the fact I've never read anyone saying a bad word about the man and that he recognised his achievement of winning The Open by being completely unprofessional and celebrating all night.
Legend for me.

kwinigolfer wrote:Why would Beckham receive a knighthood?
For services to himself?

If his charitable contributions merit a gong then so be it.

But difficult to see why his football career would merit such an honour until and unless he goes on to achieve greater distinction. As opposed to greater celebrity.

Try telling that to Sir Alex

Very strange to grant any sort of award for sport. It's not as if it's an altruistic pursuit.

Scottrf wrote:

Diggers wrote:Id say Rooney is a more overated player than Beckham. Though I do believe Rooney is/was a better player.
Sometimes it seems Rooney is above criticism but I do think he is a bit of a streak player, certainly in terms of his goal scoring it seems like its feast or famine.

Fair comment, but injuries have a lot to do with that. He's been superb whenever he's had a long injury free period. That's normal in strikers.

True, Van Persie is another example of that. Dont get me wrong, I rate both Beckham and Rooney very highly, but because most people can see that Rooney can sometimes be such a special player there is a huge desire amongst the British public to see him as one of the really big world players like Ronaldo or Messi.
For me I dont think he will ever be quite that but certainly in the group just below.

super realist

Imagine Sir Wayne Rooney Sir Ashley Cole

What would happen if England won the Euro 2012? Would we have Sir Fabio Capello?

super_realist wrote:Very strange to grant any sort of award for sport. It's not as if it's an altruistic pursuit.

Are we talking about Knighthoods or SPOTY ?

Knighthoods obviously.

beshocked wrote:super realist

Imagine Sir Wayne Rooney Sir Ashley Cole

What would happen if England won the Euro 2012? Would we have Sir Fabio Capello?

Lets be honest, plenty of people get knighthoods for being born into the right family or just knowing the right people. Im not saying Rooney or Cole deserve them but at least they had an ability that they worked hard to make the most of to get to teh top of their professions.

I think they are dished out a bit too readily these days though. I wouldn't want them to be as hard to award as a VC, but a standard ought to be set.

I don't suppose being a Knight of the realm means much in a post empire world anyway, just a bit of a pompous title.

Bit like Spoty then, they shouldnt hand them out just for being Ryan Giggs or failing to win a tennis grand slam tournament.

Super_realist it might be seen as pompous but wouldn't you want to be knighted?

Anyway back to the question at hand.This is how I rate the candidates.

1.Cavendish
2.Cook
3.Farrah
4.Luke Donald
5.Rory McKilroy
6.Dai Greene
7.Amir Khan
8.Darren Clarke
9.Andy Murray
10.Andrew Strauss

Not a bad point Seabiscuit. If no one has done anything truly worthy in a year (e.g. Giggs) then don't have an award just make the show a season review. Bit like regional news, if there's no news, don't bother trying to make a news bulletin.

super_realist wrote:Bit like regional news, if there's no news, don't bother trying to make a news bulletin.

What?