Sports which are just too posh, rich and over-represented at the Olympics

by Portnoy Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:12 am

First topic message reminder :

Swimming/Gymnatics - have too many medals on offer
Equestrian/Yachting/Shooting etc. require loads of dosh to just get on the first step (and I'll include the Pole vault in that)
And filthy rich sports like football, tennis, golf, rugby and basketball should never even have a sniff of Olympic participation - well, not the multimillionaires anyway. If the Olympics ain't the pinnacle of the sport, then they shouldn't be in.

by Josiah Maiestas Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:31 pm

mystiroakey wrote:rugby 7's is easier to handle and easier to promote worldwide, also much easier on the players to play games after each other- would like to see 20/20 come in as well

nah man. if that happened, Americans would make sure baseball becomes an olympic sport. Laugh

by ChequeredJersey Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:33 pm

I just want to say, off topic I know, but watching a live MLS Baseball game is to date the biggest waste of an evening of my life ever and I don't think it should be counted off my lifespan. I can see why people mightn't like Cricket but Baseball is an atrocity, a crime against the notion of leisure

by mystiroakey Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:44 pm

let baseball come in.. no dramas- lets have every sport possible

by andyi Tue Aug 07, 2012 7:13 pm

mystiroakey wrote:let baseball come in.. no dramas- lets have every sport possible

It was in the Olympics between 1992 and 2008 then they voted it out.

Its is travesty that Squash isn't in though!!!

by mystiroakey Tue Aug 07, 2012 7:14 pm

squash isnt in- didnt think about that- jokes.. Thats a proper sport.

Lets get everything from darts to redbull sky racing in the olympics

by Guest Tue Aug 07, 2012 9:32 pm

Rugby? that's out for sure. How can you have a sport that only around a dozen countries play seriously included in the Olympics? OUT NOW. Same for Cricket - and I don't care if there are five billion people in India - OUT I say.

Squash - definitely in. Seems ideal for an Olympic sport.

ghost

emancipator

by ChequeredJersey Tue Aug 07, 2012 9:55 pm

Rugby sevens is actually played seriously by a good 20 odd nations, plus some
15s nations don't even play 7s properly!

by GSC Tue Aug 07, 2012 10:16 pm

Jennifer1984 wrote:I'm surprised this thread is still being discussed at all. It seems to have no mileage in it except as a vehicle for disgruntlement about haves and have-nots.

I'm not entirely sure how many of the posters on this thread are personally involved in sports such as cycling, equestrianism or any other participation sport that the uber-proletariat could describe as "posh".

It's fair to say that everybody is entitled to an opinion.... that is a given..... but speaking for myself, I usually have the most confidence in those who offer an informed opinion, for instance, Maesteg's posts about the sailing have been intelligent, well thought out and have offered insights and opinions that make a genuine contribution to greater understanding of what is going on.

I see nothing of that in this thread.

What I see instead, is a collection of lowbrow, poorly informed grudge-posts against sports that the posters appear to have no connection to, or interest in other than to deride.

Can somebody please.... and I ask this question very genuinely.... inform me as to WHY the format of the sports in question should not include the elements that they do.? What is it about those elements that is wasteful or irrelevant and if they can adequately explain what they would remove, then what would they put in their place to improve the sport.

If the answers are nothing more than "It's a f***ing waste of time for poncy rich ba***rds", then I would rather not have any reply at all. Their silence will tell me exactly where the posters coming from.

.

And I see a pretentious know it all trying to lord it over everybody else

.

by TopHat24/7 Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:24 pm

mystiroakey wrote:rugby 7's is easier to handle and easier to promote worldwide, also much easier on the players to play games after each other- would like to see 20/20 come in as well

also 7s is a cracking event, has greater worldwide representation than XVs and can be turned around in a couple of days.

Love 7s, been to Twickers for the IRB tourney 6 years in a row!

by TopHat24/7 Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:25 pm

Josiah Maiestas wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:rugby 7's is easier to handle and easier to promote worldwide, also much easier on the players to play games after each other- would like to see 20/20 come in as well
nah man. if that happened, Americans would make sure baseball becomes an olympic sport.

it was, for a while, wasn't it?

by Ent Wed Aug 08, 2012 12:24 am

Rugby 7s, what's next 5 aside football...

A racing boat costs a few k second hand, then there's the running costs, hauling it etc.

Yeah you can try it for a relatively low amount but mastering it and becoming competitive, unlikely unless you've some cash behind you.

by ryan86 Wed Aug 08, 2012 12:28 am

I always very much of the more the better, but I also accept they are limits.

One thing is that you say certain sports are of limited appeal and a only popular in certain areas of the world. What better way of improving this than putting it on a global stage.

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 7:41 am

Ent wrote:Rugby 7s, what's next 5 aside football...

A racing boat costs a few k second hand, then there's the running costs, hauling it etc.

Yeah you can try it for a relatively low amount but mastering it and becoming competitive, unlikely unless you've some cash behind you.

You don't have to buy a boat, you can join a club and borrow one or woe betide you could actually save up for one. There are tons of rowing and sailing clubs up and down the country. That's the whole point of clubs. Same as all sports. Tennis, Rowing, Shooting, Sailing, Horse riding etc needn't be expensive, but it suits peoples agenda to say they are elitist and inaccessible.

I'm sick of people having a go at sports people see as elitist. Do people really expect sports only to be in the Olympic games if they are accessible to the poorest sectors of society. Absurd.

Being a football supporter is expensive but people don't call that elitist. If you are a Spurs or an Arsenal fan your season ticket or Sky Subscription and 50 inch telly could go a long way in so called elitist sports.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 7:57 am

SR Just because people see a sport as being elitest doesnt mean they are having a pop at the sport or the olympics for including it.

It is what it is. They are what they are and long live them all..

being a football supporter isnt the same as buying or finding a football and finding a green patch or even concrete patch and kicking it about though.. Your talking apples and oranges

The elitest element of the any sport in question may mean that that sport doesnt attract new kids from lower class backgrounds. It means the schools they go to wont bring the sport to them either.

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:13 am

Oakey, I don't think it matters what class or background people come from or what sports they take part in.

I wish people would stop raising whether people come from a public or state school background. It doesn't matter.

THe truth is, if people of all backgrounds want to take part in a sport, then Polo aside they can. They just have to make the effort to do so.

Who cares if a Rower went to a public school, or whether a moron like John Terry even went to school. It is irrelevant and people using background as an excuse not to be interested in a sport is just ridiculous.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:24 am

I bring it up alot SR because i want us to do well in this country in sport and yet we do have the odd boundary. our working class football, our middle class golf and cricket, our upper classes rugby and rowing.(generalisation of course but still true to an extent)

I love all of these sports though- but i would love to see more particaption in all sports from all backgrounds.

Yes i am sure pretty much anyone could do and play most of these sports. However its about the divide and the average person(from any background) not relating to another sport.

I am one of the most diverse posters on this forum- I go on every board- because i love all sports. On the whole many people stick by there sport and take a pop at the others. This elitest attitude is very prominant even here..

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:31 am

....and most of that is due to ignorance by people who could, if they wished get involved in any sport they wanted.

From what I can see, the working classes so to speak have a predisposed attitude that they are unable to get involved in any sport they wish. From what I've seen it's completely untrue.

I've just looked up my local rowing club, and a years membership, including the use of boats is the princely sum of £125.
You could barely be kept in football boots for a year for that.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:33 am

so the elitest element exists- the feeling of not being able to participate exits, not feeling part of the culture exists..

Surely thats the problem and still a problem!

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:36 am

Golf is the only sport out of these that has started to appeal to all comers-One of the reasons is due to the amount of golf courses we have and the fact that many can relate these days- is that because footballers play loads of golf- rather than golf professionals! maybe!

But guess what we have 160 players in the rankings these days(britain), more depth than any other nation bar USA

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:43 am

Perhaps Oakey, but it's only a feeling and a poorly informed judgement at that. It's not a reality and developed purely by the very people who complain about it. So it's their problem, not the problem of the sports concerned.

If I can look up my local rowing club in ten seconds online, what's to stop other people doing so? It's almost as if they are using their social status as an excuse not to get involved. Reverse elitism.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:51 am

Yeah exactly elitism and reverse elitism is allways my point like snobbery and inverted snobbery. It boils down the the same thing- People feeling different.

Probally not the best time to mention OZ. however there social make up is very different and on the whole dont feel different from each other and on the whole sport is avaliable and thought of as being available for all, Possibly one of the reason they are so good(cough cough)

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:55 am

That's it though Oakey, Elitism suggest people cannot get involved on the basis of their social standing or income, however there is only a feeling of elitism, in reality it doesn't actually exist and people, with a bit of effort can get involved if they want to.

Part of the problem is though that people think people should be opening doors for them. What happened to personal responsibility and doing stuff for yourself. If I wanted to get involved in Rowing for example, i've just demonstrated that I can do it cheaply and easily.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:00 am

I think lottery funding has proved that money wins medals. Also the top economies in the world allways do well in olyimpic sports.

Individuals doing it for themselves is a utopian idea to be honest.

I want britian to maintain this olympic run we are on. fingers crossed. But we need to bring sport to all areas and all areas to sport..

One of the reasons why the olympics was held in east london- that place might as well be 10,000 miles away from west london!

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:03 am

And hopefully it will bring the realisation on those determined to think that sports are beyond them that they can partake.

Of course money wins medals, but that's the same in every top sport in the world at that level, but merely to partake and get to a decent level doesn't cost much in any sport.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:31 am

super_realist wrote:
Ent wrote:Rugby 7s, what's next 5 aside football...

A racing boat costs a few k second hand, then there's the running costs, hauling it etc.

Yeah you can try it for a relatively low amount but mastering it and becoming competitive, unlikely unless you've some cash behind you.

You don't have to buy a boat, you can join a club and borrow one or woe betide you could actually save up for one. There are tons of rowing and sailing clubs up and down the country. That's the whole point of clubs. Same as all sports. Tennis, Rowing, Shooting, Sailing, Horse riding etc needn't be expensive, but it suits peoples agenda to say they are elitist and inaccessible.

I'm sick of people having a go at sports people see as elitist. Do people really expect sports only to be in the Olympic games if they are accessible to the poorest sectors of society. Absurd.

Being a football supporter is expensive but people don't call that elitist. If you are a Spurs or an Arsenal fan your season ticket or Sky Subscription and 50 inch telly could go a long way in so called elitist sports.

Well said.

Being a football supporter is RIDICULOUSLY expensive. Two of my mates were United supporters and, fulfilling the stereotype of living in the South East, they were spending around £8k a year on the season ticket plus all the extras such as having to buy extra cup tickets they didn't want, coach fares to OT every fortnight, food and drink all day etc.

by **Biltong** Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:34 am

super_realist wrote:Oakey, I don't think it matters what class or background people come from or what sports they take part in.

I wish people would stop raising whether people come from a public or state school background. It doesn't matter.

THe truth is, if people of all backgrounds want to take part in a sport, then Polo aside they can. They just have to make the effort to do so.

Who cares if a Rower went to a public school, or whether a moron like John Terry even went to school. It is irrelevant and people using background as an excuse not to be interested in a sport is just ridiculous.

There is a lot of truth in what you are saying there, however it depends on the situation of individual countries, if I may use South Africa as an example, using rowing as the sport.

In Gauteng there are a number of rowing clubs, they are however very "clicky" and difficult to get in. Because we don't have many natural rivers suitable for rowing, kayaking etc, the only way you can get to row is at a club in Guateng.

Even if you join, you have zero chance of renting or using someone elses boat. It simply isn't done in SA.

Now a decent boat or canoe in SA is rather expensive and if your parents don't have money you ain't gonna row, no matter how badly you want to.

The other thing about specifically sports that are non mainstream, in SA there is literally no money in it.

So as I said, I agree on the whole if you really want to compete in a sport chances are there will be a way around the obstacles, but it very much depends on the country you live in, their infrastructure and whether there are any money thrown at that specific sport.

by VTR Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:39 am

May have been mentioned but I read an interesting article on the BBC that pretty much said we (Britain) are targetting sports that poor countries can't compete in due to lack of facilities. The sports mentioned were Track Cycling, Rowing, Equestrian and Swimming. Good strategy I'd say, seems like a sensible way to maximise results from resources.

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:55 am

Obviously I can't speak for other countries, but it's a total myth that sports hitherto thought of as elitist such as Rowing, Golf, Tennis, Equestrian, Shooting etc aren't perfectly well accessible for a very reasonable price.

I could go online and find a dozen examples in less than 5 minutes for my own current city right now, what I find is that people build up these images in their mind of not being able to get in to partake, but in Britain at least, it simply isn't true, it's just easier for people to say they aren't interested or that said sport is elitist.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:04 am

SR its not a myth as certain sports are thought of as elitest,. That is the whole point of the word elitest..

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:05 am

This reminds of the debate we had regarding muscle memory.. Just because muscles dont have memory doesnt mean that it isnt a factor.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:07 am

mystiroakey wrote:SR its not a myth as they are thought of as elitest, certain sports are. That is the whole point of the word elitest..

The myth isn't that they are thought of as elitest, but that they are elitest.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:09 am

Sorry i dont buy into that at all. Anyone can get involved in an elitest sport. But many dont because they dont relate. The elitest elment is about a feeling of difference and the classist element

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:11 am

"Elitism is the belief or attitude that some individuals, who form an elite — a select group of people with a certain ancestry, intrinsic quality or worth, higher intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other distinctive attributes — are those whose views on a matter are to be taken the most seriously or carry the most weight; whose views and/or actions are most likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary skills, abilities or wisdom render them especially fit to govern"

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:13 am

TopHat, They aren't elitist. Earlier on in the thread I showed that I could join my local rowing club for less than the price of a family of three going to Anfield for ONE game.

If people choose to think of a sport as Elitist, then that's their problem, but they aren't actually elitist, anyone can turn up and take part, thats INCLUSIVE, not Elitist.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:15 am

Elitism is just a word we use to discribe how people think- its a bad trait and should be part of a bygone era.

Inclusive isnt the reverse of elitest.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:19 am

super_realist wrote:TopHat, They aren't elitist. Earlier on in the thread I showed that I could join my local rowing club for less than the price of a family of three going to Anfield for ONE game.

If people choose to think of a sport as Elitist, then that's their problem, but they aren't actually elitist, anyone can turn up and take part, thats INCLUSIVE, not Elitist.

I was agreeing with you, highlighted the wrong word by mistake which caused the wrong emphasis.

Elitism is, in my view, just a belief manifested by an attitude problem as much as anything else.

F1 could be argued as the most elitist sport in the world yet Lewis Hamilton went to a bog standard state school.

Fencing is typically regarded by reverse snobbists as elitist however our main representative at these games also went to state school.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:21 am

"If people choose to think of a sport as Elitist, then that's their problem"

Its not really- its the countries problem. If the kids dont relate or have the opportunities dished out to them by there parents or schools - they wont get involved.

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:21 am

Oakey, You are talking about peoples perception, and it's up to the individual to change that, nothing to do with the sport or peoples access to it.

I suppose you could say an Etonian would find going to the terraces at Millwall as Elitist, but it wouldn't stop them from being able to go if they wanted to.

Elitist means that it is reserved for the most elite sectors of society, but there is nothing actually elitist about access to sport for anyone in this country. It's merely a perception.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:22 am

"Elitism is, in my view, just a belief manifested by an attitude problem as much as anything else."

thats it - you have got it.- its a beilef or an attitude. thats all it is- it doesnt reflect exclusivity

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:26 am

Oakey, I know nothing about rowing, but I amn't stupid enough to think it's an elite sport that only rich people can do. I looked it up and found it. THe information was readily available and nothing was hidden.

DO you think such sports should take out adverts in THe Times to demonstrate how easy it is to take part?

If someone is interested, they should get off their lazy backsides and do a bit of digging instead of just making the excuse it's elitist. It isn't hard.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:30 am

"DO you think such sports should take out adverts in THe Times to demonstrate how easy it is to take part?
"

Yes 100%, thats the lines i allways go on this. There is no reason why anyone from any background in the UK cant take part- it is attitude that pulls us back

by **Biltong** Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:30 am

Elitism is what it is, however of you don't have a strong enough character to withstand the scorn or snobism from elitists, you won't have the mental aptitude or strength to succeed in world sport anyway.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:32 am

just 20 years ago golf clubs in this country didnt just allow anyone to join!

the change has been so significant and I am very proud that my sport golf has turned that corner..

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:33 am

I think all sports have in fairness as well. But there arnt getting the same participation levels!

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:43 am

But Oakey, the attitude isn't created by the sport, it's created by those who perceive them as elitist.

I've already shown that the first rowing club I looked at had the information at hand and showed itself to be accessible and inclusive for virtually everyone all because I don't have the attitude that its elitist and I bothered my backside to find out. If people want to continue to think of such sports as elitist, then more fool them. It's not really rowings fault, they've made their information freely available, if people choose to ignore it then how can you blame rowing?

If they have sufficient membership why do you think they should have to advertise their club?

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:50 am

I am not getting involved in who or why the elitest element is out there- thats completly immaterial in my mind. The fact is it is out there by hook or by crook!

we have positive discrimination in this country for race and ethnicity in the work place. Maybe its something that could be applied to certain sports in schooling as well- To break the mould..

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:52 am

"If they have sufficient membership why do you think they should have to advertise their club?"

thats private sector- and a business- they can do what the hell they want. Its not about the clubs to get others into the sport- more a social change or an educational change if we want to get rid of the elitest and classest view to sports that is still lingering on

by super_realist Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:04 am

Well that's the crux, I think it's entirely the responsibility of those who hold beliefs about elitist sports to change their attitudes, but that doesn't come down to the clubs as such, they've shown themselves to be transparent and open of you bother to look.

Frankly I don't care if someone from a sink estate cant' be bothered to find out about rowing, there's plenty of others who will.

by mystiroakey Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:09 am

Yeah i dont either, we clearly do very well at rowing anyway..But i look at it in an overview perspective. And more about the mainstream sports. And why this country(maybe its not the same in sctoland- but this is very prominant in london) kids are almost allocated sports by virtue of what school they go to or what area they come from..

I am not in any shape or form one of these "why is this sport in the olympics"- the more the merrier from my pov!

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:37 am

Portnoy wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote:
You cant get much more behind the times than archery, but I bet Robin Hood would have loved one of those new fandangle bows.

I suspect that Robin Hood (if he ever existed) might have used the best technology available. But that doesn't question Olympian values.

laurie, Hood was almost certainly on PEDs too

by Sponsored content