• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

2016 Olympic Games, Rio

TBF our Athletes get huge funding compared to most of those countries with the lotto money.
I've posted these posts elsewhere; discussing the issue (though more in relation to improvements since Atlanta); also some people complaining that we spend too much on olympic sport, espeically the £ per medal table the Fail printed; which I believe assumed that 4 years worth of investment was the annual total; and was printed halfway through the olympics before the number of medals was known, but after the level of funding was (some were surprised that changing the number of medals won, whilst the amount already spent remained static would reduce the £ per medal - bloody idiots)
Which Tyler said:
Listen to the interview with the hockey captain ahead of the SF. Comparing her Olympic debut in Sydney, to now. It is literally the difference between being a full time professional, versus being an amateur getting in some practice after work and no further support.

Surely we rugby fans should appreciate this difference.

Lottery funding means that our athletes are now full-time professionals, on £15k-£28k per year (+ private sponsorship, and depending on success), with professional support structures, coaches, nutritionists, phyio.s, analysts etc. Having hosted 2 commonwealths and an Olympics recently, they have access to elite facilities, Olympic sized swimming pools, velodromes etc.
For cycling, its also caught some media attention (off the back of Olympic succeeds) and Team Sky is now a thing, garnering external investment.

Which Tyler said:
OutsideBath said:
I didn't realise the athletes only received between £15k-£28k, they should be getting much more than this to increase our success even further.
it was in the BBC article I linked a couple of days ago [1], £15k for an up and comer, they mentioned Peaty with world record and an Olympic gild could get up to £28k. Of course, there's private sponsorship and places like Team Sky that can increase that, but lottery/central funding seems to top out at £28k.
Obviously, the extra cash is going to be limited by appeal, so Jess Ennis will get quite a bit beyond, whilst Laugher, whom we've never heard of before probably gets no extra. IIRC women's hockey is amateur, or semi-pro at best here, whilst Team Sky's riders probably draw a decent wage beyond the £28k

The amount is enough that you don't HAVE to hold down a full-time job, which I guess is the point, especially when funding however many hundreds, presumably thousands of individuals.

I can't find anything on funding for the coaches, support staff etc beyond the gross figures per sport. eg. [2] Athletics (track and field), got £6.7M p.a. since 01/01/13 and last year they funded 64 at "podium" level, and another 66 at "podium potential" level [3], with who-knows how many for future potential. That £6.7M will also take into account all the support staff, facilities etc.
So in rugby, our Salary cap is £6.5M + 2 marquees, for 40-odd players, Athletics gets £6.7M for 130 players, AND all their support.
Then, of course, you've got cycling, swimming, gymnastics, shooting, rowing, diving, hockey etc etc

And people complain that we invest far too much into elite sport; others complain that this level of funding is cheating, equating it to doping.

Links (can't hyperlink on the phone):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37085873
http://www.uksport.gov.uk/our-work/investing-in-sport/current-funding-figures
http://www.britishathletics.org.uk/world-class/2014-2015-funded-athletes/
 
2-2 at half time in hockey....feel like the Dutch are better than us though.
 
Good posts @Which Tyler, thanks. The comparison to a Premiership rugby team is pretty powerful. At least rugby teams get to monetise their investment by using them to put bums on seats and sell merchandise and sponsorship. To what extent are UK Athletics to monetise their assets? It's sad that they can't raise more money from corporate sponsorship or wealthy benefactors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh ****, hockey gores to a penalty shoot-out.
Yet another part of hockey that's completely changed since I played. Much fairer than the penalty flick, more entertaining too TBH.


They say our keeper is the best in the comp, so its her I'll pin my hopes
 
Last edited:
Dutch goalie rugby tackles our striker, upgraded to an old-school penalty flick...


SCORES!!

1-0
 
I never thought we would top London, bloody hell what is wrong with this country? Since when did we become a nation of winners?
 
I never thought we would top London, bloody hell what is wrong with this country? Since when did we become a nation of winners?
Still haven't done it yet but christ it's close we have to do better on total count and medal table as well.

If we do we'll be the first nation to do better after a home Olympics. I'd say it's testimony to our system and goals to build a legacy out of London rather than one big blow out.

- - - Updated - - -

My rough thinking is we are 5 gold medals off and 2 medals. The two medals we've done as we have 3 guaranteed to come. The golds well there Mo and 3 gold medal matches this is very doable in the last two days...

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry my bad we're 7 medals off....still doable I think when you look at prospects.
 
I'm told we've won golds in 14 different sports - no-one else has more than 10.
Take out swimming, and we're ahead of USA.

I really can't be bothered to verify though.
 
Yup it was 9 this morning according to the BBC and we picked up Hockey today. Still haven't picked up Boxing yet which we will do. Modern Pentathlon is also a possibility in the men's apparently.
 
Brilliant from the hockey girls.

Less brilliant about the Paralympics. Total **** up.

While Team GB has been immense, the games overall haven't been a patch on London. Mainly because the British public absolutely bought into them in a way the Brazilians just haven't or haven't been able to afford to.
 
The problem to some extent and going into full arrogance mode. Britain is one of the most passionate nations on the planet when comes to sports in general. The games to some extent were massive release valve of that passion and we revelled in it.

It's very hard to go to another nation without the same money and infrastructure and without that all round passion for sport and expect the same result.

There's a reason why the best games before London was likely Sydney. Again you had a nation nuts about sport.
 
Up to 60 medals then, with 2 days to go; 5 behind on London's total, but 3 ahead for the day-by-day. No chance of equalling the gold medal tally.

We've got Joyce and Adams to go with guaranteed medals
Farah and Daley as favourites
Heath and the women's four in Kayaking through to their finals today, with good chances
Jamie Cook starts the Pentathalon as favourite; but this doesn't seem to be a sport where the form-book matters
Walkden and Cho going in the Taekwondo too; with Walkden supposedly a favourite for a medal, and Cho a reaslistic chance; we're only at the last last 16 stage here, and again, the form-book can fly south pretty quickly.
3 Contenders in the Triathalon; but not with the expectation levels of the Brownlees
Oh, and Hull's still in with a chance in not-a-sport

Obviously, we have contenders in other events; but none I can see being talked about as medal expectations (eg 800m)
 
Okay can we stop as a nation fawning over Tom Daley Now?
 

Latest posts

Top