Olympic underacheiving

Talk here about anything that isn't covered by the other boards....
Sismis
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 12844
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by Sismis »

swoodley wrote:
Sismis wrote:
swoodley wrote:
And just out of interest, when has he choked before?
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/s ... 86,00.html

He is a very consistant runner in grand prix events but never seems to crack the big ones.
That article talks about oppressive conditions and how his coach buggered up his preparation....I don't see how that translates to him being a choker.
What is your definition of a choker? When someone is a favorite for a big event like he was in the world champs last year and the olympics this year and does absolutely nothing, I consider that choking.
User avatar
boncer34
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 10184
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by boncer34 »

j-mac wrote:Actually Boncer the bit we missed while the delayed boring softball was on was the Boomers' most competitive period of the game. :roll:

Channel 7 just plain suck.
Thats wonderful. I vote from now on we only show parts of sports where we are competitive. :roll: As soon as we start getting thumped cut to something else.
Essendon Football Club- We arent arrogant, just deluded.
User avatar
nomolos
Club Captain
Posts: 2930
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:51 pm

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by nomolos »

Sismis wrote:Aussie Men should win the hockey
Hows that prediction worked out for you, Sis.
User avatar
MH_Bomber
Club Captain
Posts: 3972
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:16 pm
Location: Bentleigh

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by MH_Bomber »

I don't think Mottram choked at all.

He went out with a plan and stuck to it. The problem was that he obviously wasn't keeping an eye on the lap times and thus seemingly wasn't aware of how slow his race was going. After the race when he was talking to Paddy Welsh, he said he could have done a 13:38 (which would have qualified him) but he thought that by sticking with Lagat, he would get home in a good enough time.
I dont think he choked I think he was just plain stupid or badly coached. In the call of the race Ovett was imploring him to GO early because he doesnt have a sprint finish. In order for him to qualify he had to finish top 4 or fastest loser. So, knowing you dont have the kick finish, wouldnt it be blatantly obvious that you have to set the race up as fast so that if you dont happen to finish top 4 you are at least in a fast heat. He was unaware of the time he had to run to beat the fastest loser which I thought was said to be 13.32. For a guy with the talent to mix it with the best that is extremely sloppy preperation.

As for "underachieving" what a load of cods wallop !!! The athletes representing Australia have all tried their hardest to do their best with possibly the exception of that perennial whinger Tamsyn Lewis. She seemed it was more important to accuse others of cheating and not concentrate on actually tried at least to do a personal best.
Image
Menzie!! ❤️

Things go awry without Jye!!

Regards

MH_Bomber
Sismis
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 12844
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by Sismis »

boncer34 wrote:
j-mac wrote:Actually Boncer the bit we missed while the delayed boring softball was on was the Boomers' most competitive period of the game. :roll:

Channel 7 just plain suck.
Thats wonderful. I vote from now on we only show parts of sports where we are competitive. :roll: As soon as we start getting thumped cut to something else.
It's fair enough to say different strokes. but can someone explain to me why with the digital technology we have today we only have 2 channels of Olympics? We could theoretically have 20! 7 has 2 channels yet showed the same footage on both WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????
User avatar
j-mac31
Essendon Legend
Posts: 15233
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: The city of brotherly love (Detroit)

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by j-mac31 »

Sismis wrote: It's fair enough to say different strokes. but can someone explain to me why with the digital technology we have today we only have 2 channels of Olympics? We could theoretically have 20! 7 has 2 channels yet showed the same footage on both WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????
I am so pissed off about that too.

Found out yesterday it's due to anti-siphoning laws. I believe those laws previously were involved in keeping big sporting events off Foxtel and may have some relevance to AFL, although NBL and A-League are only on Foxtel. I see this as different though, seeing as Foxtel has to be paid for all the time, whereas you pay once for a good TV or a set-top box.

Hopefully this law will be changed very soon. They're allowed to show different non-sport programs at the same time, why not sport?

Also, how many people have access to digital TV these day!? I would have thought a large proportion.
Aaron Francis is the Messiah.
User avatar
nomolos
Club Captain
Posts: 2930
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:51 pm

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by nomolos »

OK... im going to admit i may have been a little bit hasty in my call of the demise of the Australian Olympic movement and subsequent disappointment.

Some sterling efforts form individuals in Pole vault, diving, and canoeing.



I reserve some judgment of the underachieving of the swimming pool and the pathetic efforts of Athletics as a whole.

The media i think is to blame for the hype of certain areas.

"Underpromise and Overachieve"
Sismis
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 12844
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Olympic underacheiving

Post by Sismis »

nomolos wrote:
Sismis wrote:Aussie Men should win the hockey
Hows that prediction worked out for you, Sis.
I am f****** livid. both of teams beaten by their own egos. pathetic.
Post Reply