Well I may get shouted down for this but I am pleased GBs men's team got knocked out and ESP pleased that it was that,arrogant dick Sturridge who missed. Somehow the thought of those overpaid posturing footballers wearing Olympic medals just didnt sit right with me. When you see the sacrifices and pain that other winners (and losers for that matter ) go through to achieve their dream then footballers shouldn't be there. The 3 young girls who won the cycling tonight,breaking the world record for the 6th time ,one who was born with a collapsed lung,one who has a stomach problem and the other who suffers from alapecia and was bullied because of it. They are the people we should remember the Olympics for. I love my football and I love Liverpool but sometimes the posturing,cheating and arrogance can get a bit much.(obviously that's from other teams and not our lads ) These games have brought it home more than any other and it's great to see these poorly supported athletes getting their moments of glory.
I couldn't disagree more. You do realise that becoming a professional footballer takes a hell of a lot of effort and isn't something you can just stroll into? It easy to accept the Daily Mail's scornful view of all footballers but you've got to remember that our team was made up of predominantly young men who will likely never get the chance to fight for a gold medal again. Guys like Ramsey, Allen, Butland who are real professionals don't deserve to have their efforts laughed at because of the 'overpaid primadonnas' stereotype. Also, any player that stands up to a penalty has balls. Sturridge's workrate was good, and I commend him for his efforts throughout the tournament. Why can't some people just be happy for our athletes AND graceful in our footballing defeat?
Footballers don't fall in to the image of the Olympic ideal(same thing with the multi-millionaire tennis players), true Olympians have to find sponsors and part time jobs to subsidise their dream. Those that represented Team GB mens football were all on big wages compared to the amateurs on the track and field,pool.velodrome etc. The football team should have been managed by a non-league manager and allowed to choose only non-league players.
Sorry page but you are wrong. Every one of the members of the GB team in ALL sports with the exception of football and tennis are full time sponsored atheletes. Whilst they are not earning at the same level level as the footballers they do 'earn' at least the average wage. For Ennis and Farrah winning tonight means that they will make more than a few bob. Whilst I've no figures I will be amazed if Ennis had not already earnt a tidy sum from image rights as 'the face of the Olympics'. That sounds harsh but it in no way takes away the effort of the athletes - even those who did not make the finals let alone win a medal.
The olympics should be amateurs. The boxers are amateur and struggle between work and their sport and then you have the likes of USA basketball with their multi millionaire NBA stars and team gb with the footballers etc. Switzerland with Federer it stinks. The olympics should be a stepping stone to becoming a pro, not a bit of fun for actual pros. please log in to view this image
Got to agree with that,if pro footballers,pro tennis players and pro basketball players are allowed to compete why don't they go the whole hog and let them all be pro in every event? They could of course make the whole thing amateurs only again.
[TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD]So Jessica Ennis got the heptathlon. Big deal? I caught that from a Nicaraguan transvestite in 2003 and nobody gave me a medal. [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
You might see him/her in these photos Hash. http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/photos-lfc-marches-at-pride
A lot of members had their funding cut. Our women's volley ball team supported themselves to get to the Olympics. The lad who got gold in the shooting had his funding cut, before they realised that he was actually quite good with a gun. I'd imagine there are plenty more who didn't have funding or maybe even more who didn't have funding but didn't make it at all.
The flip side of the football has been the ladies football (which you can't have without the men). I have found the ladies football to be a fantastic watch. They have been playing in front of huge crowds with a global audience on TV and it's been great watching them perform at a level that was equal if not higher (due to the low expectation) of the mens team. I really do hope that this Olympics provides the platform that the Womens Super League needs to make it big because attendances have shown that the sport has potential
Sturridge is MASSIVELY overrated anyway, if the ball isnt bouncing off the twat he's knocking it out of play with a failed step over :S. When he stepped up for his pen i turned to my mate and said 'no chance!' hes the last player you want taking a pen in a pressure situation. Sturridge is piss poor. When are we going to produce a goalkeeper that can actually save pens?? lol This kid seems to have adopted the David James strategy of just diving and hoping for the best. :S
I've actually coached women football and I find it quite a decent watch up to a certain level. I find the top level womens game slow and boring but I dont think its the fault of the players. Women should play on smaller fields and use a smaller ball. They simply dont have the athleticism and power of the men.
The point I am trying to make with regards the footballers is that,although many came from the lower leagues they are still paid a lot of money and many,not all, have this arrogance that "it doesn't matter if I lose I will still get my £0000's of pounds each week." For me the Olympics is not about that. Although many top athletes are well rewarded when they get to the top it's the dedication and sacrifice that get them there. And also the fact thatntheymget to participate in front of many more thousands of spectators than normal. Anyway I think these games have been fantastic and the crowds unbelievably good. You can only imagine what it's like to perform in front of that sort of support (Man u and chelski supporters take note ) Finally Sturridge is still ****e but I am sure when he got home last night he consoled himself by counting his millions. You see the thing is in football even Joe average (or joe cole ) get very very well rewarded for being....average.
Not entirely true Dave - several of them are students who fit their athletic commitments around their studies. Anna Watkins is doing a PhD at Reading, and Helen Glover and Heather Stanning were in full time employment until they got Lottery funding a couple of years back. That's the great irony of GB athletics - you have to meet minimum performance standards in order to get and keep your funding, but you have to work to support yourself whilst you are trying to get that funding. Once you get to the top and get the funding you're set, as long as you don't have an injury or period of bad form and lose the cash, then you are right back where you started. Also, whilst Ennis and Farah will be able to make money in the future, IOC rule 40 effectively says they can't make money from advertising during the Olympics, so I doubt she'll be earning much as the face of the games. In fact, appearing on those posters for 'Team GB' (****ing hate that Americanism!) is probably something she has to do as part of her funding!
Don't think so with regard to Ennis. The 'face of the Olympics' was pre-event and therefore not covered by IOC rule 40. Further, that was a LOCOG campaign and therefore nothing to do with either Team GB or Sport UK. I hope that she did make a tidy sum from the campaign. Once you have qualified for the Elite Group then your funding is aassured. The problem is the process to achieve Elite status and the funding available for those athletes seeking to achieve that status.
I can see the argument, but let us be honest, the reason these people don't get paid for what they do, is that, other than these 2 weeks, on-one on this earth gives a flying **** for their sports. People sit there for these 2 weeks and drink all these sports in, and then never give them a second thought for 4 years. That is why they don't get money for doing it. It's supply and demand, and that should not reflect badly on the sports that do generate income. Sure, with football, it has gotten obscene, but who's fault is that? it is the fault of those idiots that pay Sky £30 a month to watch footie on TV. You give some dumb chav kid £30,000 a week, he is going to go nuts with it.
