Agree up to a point but there is no pointy making a rule and then allowing the top teams to flout it. How would we have felt if China had beaten us in the final by ignoring a rule?
Olympic non football thread
- Thread starter lamby
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Agree up to a point but there is no pointy making a rule and then allowing the top teams to flout it. How would we have felt if China had beaten us in the final by ignoring a rule?
Presumably because they had successfully qualified into the final, so would have got a silver even if they hadn't raced at all.
Don't forget Becky Adlington as well! Not nailed on, but she certainly has at least a 50/50 chance of our first gold in the pool.
GB were relegated [I've kept writing disqualified, but that's wrong] in the earliest stages, so they could drop to the bottom of the pile. China were relegated in the Final, so could only drop from 1st to 2nd.
Still weird rulings, if you cheat by purpose or not then you should get disqualified.
They didn't cheat with intention. It was more unfortunate timing. Britain's unfortunate timing was slightly worse apparently, although that wouldn't have made any difference to the relegation.
Didn't say they did, what I ment was it would be a far simpler ruling to just disqualified.
That would have been very harsh. It was harsh enough that the Chinese were relegated, let alone be disqualified. Do you know what took place..?
Greatest swimmer. I find it very difficult to call him the greatest olympian ever, because how can you compare athletes from two different sports (especially because swimming gives you far more chances to win medals than almost anything else, but conversely, to still be competing at a top level past 25 is difficult and it is a sport where every country competes)?
Redgrave is a very good candidate for being one of the greatest Olympians ever, because his 5 Golds came in 5 Olympics [1984 - 2000] in which he generally had just the single opportunity to win a medal. He also won a Bronze [Coxed Pairs] at Seoul in 1988 during the only time [I believe] he took on two events during an Olympics.
To be the very best at what you do, over a span of at least 16 years, is bloody good going.
To be the very best at what you do, over a span of at least 16 years, is bloody good going.
The point is that Phelps has been the best at what he does, which is a whole load of different swimming disciplines, not just the one event, so imo thats why he is the best.
Iceland just won a very close handball game against Sweden, went down to the last minute with just a couple of points separating them! ISLAND!!!!!!
Yeah, but somebody like, say (to avoid the cliche of Steve Redgrave) Birgit Fischer. She is a German Canoeist won 8 golds between 1980 and 2004. She was the best at what she did for arguably 24 years. However, she could only compete in one or two events at each olympics. My big problem with saying that Phelps is the greatest just because he has won more medals is that he can (potentially) win 4 medals for swimming the same distance in slightly different styles. Now that is difficult, but it's not something that is open to most other competitors at the olympics.
