Re: Olympics 2016
 

Oh the British are so funny. Mouths permanently glued shut during the Rugby World Cup and the Euro's. I had the pleasure of watching the long faces in London during the Rugby Seven's final. That was hilarious. Appaulling losers, even worse winners ... but Germany, the French, the Irish, the Argentineans, the Australians all know about that. The most hated nation(s) in world sport :)

Re: Olympics 2016
 

Back at the beginning, when Oz were near the top of the table, I was saying it was less about Oz being 1,2, or 3, and more about could they beat the UK this time.

Didn't go down well.

Oz tends to do well in the swimming, which tends to be early on. Then they fade as the track stuff starts. So being 8th at the moment suggests they may well fall further as time moves on. Current predictions have them on 11 Golds by the end, with the UK on 18 (currently they have 10).

Olympic Medals Prediction

Re: Olympics 2016
 

It's taken a week (maybe a BE record, usually it would have been by day 2) but thus thread has now turned into UK v Aus slagging match

Inevitable I guess

Australia has the smallest population - by far - of the countries in the top 10 of the medals table

Next we'll be getting posts about how biased the Aussie commentators on 7 are - from posters who are not also watching on iplayer (like I am) and are not seeing how UK-biased the BBC commentators are!

Nature of the beast JAWPs

Re: Olympics 2016
 

Saw the first week in London. BBC is all about Britain. Even more country focussed than 7. And why not .... you focus on your audience. Something Poms in Oz just don't get.

Re: Olympics 2016
 

The BBC might be UK focused (kinda obviously, natch), but they have a good reputation for covering the breadth of Olympic sports via their 24 HD streams. Whilst BBC 1 might be all about the UK medals and the main sports, it you are into synchronised paper folding you can probably find a stream with it covered.

7 has been said to be doing better this time, though with the ads and paid for streams, they are limited by the available freeview channels. The time delay doesn't help either.

The real one that's got hammered (again) is the US NBC coverage - where not only have they been concentrating on the US participants (obviously) but have been delaying broadcast of sports to maximise ad revenue, and turn sport into reality show. They are less interested in showing a particular sport or heat where the US is thought to do well, but instead to concentrate on the individual and forget why they are there - to the extent of cutting away and then back again to remove 'the boring bits'.

NBC's coverage of the Olympics is atrocious. There's a simple reason why. - Vox

Re: Olympics 2016
 

I do like that there are certain sports that MUST be shown on the BBC. Olympics, Euro's, Football World Cup etc. Cricket must be added to that list.

Re: Olympics 2016
 

I'd cut NBC some slack. They've paid billions (I think in think in the region of 7) for the rights to Olympic coverage (not their fault, that's what the IOC has demanded) and obviously are trying to make a return on their investment

Economics 101

Economic reality

But then, the left and economic reality are rarely on the same page

Re: Olympics 2016
 

I only really get interested if some person pulls some amazing result and are from a tiny or developing country or something.

The rest of it is really quite predictable, too much money spent on a few medals, in the grand scheme of things, who gives a toss. :blink:

Plus a lot of these people come across as terribly unsporting. "I didnt win, whaaa, the winner was on drugs/cheated/the ref was unfair, I was sick, injured ........ Oh heavens, just congratulate them its sport, like be sporting about it.

There we go. :lol:

Re: Olympics 2016
 

You mean like the Britains lottery funding?

Re: Olympics 2016
 

those aussies..

Re: Olympics 2016
 

Britian lacking football ability again. That's gotta hurt.

Re: Olympics 2016
 

Who is this Bruce McAvaney guy? He is just an appaulling commentator.

Re: Olympics 2016
 

I haven't engaged in the UK V Aus battle some are obsessed with.

The general comment too much money is spent on this, mentions USA not UK or Australia. Besides its true, its ridiculous IMO.

If a country fund raises by lottery, great! If you dont want to buy a ticket dont, not exactly the same choice in taxes.

Now back to my main point the sporting spirit.

Wasn't it fabulous, when the Kid from Singapore beat the world greatest swimmer, and they genuinely hugged each other.

Sporting indeed :thumbup:

Re: Olympics 2016
 

UK up to second in the medal table at this moment.

Re: Olympics 2016
 

I'm happy to engage but have no need to start it. Brits tend to have a tendency to jump up and down when things are good then back in the box when things are bad - which is more often than not in sport.

The lottery funding has been wonderful for British sport and a much needed injection from the lows of 1 gold back in '96. It also gives Brits a feel good factor which is needed for the typically negative mindset. Think of it as money spent on mental health.

Though I do worry Britain could be headed back to mental health issues. Countries do tend to spend up when they host an Olympics which then lasts for an Olympics or 2. Britain has 14 gold now. Needs another 15 to be headed in the right direction. Can it be done?