Paralympics

RE: Paralympics

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 11:27:37 GMT

Look at Lee Pearson, his limbs are grotesquely twisted................and look at what he gets a horse to do. He and Sophie Christiansen regularly compete against able bodied riders at national level.........and win.

Look at Ellie Simmonds..............elite swimmers are supposed to have long arms and legs, but how many of you can swim faster than her?

Look at the blind runners who actually ran faster than the able bodied ones.

Others with far less disability are "on the sick"

Wynne

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:02:17 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Or to they do it for personal satisfaction, sense of achievement etc (like most athletes)?[/quote]Of course they do it for these reasons but the whole point is that they are doing it not wallowing in self pity which I admit they may be entitled to do. If it inspires one other person with life changing disability to something more with their life then it is worth every minute of TV coverage. I am so sorry for you that you can't see it that way.

RE: Paralympics

Francisco Gomez — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:48:50 GMT

I agree with Martin, these things being on TV inspire people - makes people move more, do more sports and become healthier, that's my view. And its better, by comparison, than most 'cr*p' shown in the TV box.

I'm however very uneasy about TUEs - I guess it is difficult, in some cases, to agree if someone has a condition (i.e disease), if that condition is part of who they are or it is just simply that you need a short term treatment to cure a minor injury - but it is a bit funny how many elite athelets have things like asthma... - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/apr/29/elite-athletes-asthma-simon-yates-team-sky-swimmers

Do I think paralympics are a waste of time? I think it insipire people too - I do hear people that complain about the difference of disabilities between to athletes competing in the same sport - Sometimes you know who is going to win... but is this really about winning? I've entered a few races in my life (and, as long as I can I'll continue to do so)... and guess what? I'm not planning to win any of them.

RE: Paralympics

David Mills — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:34:17 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

[quote user="David Mills"]And, please don't come back with the usual responses to 1 and 2, its tiresomely PC [/quote]Because you know you are talking b*ll*cks David. Condescending is the word that comes to mind.

[/quote]

Au contraire, mi amour.

Ask yourself this: do paralympians do it to be watched, adored, pedestaled? Or to they do it for personal satisfaction, sense of achievement etc (like most athletes)?

Therefore saying they make you feel "warm and fuzzy" inside is possibly one of the most patronising things you can say. Like a school sports day.

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]but I find the comment that it's easier for disabled athletes to become elite very offensive.[/quote]

My days. Statistically it is.

Everyone who becomes disabled or is born disabled has to learn to adapt, and in the former case rehabilitate themselves. Some of the former will discover that they have athletic ability and take it further, for whatever reason. But let's not pretend this is elite sport on the same level - in general - as the able bodied athletes (the empty stadia and heavily reduced ticket prices will show that the general public believe so). Ditto those with minor disabilities (a certain record breaking British cyclist comes to mind) competing at this level. As soon as you bring the "but they've..." into it you become patronising.

Still, at least it gives the middle classes something to virtue-signal about and stop blocking London City Airport runway. Every cloud.

RE: Paralympics

Thomas Johnson — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:27:02 GMT

[quote user="Noweia"]The Ukraine has a well developed sports program for parathletes hence the reason they do so well.[/quote]

And considering their main Paralympic training centre was in Crimea, so they lost access to it in 2014, it's even more impressive.

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:22:56 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]I'm the last person on earth anybody would ever accuse of poltical correctness, but I find the comment that it's easier for disabled athletes to become elite very offensive. [/quote]For once I totally agree with you Wynne, I find Bob's, David's and especially Michael's remarks offensive and pathetic and totally missing the point.

Unfortunately your second sentence is a bit of grist to Michael's mill and I'm not sure I agree with yours second paragraph: able bodied athletes should not be awarded honours of any sort - the mere fact they have won medals and plaudits aplenty should be enough unless their award is for helping others/charity work etc.

RE: Paralympics

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 19 Sep 2016 08:29:55 GMT

I'm the last person on earth anybody would ever accuse of poltical correctness, but I find the comment that it's easier for disabled athletes to become elite very offensive. Some of the dressage riders have competed successfully at national level against able bodied riders.

These people are inspirational, and I'm disgusted the "Honours" system hasn't awarded them on par with the able- bodied................Lee Pearson should have had a knighthood after London

Wynne

RE: Paralympics

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:52:27 GMT

Pretty much. There are better things on TV.

Each to their own. I'm not that interested in the able bodied Olympics - I watched a bit of tennis.

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:47:53 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

I tend to agree with David.

[/quote]So you agree with this: 'compared to the able-bodied, the athletic ability is less, which makes it much less interesting for me'? All the more reason you should be interested in it. Will you be running, swimming, cycling, rowing, riding....when you lose a limb or become paralysed from the waist down? I won't watch you because it would be boring.

RE: Paralympics

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:31:41 GMT

I tend to agree with David.

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 19:20:56 GMT

RE: Paralympics

David Mills — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 17:20:25 GMT

It's mainly due to funding, from the tax on the uneducated (Lottery). The medal tables in both olympics/paralympics essentially follow the amount spent per athlete (wherever that amount comes from).

As for doping, it still goes on - its estimated that testing takes at least 5 years to catch up with the latest performance enhancers. The move currently is to try to use compounds that are close to natural ones or mimic the effect of natural ones (e.g. erythropoeitin) so that they are essentially undetectable. It's a multi-million pound business for both the testers and the cheats.

As to TUEs, they should be banned. If you can't compete without taking a banned substance, you shouldn't be competing, no exceptions. The US athlete with ADHD (a made up disease??) taking ritalin, which also boosts muscle power by 10-20%? Come on.

As for the paralympics, I have two issues:

1. Disabilities that aren't that disabling being included, such as some of the cyclists with minor hand problems.

2. As a continuation of 2, the pool of disabled athletes is small so becoming "elite" is easier. It may be impressive on one level, but compared to the able-bodied, the athletic ability is less, which makes it much less interesting for me.

And, please don't come back with the usual responses to 1 and 2, its tiresomely PC

RE: Paralympics

Virginia Campbell — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 14:46:56 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]So its all about the funding really ?[/quote]

Well, they still have to put the work in! But the funding makes the difference in allowing them to train properly rather than trying to wedge it in round a 40 hr/week job, buys the super engineering like the British engineered bikes, and helps them buy their tickets to Rio I assume. Buying opportunities as Martin said. Big sponsors like Nike aren't going to sponsor anyone but the top few in Olympic main sports like athletics, and the very top top handful in Paralympic sport. Nobody big is going to bother sponsoring double trap shooting or dressage, and the smaller niche sport sponsors like gunmakers or horse feed companies can probably only afford to sponsor one established competitor and not give them very much. So the lottery funding makes up for that and allows more niche sports to get their moment in the sun and hopefully inspire young people onto bikes and rowing boats as Martin said.

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:20:49 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]So its all about the funding really ? that is a bit depressing , if its true ,do we need to buy gold medals to make ourselves feel better at both levels ?[/quote]Its not so much buying medals as giving opportunities and as a bi-product inspiring young people to realise what they can achieve. Having sportsmen/women as role models and getting them onto the track. bikes, boats, horses, into the pool whatever, is surely better than aping Karen Kardashian and other half wit celebrities, and for older ones for that matter to get off their arses and improve their health. Apart from those few who are cynically opposed to sport in any form, which is their loss, it lifts the mood of the nation and will have beneficial knock-on effects.

[quote user="grumpyoldman"] I had a different theory for the normal games, basically the testing had finally caught up with the pharmaceuticals and cheating ,which was why the Russians tried so hard to nobble the testing process. Instead of doing well and finishing a noble creditable 4th-8th like we did 20-30 years ago, the others could not cheat without getting caught so our people did better. Just a thought . [/quote]If you read the news on the Russians hacking into athletes personal data if makes interesting reading. Its not as if its news to me, I've been well aware of therapeutic use exemptions (TUE's) for a long time and have long been cynical as to their (mis)use. It is treading a fine line between what is legal and illegal with a foot slipping over into the unethical. I'm not quite sure what the Russians aim to achieve by this I'm sure if they looked closer to home at the use of TUE's in their own athletes they would find it a whole lot more unethical and just the tip of the iceberg in terms of doping but it does expose some amount of hypocrisy on our side also given Lizzie Armitsead's 3 missed whereabouts tests. It shows we are far from whiter than white.

RE: Paralympics

grumpyoldman — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 11:53:31 GMT

So its all about the funding really ? that is a bit depressing , if its true ,do we need to buy gold medals to make ourselves feel better at both levels ?. I had a different theory for the normal games, basically the testing had finally caught up with the pharmaceuticals and cheating ,which was why the Russians tried so hard to nobble the testing process. Instead of doing well and finishing a noble creditable 4th-8th like we did 20-30 years ago, the others could not cheat without getting caught so our people did better. Just a thought .

RE: Paralympics

Noweia — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 21:42:53 GMT

I volunteered at the Paralympic World Swimming Champs in Glasgow last year, on Medal Ceremonies. Our job was to brief the athletes on the steps of the medal ceremony and walk them out and off again, to keep everything looking neat for broadcast. The athletes were all lovely, friendly, inspiring people and it was a privilege to get to know them.

The Ukraine has a well developed sports program for parathletes hence the reason they do so well. Ditto the UK and China. The US is not as high in the medals table for the reason Virginia states - athletes there rely on sponsorship and parasports simply don't have much visiblity in the US.

RE: Paralympics

Virginia Campbell — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 21:11:58 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]I was a bit puzzled at how well GB/UK seemed to be doing in everything [/quote]

Same reason the team did so well in the Olympics- lottery funding.

The USA doesn't do as well because there is no government funding, the top US athletes rely on sponsorship deals and only a handful of Paralympians get sponsorship.

China do so well because Deng Xiaoping's son was injured during the Cultural Revolution and paralysed and became very keen on disability rights and sport. If something is approved of by the government in China and gets funding, it will do well.

Dunno about Ukraine.

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 19:34:07 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Not all disabilities can be 'put aside' or 'fought' by the person affected.[/quote]My daughter is a ski instructor and spent some time (unpaid volunteer) helping to train children for the 'Special Olympic'. This is for children with severe handicaps, Down's syndrome and the like, who have very little independence, indeed more of her time was spent helping them dress and get ready than teaching them to ski but it all adds purpose to their lives and helps them find a sense of achievement.

RE: Paralympics

grumpyoldman — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 19:00:31 GMT

I was a bit puzzled at how well GB/UK seemed to be doing in everything ,which made me wonder a bit , do we have more disabled people per capita than the rest of the world and if so why ?. e.g. Are our A&E people better at repairing accident victims but terrible at saving limbs maybe ?.

Are we very good at engineering sporting wheels chairs?.

Are people with birth defects more likely to survive here ?

I am glad they all did so well and maybe our footballers could learn a thing or two about effort energy and enthusiasm from them.

RE: Paralympics

Gillian Mostyn — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:00:50 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]every sick benefit seeker should be forced to watch it and maybe they can then put things in perspective[/quote]

I know what you mean, Martin, but I think your comment highlights one problem that the Paralympics causes. Not all disabilities can be 'put aside' or 'fought' by the person affected. Those athletes who are 'fortunate' enough to be able to use sport to bring meaning and purpose, as well as an income, to their life, are certainly worth celebrating. Their dedication and commitment are amazing. However, saying that 'every sick benefit seeker should be forced to watch it' is unfair.

RE: Paralympics

Hannah Wynne Richards — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 12:02:39 GMT

Hear hear

Wynne

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 11:10:40 GMT

I can't help but think that you're missing the point here Bob. Surely even someone as cynical as you about sport can see that is not what it is about and you should be celebrating the achievements of disabled people who have shrugged off what shit hands they have been dealt, embraced life and done more than you could ever do as an able bodied person. Shame on you.

RE: Paralympics

bob lehner — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 11:03:51 GMT

I used to think that nothing in the world could be more mind-numbingly tedious and boring than the Olympic Games.

Then some numpty invented the Paralympics.....

Thank God it'll be four years before the whole ghastly circus comes round again.

RE: Paralympics

Martin Atkinson — Sat, 17 Sep 2016 09:14:09 GMT

I'm glued to it. Everyone who thinks they have a bit of a problem and every sick benefit seeker should be forced to watch it and maybe they can then put things in perspective.