Drugs in other sports and the media.

joelsim

TheBigBean wrote:

Who is the one that was mates with Walcott and chose to pursue sprinting?

It was Walcott.

He just chose to do it on a football pitch. Put a ball at his feet and ...

lostboysaint

Joelsim wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Who is the one that was mates with Walcott and chose to pursue sprinting?

It was Walcott.

He just chose to do it on a football pitch. Put a Gooners kit on him and ...

TheBigBean

Joelsim wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Who is the one that was mates with Walcott and chose to pursue sprinting?

It was Walcott.

He just chose to do it on a football pitch. Put a ball at his feet and ...

I saw an interview with them both. His friend had chosen sprinting and he had chosen football. They both claimed to be able to beat the other when they were kids. The sprinter said he had learnt lots about sprinting and body efficiency. Anyway, I thought it was quite a good example that you do need to have some football skills to even think about becoming a footballer - speed is not enough, and if you are quick enough there is a possible track career.

pinno

Dinyull wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

mfin wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

In how many countries would someone with that much talent at that age be guaranteed to stick with athletics?

World record when he was 16 was 19.32, 8th last night was 20.43... I think if you ran that at 16 (if true) you'd likely stick with it regardless of where you're from, I doubt many 16 year olds have ever ran quicker?

If you had the aptitude, that would make you a pretty tidy winger (football or rugby), or wide receiver. And you'd be doing that from before age 16.

That's simply not true for football. You've only got to look at the struggles of someone like Walcott who is nowhere near as fast as Bolt, but still faster than everyone else and does, despite what is critics say, actually have quite a lot of ball skills in comparison to your average punter.

Plus in sport it is not 100m times that matter, but 5-20m times.

The point is though, even if Bolt didn't have the skills to make it to the top the school teachers over here would have killed his hopes as a sprinter as he'd be playing as a striker with balls played over the top. He would have scored a shed load even if he wasn't any good.

Look at the amount of athletes playing football in the lower leagues to see that skill isn't always as highly regarded as physical attributes.

...and therein lies the problem in football in the UK: not nearly enough emphasis in technical attributes. Far too much 5 a side and youth team leagues when I know for a fact that youth training in Spain and Holland for example, concentrate on the acquisition of technical skills. There is empirical evidence that under 12's psychologically have very little conception of the collective.
Source: my friend Thomas Fletcher, Football coach - cousin of Darren Fletcher

joelsim

All the problems in British football stem from playing small kids on big, muddy pitches.

TheBigBean

Joelsim wrote:

All the problems in British football stem from playing small kids on big, muddy pitches.

Firstly, there isn't really a problem with British football. Secondly, kids no longer play on big pitches.

lostboysaint

TheBigBean wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

All the problems in British football stem from playing small kids on big, muddy pitches.

Firstly, there isn't really a problem with British football. Secondly, kids no longer play on big pitches.

You are completely wrong on both counts, but this thread isn't the place to get into all of that.

Yours, a UEFA B level coach specialising in youth football.

salsiccia1

lostboysaint wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Who is the one that was mates with Walcott and chose to pursue sprinting?

It was Walcott.

He just chose to do it on a football pitch. Put a Gooners kit on him and ...

Watch him get broken over and over

kingstongraham

So who would have guessed the first medal to be taken away would be in weightlifting?

TheBigBean

lostboysaint wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

All the problems in British football stem from playing small kids on big, muddy pitches.

Firstly, there isn't really a problem with British football. Secondly, kids no longer play on big pitches.

You are completely wrong on both counts, but this thread isn't the place to get into all of that.

Yours, a UEFA B level coach specialising in youth football.

You ignore the FA guidelines then on pitch size, goal size and number of players per team? I'm also guessing you don't coach in an academy as well. The issue is so widely known and understood that it is even talked about on a bike forum.

lostboysaint

Not in this thread.

The FA guidelines are decades behind Europe. The issue isn't widely known, because you wouldn't be telling me how it's ok for 13 year olds to be playing 11-a-side (FA Guidelines). Just because they moved it on two years from U11 hasn't made the issue magically go away and the fact that you choose to quote it shows how much you know about it.

And you guess wrongly as well! Would you like to keep this up?

TheBigBean

I won't derail the thread any more, but I do continue to disagree.

awavey

Dinyull wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

mfin wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

In how many countries would someone with that much talent at that age be guaranteed to stick with athletics?

World record when he was 16 was 19.32, 8th last night was 20.43... I think if you ran that at 16 (if true) you'd likely stick with it regardless of where you're from, I doubt many 16 year olds have ever ran quicker?

If you had the aptitude, that would make you a pretty tidy winger (football or rugby), or wide receiver. And you'd be doing that from before age 16.

Agree, he'd be "guided" towards football over here and NFL in america. It certainly helps him that he was brought up in Jamaica where aside from cricket sprinting is king.

Basketball (and other american sports) is supposedly the bigger draw in the West Indies than cricket thesedays, which is why they dont produce the likes of a Holding,Garner,Marshall,Ambrose or Walsh anymore.

RichN95.

Not really about doping in other sports, but I saw this post in the infamous Clinic forum

Actually, the a large number of clinic posters including myself came into the clinic thinking doping was just something the occasional Russian did and have little by little come to realize just how fraudulent and corrupt elite sport is

Basically that's how radicalisation works. Beware of echo chambers people.

Pross

RichN95 wrote:

Not really about doping in other sports, but I saw this post in the infamous Clinic forum

Actually, the a large number of clinic posters including myself came into the clinic thinking doping was just something the occasional Russian did and have little by little come to realize just how fraudulent and corrupt elite sport is

Basically that's how radicalisation works. Beware of echo chambers people.

Shows the mentality doesn't it? A bunch of sheep prepared to believe whatever they are told as their own knowledge is so limited and they are incapable of researching or thinking for themselves.

Richmond Racer 2

Pross wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Not really about doping in other sports, but I saw this post in the infamous Clinic forum

Actually, the a large number of clinic posters including myself came into the clinic thinking doping was just something the occasional Russian did and have little by little come to realize just how fraudulent and corrupt elite sport is

Basically that's how radicalisation works. Beware of echo chambers people.

Shows the mentality doesn't it? A bunch of sheep prepared to believe whatever they are told as their own knowledge is so limited and they are incapable of researching or thinking for themselves.

Freaking depressing

TheBigBean

RichN95 wrote:

Not really about doping in other sports, but I saw this post in the infamous Clinic forum

Actually, the a large number of clinic posters including myself came into the clinic thinking doping was just something the occasional Russian did and have little by little come to realize just how fraudulent and corrupt elite sport is

Basically that's how radicalisation works. Beware of echo chambers people.

What's so outrageous? Scandal after scandal has shown corruption at the top levels of sport. It's nice if you want to believe that is a thing of the past and maybe it is in some sports, but I don't think FIFA has changed, and if you can buy a world cup then some might legitimately wonder what else can be bought. I've heard of far more radical echo chambers.

bobmcstuff

TheBigBean wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Not really about doping in other sports, but I saw this post in the infamous Clinic forum

Actually, the a large number of clinic posters including myself came into the clinic thinking doping was just something the occasional Russian did and have little by little come to realize just how fraudulent and corrupt elite sport is

Basically that's how radicalisation works. Beware of echo chambers people.

What's so outrageous? Scandal after scandal has shown corruption at the top levels of sport. It's nice if you want to believe that is a thing of the past and maybe it is in some sports, but I don't think FIFA has changed, and if you can buy a world cup then some might legitimately wonder what else can be bought. I've heard of far more radical echo chambers.

Yeah I don't have an issue with their core idea that there are loads of dopers still out there across all sports, it's just when the condemnations are based on nothing but speculation I can't agree with.

Pross

While watching Mo last night it occurred to me I've never seen him run a really quick time in race so I thought I'd look him up on the all-time list assuming he would be top 5 or 10. Turns out his best 10,000m time puts him 28th nearly 30s behind the world record (3 times in the top 100 and slower than times from over 20 years ago) and 64th on the 5000m list (he's 31st on the 1500m list as well). It makes me wonder why some people continue to find him so suspicious.

joelsim

Pross wrote:

While watching Mo last night it occurred to me I've never seen him run a really quick time in race so I thought I'd look him up on the all-time list assuming he would be top 5 or 10. Turns out his best 10,000m time puts him 28th nearly 30s behind the world record (3 times in the top 100 and slower than times from over 20 years ago) and 64th on the 5000m list (he's 31st on the 1500m list as well). It makes me wonder why some people continue to find him so suspicious.

People find him suspicious because of who trains him, who he trains with, where he trains etc. Put it this way he sure mixes with a lot of people who have lots of smoke around them.

ddraver

Well...because of the company he keeps really, but I take your point.

Pross

Joelsim wrote:

Pross wrote:

While watching Mo last night it occurred to me I've never seen him run a really quick time in race so I thought I'd look him up on the all-time list assuming he would be top 5 or 10. Turns out his best 10,000m time puts him 28th nearly 30s behind the world record (3 times in the top 100 and slower than times from over 20 years ago) and 64th on the 5000m list (he's 31st on the 1500m list as well). It makes me wonder why some people continue to find him so suspicious.

People find him suspicious because of who trains him, who he trains with, where he trains etc. Put it this way he sure mixes with a lot of people who have lots of smoke around them.

So if I trained with Salazar and got my Parkrun PB down under 20 minutes would I come under suspicion? His times aren't extraordinary, he has just become a racer and has a last lap kick a 1500m would love.

Richmond Racer 2

And yet to date Tygart & team still can't get enough on Salazar

Remarkable

joelsim

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

And yet to date Tygart & team still can't get enough on Salazar

Remarkable

It's not just Salazar, who they will get in the end anyway.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olym ... 91526.html

As well as the training in Kenya and Ethiopia, and living with known dopers over there.

Pross

The treatment of Caster Semenyar is disgusting. She's a young woman with a medical condition she would probably much rather not have and yet gets treated with more disdain by the media and her fellow competitors than she would if she'd served a doping ban. For someone without the mental strength the whole saga could end tragically.

Richmond Racer 2

Joelsim wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

And yet to date Tygart & team still can't get enough on Salazar

Remarkable

It's not just Salazar, who they will get in the end anyway.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olym ... 91526.html

As well as the training in Kenya and Ethiopia, and living with known dopers over there.

Tygart still has to get enough evidence, whatever your optimism that he will

Still got to happen

mechanism

Pross wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Pross wrote:

While watching Mo last night it occurred to me I've never seen him run a really quick time in race so I thought I'd look him up on the all-time list assuming he would be top 5 or 10. Turns out his best 10,000m time puts him 28th nearly 30s behind the world record (3 times in the top 100 and slower than times from over 20 years ago) and 64th on the 5000m list (he's 31st on the 1500m list as well). It makes me wonder why some people continue to find him so suspicious.

People find him suspicious because of who trains him, who he trains with, where he trains etc. Put it this way he sure mixes with a lot of people who have lots of smoke around them.

So if I trained with Salazar and got my Parkrun PB down under 20 minutes would I come under suspicion? His times aren't extraordinary, he has just become a racer and has a last lap kick a 1500m would love.

If you accept that fast times don't mean someone's cheating then slow times don't mean they're clean. Those rankings are surprising though.

shinyhelmut

If you accept that fast times don't mean someone's cheating then slow times don't mean they're clean. Those rankings are surprising though.

Funnily enough the winning times seem to have slowed down since the introduction of the biological passport. That and the fact the big money is in marathon running so fewer of the best runners are racing on the track these days.

Richmond Racer 2

ShinyHelmut wrote:

If you accept that fast times don't mean someone's cheating then slow times don't mean they're clean. Those rankings are surprising though.

Funnily enough the winning times seem to have slowed down since the introduction of the biological passport. That and the fact the big money is in marathon running so fewer of the best runners are racing on the track these days.

This is true. As a few posters have pointed out a number of times

TheBigBean

Pross wrote:

While watching Mo last night it occurred to me I've never seen him run a really quick time in race so I thought I'd look him up on the all-time list assuming he would be top 5 or 10. Turns out his best 10,000m time puts him 28th nearly 30s behind the world record (3 times in the top 100 and slower than times from over 20 years ago) and 64th on the 5000m list (he's 31st on the 1500m list as well). It makes me wonder why some people continue to find him so suspicious.

He improved quite dramatically one year as well which often raises eyebrows