Wiggins knighted
Cheshire Celt
Posts: 137
After a great year wiggo is getting a knighthood well done wiggo
0
Comments
-
Congrats Wiggo - and also Dave Brailsford, justly deserved.0
-
Brailsford especially - just finished My Time by Wiggins, and it's bleeding obvious throughout that without him none of the cycling success (track or road) would have occurred.
Meanwhile, the angry little republicanistas are all upset;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... tcard-pomp0 -
I agree about brailsford. I wonder how long he will stay in cycling. He must be in the frame to be performance director for performance director for the Olympic team as a whole0
-
God, what a tiresome, eye glazing tirade that is in the Guardian...dynamicbrick wrote:Brailsford especially - just finished My Time by Wiggins, and it's bleeding obvious throughout that without him none of the cycling success (track or road) would have occurred.
Meanwhile, the angry little republicanistas are all upset;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... tcard-pomp0 -
Isn't it just.Hoopdriver wrote:
God, what a tiresome, eye glazing tirade that is in the Guardian...dynamicbrick wrote:Brailsford especially - just finished My Time by Wiggins, and it's bleeding obvious throughout that without him none of the cycling success (track or road) would have occurred.
Meanwhile, the angry little republicanistas are all upset;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... tcard-pompIs the gorilla tired yet?0 -
ChrisAOnABike wrote:
Isn't it just.Hoopdriver wrote:
God, what a tiresome, eye glazing tirade that is in the Guardian...dynamicbrick wrote:Brailsford especially - just finished My Time by Wiggins, and it's bleeding obvious throughout that without him none of the cycling success (track or road) would have occurred.
Meanwhile, the angry little republicanistas are all upset;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... tcard-pomp
I have a theory that the Guardian comment is free section is actually an instrument of the centre-right. It gives the left-wing pseudo intellectuals somewhere to be angry, and keeps them off the streets where they might actually cause real change.0 -
I don't agree with "honours" but, being as they do exist the likes of our very top athletes being recognised has to be a good thing.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
dynamicbrick wrote:I have a theory that the Guardian comment is free section is actually an instrument of the centre-right. It gives the left-wing pseudo intellectuals somewhere to be angry, and keeps them off the streets where they might actually cause real change.
Any theories about the Daily Mail comments section?0 -
Frank the tank wrote:I don't agree with "honours" but, being as they do exist the likes of our very top athletes being recognised has to be a good thing.
A lot of countries have some kind of honours system, where exceptional achievements can be publicly recognised, it's just that ours is a relic from the past. I think the system should exist in some form but I can't see a problem with the one we've got.0 -
RDW wrote:dynamicbrick wrote:I have a theory that the Guardian comment is free section is actually an instrument of the centre-right. It gives the left-wing pseudo intellectuals somewhere to be angry, and keeps them off the streets where they might actually cause real change.
Any theories about the Daily Mail comments section?
Why, do we need one?0 -
Playing devils advocate then. I suppose you could argue there is no need for successful sportsmen to have a "honour" bestowed as their medals and titles etc give them public recognition.random man wrote:Frank the tank wrote:I don't agree with "honours" but, being as they do exist the likes of our very top athletes being recognised has to be a good thing.
A lot of countries have some kind of honours system, where exceptional achievements can be publicly recognised, it's just that ours is a relic from the past. I think the system should exist in some form but I can't see a problem with the one we've got.
I feel a "Nabb inn" debate coming on.
Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Or the fact that the BE bit of MBE, OBE and CBE stands for "British Empire", something which doesn't currently exist, and which for many people comes with serious negative baggage. Quite a few people have turned honours down because of this association with empire0
-
It is much of a muchness really - despite being a throwback to the days of Empire (I think the current system is Victorian) I think it is silly to turn down what is, in effect, recognition of your efforts from the Crown on behalf of the British people. The honours list is drawn up by the Government for a number of categories.
I also think it's rather silly to effectively shun a system because you don't like the concept of something which nobody living had any hand in creating, and on which the sun set 70 years ago.0 -
Respect to Danny Boyle."That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college! " - Homer0
-
Knighthoods Scmighthoods! My respect would have doubled for him if he had refused that outdated 'honour' and carried on as normal, Sir Bradly...Don't make me laugh!
Well done Danny Boyle, and many others before him who have turned this down.“If you do what always do, you'll get what you always get.”0 -
For me they are an anachronism but for those that believe in them congratulations to Bradley and the others.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
It struck me as a bit soon. The honour should be for the career, not one aspect of it. And given that it took us 67 years to honour one of the Bletchley code breakers maybe six months wasn't quite long enough to determine whether an honour was deserved.0
-
Had the debate and in spite of being in a minority of one(ish) bit of fence sitting I'm still right.Frank the tank wrote:
Playing devils advocate then. I suppose you could argue there is no need for successful sportsmen to have a "honour" bestowed as their medals and titles etc give them public recognition.random man wrote:Frank the tank wrote:I don't agree with "honours" but, being as they do exist the likes of our very top athletes being recognised has to be a good thing.
A lot of countries have some kind of honours system, where exceptional achievements can be publicly recognised, it's just that ours is a relic from the past. I think the system should exist in some form but I can't see a problem with the one we've got.
I feel a "Nabb inn" debate coming on. Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Frank the tank wrote:Had the debate and in spite of being in a minority of one(ish) bit of fence sitting I'm still right.
Hmm, that's debatable
0 -
DrKJM wrote:It struck me as a bit soon. The honour should be for the career, not one aspect of it. And given that it took us 67 years to honour one of the Bletchley code breakers maybe six months wasn't quite long enough to determine whether an honour was deserved.
He has been cycling, and winning medals on the track, for some considerable time before the TdF win....
Indeed, he's up there with Sir Steve Redgrave and Sir Chris Hoy in the medal tally.0 -
The way I see it, is that most people object to the name and the fact that the award comes from the Queen. So if the name is changed and it's presented by the government, does that make the award acceptable ???
As for Danny Boyle (that $40M man of the people), what benefit is to be gained by turning down an award for services to the country ? It just seems a little puerile to me. Would he have accepted it if it was changed, as above ?Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved0 -
If the award came directly from the government, it would become even more partisan than it is now. I think much of the problem stems from the fact that the 'suggestion' for honours comes from the serving PM, although notionally it is a cross-party committee that draws up the list (I think).
I wonder if very left-wing Boyle would have accepted the honour during the Labour administration?0 -
dynamicbrick wrote:RDW wrote:dynamicbrick wrote:I have a theory that the Guardian comment is free section is actually an instrument of the centre-right. It gives the left-wing pseudo intellectuals somewhere to be angry, and keeps them off the streets where they might actually cause real change.
Any theories about the Daily Mail comments section?
Why, do we need one?
Well, it seems to serve pretty much the same purpose as a safe play space, where rabid right-wing ranters can harmlessly spew their hate. It was probably set up by the same sinister left-wing cabal that created UKIP to draw support away from the Tories.0 -
I wonder if Wiggins isn't that fussed really but felt he should accept it for cylings sake? I haven't looked up any of his comments on it yet.
The thing about that guardian article is you know there will be an almost word for word reprint every year, they can't accept the situation and find something more interesting to say. The comments pages and internet in general are a boon for modern politicians, people spend hours bitching online rather than really agitating for change and getting off their arses.0 -
For me, i just don't 'get it'.
Dave B, i could understand. He has done alot to bring UK cycling where it is today and sits back and applauds with everyone else when the riders take the glory.
'Sir Brad' as an active athlete, is surely only chasing his personal goals. He's not doing it to 'inspire a nation'. He wanted to win TdF. He did that. Full, whole-hearted props for that. But worthy of a knighthood? Give over.
When you look further down the honours list, past the 'headliners', you see the folk truly deserving.0 -
My comment was intended to be general, rather than aimed specifically at Wiggins. I would prefer that any recipient was honoured for a body of work rather than one individual event. And for sporting success where careers are fairly short it doesn't seem excessive to wait until the whole career is available to review. But in the case of Wiggins, where do we go next should he repeat his success? Does 3 consecutive Olympic golds equal knighthood? Why did Ben Ainslie wait so long for his then?dynamicbrick wrote:DrKJM wrote:It struck me as a bit soon. The honour should be for the career, not one aspect of it. And given that it took us 67 years to honour one of the Bletchley code breakers maybe six months wasn't quite long enough to determine whether an honour was deserved.
He has been cycling, and winning medals on the track, for some considerable time before the TdF win....
Indeed, he's up there with Sir Steve Redgrave and Sir Chris Hoy in the medal tally.
I suspect the immediacy is more about Cameron wanting the reflected glory now rather than letting some future leader take credit. And in the interests of balance, Blair was as bad.0 -
7 time Olympic medalist, 4 time Olympic Champion, 11 time World Championship medalist, 7 time World Champion....and that's before you even get to his road career.DrKJM wrote:It struck me as a bit soon. The honour should be for the career, not one aspect of it. And given that it took us 67 years to honour one of the Bletchley code breakers maybe six months wasn't quite long enough to determine whether an honour was deserved.You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
-
No dispute there. But ask yourself, why now? Why did Ben Ainslie - equally as qualified, and arguably should have been in there after Beijing - get in the mix now? Why are people who have one notable success on their sporting CVs in there now? Because 'call me Dave' wants the glory. Because we can't wait to honour people after a period of reflection in case the political glory falls elsewhere.NapoleonD wrote:I think he's more than qualified!0 -
DrKJM wrote:
No dispute there. But ask yourself, why now? Why did Ben Ainslie - equally as qualified, and arguably should have been in there after Beijing - get in the mix now? Why are people who have one notable success on their sporting CVs in there now? Because 'call me Dave' wants the glory. Because we can't wait to honour people after a period of reflection in case the political glory falls elsewhere.NapoleonD wrote:I think he's more than qualified!
So, you don't think he would have got the award if someone other that Cameron had been in government ? Horse sh!t, it's got nothing to do with Cameron getting the glory.Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved0
