Brits don't dope?

[doolols]

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

 

[The Hegelian]

Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

It's a bit strange how the "let's throw a huge amount of money at it solution" seems to have had the opposite effect in football. I wonder why it doesn't work there. England have the most expensive manager and support staff, Wembley, St Georges Park, basically the best of everything. Result: embarrassed by Iceland

 

[iejeecee]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

It's a bit strange how the "let's throw a huge amount of money at it solution" seems to have had the opposite effect in football. I wonder why it doesn't work there. England have the most expensive manager and support staff, Wembley, St Georges Park, basically the best of everything. Result: embarrassed by Iceland

To have a good national team (and the emphasis is on team) you need players that have played with eachother a lot, preferably on a weekly basis in their club teams. E.g spain during their success could basically take the core of barcelona with a couple of added real madrid players. Failing that you need atleast one world class attacking player to make the difference (e.g. we had robben, argentina has messi, portugal ronaldo etc).

The English for various reason have had neither. And in terms of doping you can't really make a big impact because everyone including all the smaller nations are already doped to the max.

 

[Electress]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

Ah, but give the people what they want - they want winners. Winning makes us feel good. Education and all that sort of thing is so serious and boring! It involves delayed gratification...that's shite. Fulfilment is no match for glory! Nobody is interested in the hard yards story except as a post-success, triumph over adversity narrative. We certainly don't want to watch it or do it ourselves. We just want to achieve vicariously through experiencing the highlights.

I honestly don't think anyone really gives a hot damn about doping any more - do the punters really believe in what they see in the velodrome, or on the athletics track, or just not want to know if a favoured star is injecting any number of PEDs into his eyeballs? Watching sport is like going to the cinema. We know it's CGI, but so long as there are a lot of whizz bangs and more more more action, who cares ? Faster ! Higher ! Stronger! And it was ever thus...bread and circuses.

Which is why I was vastly amused by the canny scheduling which put Gladiator on our TV screens in the UK the other evening:

'Fear and wonder, a powerful combination. You really think people are going to be seduced by that?
I think he knows what Rome is. Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they'll roar. The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the senate, it's the sand of the coliseum.'

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

But it still won't explain Radcliffe, Farah, Wiggins or Froome.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

It's a bit strange how the "let's throw a huge amount of money at it solution" seems to have had the opposite effect in football. I wonder why it doesn't work there. England have the most expensive manager and support staff, Wembley, St Georges Park, basically the best of everything. Result: embarrassed by Iceland

Because in global sports, as opposed to small ones, you can't win just by throwing money at it. Which is precisely why I say it won't explain things like Froome. Froome doesn't turn into Lance Armstrong just by throwing a few million at BC (unless that few million is spent on drugs)

 

[Lyon]

Re:

You honestly don't think doping would help performance in gymnastics? Have you never seen the Rings?

Sure, technique is the main deciding factor in gymnastics, and doping won't fix shoddy technique, but you don't think improving your power has benefits in the Rings, Pommel Horse etc? You don't think that improved speed would help your vault performances?

It is strange the way people seem to think certain sports are not affected by drugs. You use your body in your chosen sport? I have a drug that can improve your performance - It's that simple.

On the matter of technique, it is true that drugs won't help with bad technique directly, but the best way to improve your technique is often through indirect means, especially through strenght training, where of course drugs will help immensely.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

It's a bit strange how the "let's throw a huge amount of money at it solution" seems to have had the opposite effect in football. I wonder why it doesn't work there. England have the most expensive manager and support staff, Wembley, St Georges Park, basically the best of everything. Result: embarrassed by Iceland

I have a suspicion that England did not dope under Roy at the Euros. Out of Eng and Wales, the only heavily doped player looked to be Bale of RM who was always strong in the last quarter. Just a hunch no more.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

Ah, but give the people what they want - they want winners. Winning makes us feel good. Education and all that sort of thing is so serious and boring! It involves delayed gratification...that's shite. Fulfilment is no match for glory! Nobody is interested in the hard yards story except as a post-success, triumph over adversity narrative. We certainly don't want to watch it or do it ourselves. We just want to achieve vicariously through experiencing the highlights.

I honestly don't think anyone really gives a hot damn about doping any more - do the punters really believe in what they see in the velodrome, or on the athletics track, or just not want to know if a favoured star is injecting any number of PEDs into his eyeballs? Watching sport is like going to the cinema. We know it's CGI, but so long as there are a lot of whizz bangs and more more more action, who cares ? Faster ! Higher ! Stronger! And it was ever thus...bread and circuses.

Which is why I was vastly amused by the canny scheduling which put Gladiator on our TV screens in the UK the other evening:

'Fear and wonder, a powerful combination. You really think people are going to be seduced by that?
I think he knows what Rome is. Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they'll roar. The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the senate, it's the sand of the coliseum.'

David Cameron was cleverer than I thought!

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

It's a bit strange how the "let's throw a huge amount of money at it solution" seems to have had the opposite effect in football. I wonder why it doesn't work there. England have the most expensive manager and support staff, Wembley, St Georges Park, basically the best of everything. Result: embarrassed by Iceland

To have a good national team (and the emphasis is on team) you need players that have played with eachother a lot, preferably on a weekly basis in their club teams. E.g spain during their success could basically take the core of barcelona with a couple of added real madrid players. Failing that you need atleast one world class attacking player to make the difference (e.g. we had robben, argentina has messi, portugal ronaldo etc).

The English for various reason have had neither. And in terms of doping you can't really make a big impact because everyone including all the smaller nations are already doped to the max.

The Italian team of 2006 were from different clubs. They were just all jacked up on dope. Lippi described his defense as in a "state of grace" when beating Germany in that memorable semi-final.

 

[meat puppet]

Good one. Saddle sores and science.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/aug/15/team-gb-cycling-saddle-sore-medals?CMP=fb_gu

 

[The Carrot]

Re:

I feel like I need to get some stuff off my chest for a moment. I've been lurking on this forum on and off for a couple of years. It's always interesting reading, mainly because it explores a lot of areas the mainstream media in Britain daren't touch. As such, people don't take it seriously. I've been dismissed by friends and family as a miserable cynic and "sad" for pointing out things that have actually happened and there are good accounts of - I can point to books, articles, academics, and any amount of circumstantial evidence, and none of it will be enough to convince them

Maybe it's because I'm Welsh which gives me that bit of distance from the main English narratives (and that's what it basically is - there's little room allowed for Welsh and Scottish narratives, even with people like Geraint Thomas or Laura Muir, with Murray the only notable exception because it's a running joke), but I've been quite sceptical for a long time over the way the media portrays British success. The Olympics is the one great example of how even during the greatest international festival in the world, the national broadcaster turns inward. And I'm certain that those running the sports in Britain know that and are aware of the power of getting on the media's side, mainly by winning. Most people who watch only really care about Britain's medal count - they're not really bothered what events they come in or who gets them. And it's always that use of "we" to describe it - "we've won another medal" - as if everyone feels part-ownership of that success

Ultimately, it's chicken-or-egg to determine which came first - does the media concentrating on British success create the public's blinkers, or is it the public's blinkers that lead to the media concentrating more on British success? Either way, each feed off each other. The London games was a turbocharger, because it allowed the likes of the BBC to be extra indulgent. As a result, lots of really intelligent and otherwise quite unpatriotic people end up becoming hyper-nationalist - myself included in the past. When you spend a lot of time watching the coverage, it acts like a funnel because of the way they focus on specific events and sportspeople. You get sucked into a vortex very quickly because the BBC will be telling you how great Athlete X is and what a tough road they've had to go on, so even if you don't want to go in wanting Britain to win, you still end up wanting Athlete X to win. Heck, I even started liking Wiggins again until I saw his comments today on the Sutton case, and I only watched the final of the team pursuit. You can't call any of it journalism - it's just cheerleading, and it quickly becomes nauseating when you don't buy it

Either way, Britain is a conservative, nationalist country. I mean we kind of knew this anyway, especially after the EU referendum, but it's been noticeable for a while. And of course the way that reflects on the issues of doping and scepticism means that all reason gets thrown out of the window. I'm sure this happens elsewhere too (especially the US) but I can only speak for Britain. I just imagine this is what it's also like in Russia, or was like in East Germany in the 80s

You can provide decent circumstantial evidence for Farah being dodgy and it'll be dismissed simply on the basis of him never testing positive, and yet it's fine for people like Steve Cram to essentially accuse the likes of Gatlin, Makhloufi and Ayana of doping live on air. Even today, Steve Backley pointed at the Moldovan hammer thrower's positive tests as if to insinuate she's still cheating. God knows what it'll be like when the Russians come back. And yet I totally remember the media's reaction to Linford Christie's positive test being one of total denial and paranoia - proof that what people want isn't a positive test, because even if they had one for someone like Farah, there would be excuses aplenty as to why it's not legitimate. They just want an excuse to believe it's clean

Once you get that moment of doubt, the whole thing collapses and it just becomes unbearable. So I can understand why people on here are going to spend a lot of time "bashing Brits" - I imagine quite a few are actually British and are just sick to death of the constant sycophancy and the expectation of hyper-nationalism. And there are very few places you can go to actually express this, because the vast majority of people will immediately dismiss any degree of scepticism and it's impossible to engage a reasonable, nuanced conversation about it. It's very frustrating and I don't see a way out unless there's a mass unveiling of the whole thing - even if it's just one or two individuals that get caught, they will be written off as bad eggs and the circus will carry on as before

Lots of good points here.

Some of the most intelligent, analytical and sceptical people I have ever met will suddenly drop all of those attributes when it comes to (national) sports. It's a little bit scary.

 

[glassmoon]

drugs are clearly messing with Cav's head...

 

[elduggo]

Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

 

[The Carrot]

Re:

Cavendish 11 seconds faster in the IP than in the worlds

Nothing to see here

Trott, 3.25 in the Individual Pursuit, smashing the British record by over 2 seconds and beating Sarah Hammer (current world record holder and arguably the best Pursuiter ever).

I actually watched this on the BBC, even Chris Hoy and Joanna Rowsell (former World Champ Individual Pursuiter herself) looked in shock.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

Tax is part of the equation but funds from the national Lottery make up a significant part,

See http://www.uksport.gov.uk/our-work/investing-in-sport/how-uk-sport-funding-works

Unless you are forecasting serious hard times for the nation I do not see how Brexit would make a significant difference to these arrangements. I don't think the Scots are going anywhere else soon, but that's a political issue.

But as you say, this may be far enough off topic.

 

[The Carrot]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

Ah, but give the people what they want - they want winners. Winning makes us feel good. Education and all that sort of thing is so serious and boring! It involves delayed gratification...that's shite. Fulfilment is no match for glory! Nobody is interested in the hard yards story except as a post-success, triumph over adversity narrative. We certainly don't want to watch it or do it ourselves. We just want to achieve vicariously through experiencing the highlights.

I honestly don't think anyone really gives a hot damn about doping any more - do the punters really believe in what they see in the velodrome, or on the athletics track, or just not want to know if a favoured star is injecting any number of PEDs into his eyeballs? Watching sport is like going to the cinema. We know it's CGI, but so long as there are a lot of whizz bangs and more more more action, who cares ? Faster ! Higher ! Stronger! And it was ever thus...bread and circuses.

Which is why I was vastly amused by the canny scheduling which put Gladiator on our TV screens in the UK the other evening:

'Fear and wonder, a powerful combination. You really think people are going to be seduced by that?
I think he knows what Rome is. Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they'll roar. The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the senate, it's the sand of the coliseum.'

Nail is hit squarely on the head!

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

Only Scotland might try to leave. Being outside the EU will have no impact on competition. A possible short-term scenario is the UK looking for new friends outside of EU and NATO as a whole. That could mean trade deals with Russia. To make that work the government might blow up one of its own sports federations. If I were a civil servant that is what I would advise. As ever cycling would be the easiest target in such a scenario.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

Only Scotland might try to leave. Being outside the EU will have no impact on competition. A possible short-term scenario is the UK looking for new friends outside of EU and NATO as a whole. That could mean trade deals with Russia. To make that work the government might blow up one of its own sports federations. If I were a civil servant that is what I would advise. As ever cycling would be the easiest target in such a scenario.

"Blow up?" - sounds a bit drastic.

But I haven't heard anything in reletion to trade deals that specifically emphasises Russia in preference to anywhere else. Where does that info come from? And why would cycling be likely to suffer, given that there is all this success that has been commented upon? Would not the intention be to continue in that vein?

 

[sniper]

Cav bodychecks his competitor into the hospital. Asked about that move by thijszonneveld Cav response is that he could sue thijs for that question.

But doping? Nah he would never.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

In a time when public debt is considered the problem, and austerity has been enacted as the solution. People should really be angry. GB has traded its education system for fools gold. You can't get more foolish.

Ah, but give the people what they want - they want winners. Winning makes us feel good. Education and all that sort of thing is so serious and boring! It involves delayed gratification...that's shite. Fulfilment is no match for glory! Nobody is interested in the hard yards story except as a post-success, triumph over adversity narrative. We certainly don't want to watch it or do it ourselves. We just want to achieve vicariously through experiencing the highlights.

I honestly don't think anyone really gives a hot damn about doping any more - do the punters really believe in what they see in the velodrome, or on the athletics track, or just not want to know if a favoured star is injecting any number of PEDs into his eyeballs? Watching sport is like going to the cinema. We know it's CGI, but so long as there are a lot of whizz bangs and more more more action, who cares ? Faster ! Higher ! Stronger! And it was ever thus...bread and circuses.

Which is why I was vastly amused by the canny scheduling which put Gladiator on our TV screens in the UK the other evening:

'Fear and wonder, a powerful combination. You really think people are going to be seduced by that?
I think he knows what Rome is. Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they'll roar. The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the senate, it's the sand of the coliseum.'

Nail is hit squarely on the head!

amen.
Frauds like Sutton and cookson filling their pockets with no remorse whatsoever. I'm just happy it's not my taxpayer money!

 

[elduggo]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

Tax is part of the equation but funds from the national Lottery make up a significant part,

See http://www.uksport.gov.uk/our-work/investing-in-sport/how-uk-sport-funding-works

Unless you are forecasting serious hard times for the nation I do not see how Brexit would make a significant difference to these arrangements. I don't think the Scots are going anywhere else soon, but that's a political issue.

But as you say, this may be far enough off topic.

just thinking out loud really. But, signs indicate, at least, some short term pain for the economy. That will mean cut in the tax take, with its associated knock-on affects. I couldn't see sports funding being prioritised over something like the NHS, for example. But then, who knows? Maybe British Cycling is high profile enough now to start looking for funding from private corporations (via sponsorship). As regards other sports, who knows. But £5.5 million per medal? Hard to justify that if times get tough.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

Only Scotland might try to leave. Being outside the EU will have no impact on competition. A possible short-term scenario is the UK looking for new friends outside of EU and NATO as a whole. That could mean trade deals with Russia. To make that work the government might blow up one of its own sports federations. If I were a civil servant that is what I would advise. As ever cycling would be the easiest target in such a scenario.

"Blow up?" - sounds a bit drastic.

But I haven't heard anything in reletion to trade deals that specifically emphasises Russia in preference to anywhere else. Where does that info come from? And why would cycling be likely to suffer, given that there is all this success that has been commented upon? Would not the intention be to continue in that vein?

I simply spoke of a possible scenario where British Cycling (for example) became a sacrificial lamb in a trade deal with a Russia (or a China for that matter). If I were a civil servant that is what I might cook up. Other than that, I can see these sporting scams going on for decades yet. There is evidence that, in an economic downturn, people spend more on the lottery not less so that funding looks secure.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

And, don't forget, we've invested something like £350m in this Olympics alone, funding full-time training for many of our athletes. So far, each medal at Rio has cost us £5.5m. You'd expect some return for that investment.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/15/brutal-but-effective-why-team-gb-is-winning-so-many-olympic-medals

this is an interesting one, and not meaning to take the thread too far off in a tangent, but you would wonder what the post-Brexit effect on GB will be for future olympics. Potentially not having the same level of funding, potentially not having Scots and Nordies, and potentially having less competitors of foreign lineage.

Only Scotland might try to leave. Being outside the EU will have no impact on competition. A possible short-term scenario is the UK looking for new friends outside of EU and NATO as a whole. That could mean trade deals with Russia. To make that work the government might blow up one of its own sports federations. If I were a civil servant that is what I would advise. As ever cycling would be the easiest target in such a scenario.

"Blow up?" - sounds a bit drastic.

But I haven't heard anything in reletion to trade deals that specifically emphasises Russia in preference to anywhere else. Where does that info come from? And why would cycling be likely to suffer, given that there is all this success that has been commented upon? Would not the intention be to continue in that vein?

I simply spoke of a possible scenario where British Cycling (for example) became a sacrificial lamb in a trade deal with a Russia (or a China for that matter). If I were a civil servant that is what I might cook up. Other than that, I can see these sporting scams going on for decades yet. There is evidence that, in an economic downturn, people spend more on the lottery not less so that funding looks secure.

Might you? Oh well, if you say so. I don't know if "blow up" is a way of putting it where you come from, but here, for good reason, it's not our expression for this!