Commonwealth Games Road Race and TT

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Usually a chance for Australia to wail on the rest of the British Commonwealth at various Olympic and non Olympic sports. However England and to a lesser extent Scotland have closed the gap thanks to funding for the London Olympics and AIS budgets being reduced.

In certain sports the fields are almost as strong as the Olympics - track cycling, athletics, hockey, triathlon, shooting, equestrian etc.
 
jaylew said:
What the hell are the Commonwealth games, anyway?

You've never heard of the commonwealth?

It is an association of 53 countries the head of which is our Queen, the commonwealth games are a mini Olympics featuring these 53 nations. Most athletes find the commonwealth games quite a bid deal, obviously for outsiders it doesn't mean a lot.
 
Apr 2, 2014
186
0
0
42x16ss said:
Usually a chance for Australia to wail on the rest of the British Commonwealth at various Olympic and non Olympic sports. However England and to a lesser extent Scotland have closed the gap thanks to funding for the London Olympics and AIS budgets being reduced.

Id say England have more than closed the gap ;)

Bt5_KrwIUAAU0AJ.jpg:large
 
Pricey_sky said:
You've never heard of the commonwealth?

It is an association of 53 countries the head of which is our Queen, the commonwealth games are a mini Olympics featuring these 53 nations. Most athletes find the commonwealth games quite a bid deal, obviously for outsiders it doesn't mean a lot.

So, I'm assuming it's pretty much former British colonies, but if that's the case, why no US?
 
They chose not to associate. I think specifically politically there is an issue in recognizing the monarch as the head of the body. (Though it will not necessarily pass down to Charles and his successors, it seems likely that this will be the case)

It would be interesting if they chose to apply. I think a couple of the benefits of the Commonwealth as a body is that its diverse group, and not dominated by the US.

There are 71 nations at the games, more than have a seat at the Commonwealth of nations proper, due to Crown protectorates, and administered territories sending their own teams.

There are two open applications to join (Somaliland and South Sudan), and Suriname is in the advanced stages of applying.

Rwanda and Mozambique are the only two nations in the Commonwealth without significant ties to the Britsih Empire/UK. Both were admitted under exceptional circumstances clauses.
 
IIRC the games have been known by several different names

Empire Games
British Empire and Commonwealth games (This was the name when hosted by Cardiff, the city center pool was the 'Empire Pool', now sadly since demolished. Was a great place to swim for me, as I literally walked past it every day going to and from work)
British Commonwealth games
Commonwealth games (since the 70's)
 
jaylew said:
So, I'm assuming it's pretty much former British colonies, but if that's the case, why no US?
1776 was rather a long time ago, though. The Commonwealth Games started as the Empire Games in 1930 - the USA was, of course, long gone by then.

The Commonwealth is basically countries that used be together in an Empire and even though that's over want to stay friends and help each other out. Beyond these pound shop Olympics I'm not entirely sure what they do, though (but they have other get togethers).

There are also two member countries that were never ruled by Britain - Mozambique (Portugal) and Rwanda (Belgium).

The French have a similar set up called 'La Francophonie', but they don't have a sports day.
 
To be honest I like the games, as a sports fan it's great to see another competition featuring some of the worlds best. It's much more chilled out than the Olympics but is still great experience for the athletes and for many a commonwealth gold is a massive achievement.

The fact England are doing well is a bonus of course after a few years of being in the Aussies shadow at these games, I never expected England to be so far clear in the medal table. I guess that comes down to the legacy of London 2012 and money invested in local sport across Britain.
 
Catwhoorg said:
They chose not to associate. I think specifically politically there is an issue in recognizing the monarch as the head of the body. (Though it will not necessarily pass down to Charles and his successors, it seems likely that this will be the case)

It would be interesting if they chose to apply. I think a couple of the benefits of the Commonwealth as a body is that its diverse group, and not dominated by the US.

There are 71 nations at the games, more than have a seat at the Commonwealth of nations proper, due to Crown protectorates, and administered territories sending their own teams.

There are two open applications to join (Somaliland and South Sudan), and Suriname is in the advanced stages of applying.

Rwanda and Mozambique are the only two nations in the Commonwealth without significant ties to the Britsih Empire/UK. Both were admitted under exceptional circumstances clauses.
Thanks, good post. I wonder why Rwanda and Mozambique applied?

oldcrank said:
The following article may help explain why
some Americans do not understand what
the Commonwealth Games are. Of course,
it could also be the American education
system/curriculum, or a combination of
the two (and perhaps other) factors.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-d-chalmers/the-great-american-passpo_b_1920287.html

That article, while fairly interesting, has nothing to do with anything we're discussing and your other comments, while snarky, are probably deserved as I will have to admit to doing at least a little bit of trolling.

I've of course heard of the Commonwealth so I could have gleaned what the Commonwealth Games are, though I will say the idea seems dated to me.

That said, the only place I've really heard of the CG is this site several years ago. I don't think I've ever heard them mentioned by the media over here except maybe a mention during the Olympics. I really was more looking for some insight on the membership and how they are perceived by the participating countries.
 
Generally I would say they are considered on a par with the regional games (European Athletics for example), maybe just a touch more important in some sports, certainly lower in others.

For track cycling specifically, 2nd to the Olympics, but not by much, but thats due to the recent dominance of Commonwealth nations on the track. Its almost as strong a field.

Something like the gymnastics, well England sweeping a host of medals, shows how strong a field that is. Team GB got 1 medal in 2012, and will be hard pushed to get 1-2 in Rio.


Mozambique applied primarily as it was surrounded by members, and it helped stabilse the foreign relations in a post-Soviet supported era. Certainly its application caused debate and basically led to the development of a new set of standards for applications.

Rwanda I don't recall why they joined, but presumably for similar reasons.
 
4 ? A whole lot more than I recall, thanks for the correction.


The other aspect of the CG that is very hard for outsiders to understand is that in many sports this is one of the very few times a Welshman/woman (or Scot or Manx) can represent that nation at an international level.

Millar pulling on a Scotland shirt, Cav and Kennaugh pulling on a Isle of Man shirt, and G pulling on the Welsh colours.

It often means more to athletes than any number of team GB appearances.
 
Pricey_sky said:
To be honest I like the games, as a sports fan it's great to see another competition featuring some of the worlds best. It's much more chilled out than the Olympics but is still great experience for the athletes and for many a commonwealth gold is a massive achievement.
I agree with this. I like them because it's just fun. None of stress and BS that surrounds so much sport. It really has a back to basics feel to it. It's almost what the Olympics was probably like before I was born. People just doing sport because they enjoy it.
 
Also, in terms of the games, it's probably (?) the biggest multi-sport event outside of the Olympics

The athletes are competing in front of 50,000 in Glasow this time. It's unlikely the vast majority will experience anything even close to that in their careers. Most of the rest of the events seem to rammed out too. Once in a lifetime opportunity for the competitors

Going off-topic, The commonwealth was arguably the most important organisation in ending White rule in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Overcoming Britain's reluctance and getting The US onboard

Apart from that it's a talking shop and good excuse for jollies. Like all the other multi-national entities, but much cheaper
 
Catwhoorg said:
Au Contraire


(Much smaller and less notable I admit)

Every day's a learning day.

I see that in the cycling in 2013 (first appearance) France took positions 1-6. Not bad riders either. The winner was a stag for AG2R that year and two of the others are with Cofidis and Europcar.

But on to the Commonwealth - for those that didn't see it, the 2010 race was, in my opinion, the best one day race of 2010 (and on a course with no more than a couple of yards of elevation. Australia will try and control this. Others will make alliances to stop them. I
 
Jul 6, 2014
107
0
0
It seems like most countries are having the same debate we have here in New Zealand. I think the Commonwealth Games are vital to simulate the experience of the Olympics. It is nice to see ordinary New Zealanders who train so hard, often alongside full time jobs, do so well People still go out to watch the Football Championship in England even though it is a second division. If you enjoy the sports on offer and enjoy watching your country compete then it shouldn't matter.

I find it nice that judoka's get their tiny tiny 15 minutes of fame here in New Zealand when our sport's media is generally consumed with team sports.
 
Pricey_sky said:
To be honest I like the games, as a sports fan it's great to see another competition featuring some of the worlds best. It's much more chilled out than the Olympics but is still great experience for the athletes and for many a commonwealth gold is a massive achievement.

That's true. Also, a big bonus for the Comm games is the timing in the Olympic cycle. Being halfway gives many countries a good gauge on their athletes and their progression leading into the next Olympics. It also provides an opportunity to blood younger athletes with less on the line.
 
JRTK73 said:
People still go out to watch the Football Championship in England even though it is a second division. If you enjoy the sports on offer and enjoy watching your country compete then it shouldn't matter.

Exactly, I travel up and down the country to watch my hometown team Kidderminster Harriers play home and away, they are essentially the 5th division of English football. If your a passionate sports fan it does not matter what the event or level is.