Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Aug 9
th, 2012 at 11:19am:
<<Your change of attitude hasn't escaped my attention. Can't bag aussie athletes fast enough, yet fawn over a saudi no-hoper. Funny that.>>
.................................................................
I said we spend too much on sports, and I bagged their attitudes for coming second rather than first. They acted like they deserved to win, for some strange reason.
They acted like they believed they were good enough, and were disappointed to fall short. Not something you'd understand, being accustomed to failure.
Quote:We had athletes that come almost last in the heats. Should we have sent them?
Probably not. Though theres a difference between finishing last, and finishing waaaaaaaaaaay last.
Quote:They set new rules to their "standards" for the Aussie girl who didn't qualify, she had a spack attack, they let her in, she came almost last in the heat.
Should she have been allowed to compete?
If you're thinking of Genevieve Lacaze, then no. She shouldn't.
Quote:The best of the best are not competing at the Olympics. They are somewhere else on this planet.
Really?
![Undecided Undecided](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/undecided.gif)
Where might the "real" athletes be dwelling?
Quote:Good on Saudi for allowing their women to compete, it's a move in the right direction.
Perhaps they should have started by having her compete in lesser tournaments first.
Quote:They let the Nigerian rower in because of the massive outcry due to third world nations not having the equipment to compete.
There was no outcry, massive or otherwise. This was merely an exercise in the 'all shall have prizes" philosophy that has posioned the "free" (
![Grin Grin](http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/grin.gif)
) world.
Surely theres
some event a nigerian is good at. Rowing ain't it.