British Olympic Team - Social Divide

[emicen]

Here's the article:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19109724

Now, did he actually make those comments or has there been a bit of bias added here?

Yes, its probably correct some private schools have better facilities and coaches than are available to Joe Bloggs, but also seems to be completely ignoring that a lot of private schools are already investing in such talent which the government had royally failed to do before the concept of Team GB 2012 appeared before them.

For example, there were 3 people in my year at school alone who were on assisted places because they had sporting talent.

[V8mate]

The government should be pleased that private schools are essentially funding our young sporting hopefuls.

I can't see the education minister letting your local comprehensive school have shotguns anytime soon. Or bikes with five-figure price tags, or canoes or horses...

[eccles]

I wonder how many come from the forces....

[FunkyNige]

"Lord Moynihan said it was wholly unacceptable that more than 50% of medallists at the Beijing Olympics came from independent schools."

Most of our medals were from cycling, rowing and sailing so it's not much of a surprise that the people who won came from well off families as they need a bit of cash to get started. I'd be interested to know what the proportion of the people we sent to the Olympics came from independent schools, not just the medal winners. I'd also be curious about how many of the medallists came from families where the parents weren't divorced compared to the rest of the population.

[10 Pence Short]

V8mate said:

The government should be pleased that private schools are essentially funding our young sporting hopefuls.

I can't see the education minister letting your local comprehensive school have shotguns anytime soon. Or bikes with five-figure price tags, or canoes or horses...

Indeed. All that disingenuous bks from New Labour when we won the Olympics was just that. There is no legacy from these games.

I bet there's more legacy from the 2005 tube bombings than the 2005 decision to grant Great Britain the Olympics.

[Rude-boy]

eccles said:

I wonder how many come from the forces....

Agreed, I'll bet there are a fair few!

[bga]

emicen said:

For example, there were 3 people in my year at school alone who were on assisted places because they had sporting talent.

You would hope he would know better. A few of my mates were offered or took places due to their sporting prowess.

[Chrisw666]

There's also the issue that funding for sports in the UK is directed at clubs, i.e. sailing club, rowing club, cycling club etc.

With the notable exceptions of Boxing and Football very few of these activities are pitched at an accessible level for people who haven't got the right social connections or young people who don't belong to motivated parents. Sometimes the issue restricting access isn't money but something more intangible that even I struggle to fully understand despite seeing it on a regular basis.

We've introduced many children to sports that are events at the Olympic games, but of those with a talent many of them don't follow it up as their parents can't be bothered to (or can't afford to) take them for further coaching or want to push them into sports they see as cheap and easy to access.

There has always been (and probably always will be) a class divide in sports between working and middle class people. Boxers and Footballers often come from working class backgrounds, darts players and snooker players probably do too, but Rugby players, Athletes, Swimmers, Cyclists etc are from Middle or higher class backgrounds.

[Chrisw666]

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

[Rude-boy]

Genetics must be a right bh for those that think we can change the World overnight.

[eccles]

Chrisw666 said:

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

Nothing to do with affording the air fare to get to the mountains then.

[10 Pence Short]

Chrisw666 said:

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

Not to mention they typically have the money to afford the spare time to do so, to pay the cost of travel and to buy the equipment required.

[RoadToNowhere]

Chrisw666 said:

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

...surely the counter to that is that wealthy people can afford to dedicate their lives to pursuing things that have little financial reward, as they know daddy will pay the bills? Most "normal" people have to get jobs.

It's said that the difference between a professional athlete and an elite amateur isn't the quality of the training, but the quality of the rest - it's very difficult to train to an elite level whilst holding down a full time job.

[Miguel Alvarez]

Chrisw666 said:

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

Surely the fact that poor people can't/aren't likely able to afford to go on a mountain climbing holiday/course is a bigger factor. I'd have thought the willingness to push yourself would be equal in all successful people.

[V8mate]

Miguel Alvarez said:

Chrisw666 said:

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

Surely the fact that poor people can't/aren't likely able to afford to go on a mountain climbing holiday/course is a bigger factor. I'd have thought the willingness to push yourself would be equal in all successful people.

Nah. Everyone knows that poor people are lazy and feckless.

[eccles]

V8mate said:

Nah. Everyone knows that poor people are lazy and feckless.

You missed out the other pistonheads stables Labour voting, dole scrounging, council house living, Jeremy Kyle watching, Who shop at Asda.

[10 Pence Short]

eccles said:

You missed out the other pistonheads stables Labour voting, dole scrounging, council house living, Jeremy Kyle watching, Who shop at Asda.

I bet they even drink Jacobs Creek and think it's wine. Jacobs Creek!

[V8mate]

eccles said:

V8mate said:

Nah. Everyone knows that poor people are lazy and feckless.

You missed out the other pistonheads stables Labour voting, dole scrounging, council house living, Jeremy Kyle watching, Who shop at Asda.

Yeah. I didn't want to come across as outspoken

[XCP]

Chrisw666 said:

There's also the issue that funding for sports in the UK is directed at clubs, i.e. sailing club, rowing club, cycling club etc.

With the notable exceptions of Boxing and Football very few of these activities are pitched at an accessible level for people who haven't got the right social connections or young people who don't belong to motivated parents. Sometimes the issue restricting access isn't money but something more intangible that even I struggle to fully understand despite seeing it on a regular basis.

We've introduced many children to sports that are events at the Olympic games, but of those with a talent many of them don't follow it up as their parents can't be bothered to (or can't afford to) take them for further coaching or want to push them into sports they see as cheap and easy to access.

There has always been (and probably always will be) a class divide in sports between working and middle class people. Boxers and Footballers often come from working class backgrounds, darts players and snooker players probably do too, but Rugby players, Athletes, Swimmers, Cyclists etc are from Middle or higher class backgrounds.

In relation to Rugby that is over simplification
Look at the rugby heartlands. S.Wales, Cornwall, The Forest of Dean, The Gloucester-Bristol- Bath area.
Not much middle or high class background there.

[Chrisw666]

V8mate said:

Miguel Alvarez said:

Chrisw666 said:

I did read a research paper years ago about mountaineers and why they came from wealthy backgrounds and the conclusions included the fact that wealthy people are more driven to succeed and therefore are more likely to push themselves physically to excel at something even if there is no financial reward.

Surely the fact that poor people can't/aren't likely able to afford to go on a mountain climbing holiday/course is a bigger factor. I'd have thought the willingness to push yourself would be equal in all successful people.

Nah. Everyone knows that poor people are lazy and feckless.

I thought that was the public sector?

I can't remember the exact quotes that I read but there were things about 'enduring discomfort for pleasure' in there, I realise that the four words in quotation marks are like waving a red rag at a bull.

Anyway I propose we give everyone some free trainers, a free bike, a rifle, and their choice of sailing dinghy or canoe.