London Olympics
-
Hmmm, how badly do you want the job, Giles? I expect they have to do that for the men's team, too.
-
By being an absolute arse.
Perfect qualification for my husband.
Funny that this thread seems to be more about women’s backsides than the action! You boys… ::)
Anyway, the action is fantastic and seeing Sir Chris get his 6th gold was sublime
-
Years ago, a roommate and I got into a beer fueled discussion of what is and isn't a "sport". After a few pitchers, we hashed out the basic definition: 1) no judging of subjective aspects. Sports aren't about who did it prettiest. 2) Human powered only. I don't care if your horse or your car is better, only if you're better.
We decided that everything that fails those two criteria is an "athletic contest". Participants can still be astonishing athletes, but what they do isn't a "sport". I feel that only sports should be in the Olympics. After all, the motto is, "Faster, Higher, Stronger", not "Prettier, More Expressive, More Error Free".
All this is to say that I don't have any interest whatsoever in watching diving, even when they flub and do backbusters, as we called the reverse belly flop when I was a kid.
-
Hey, I have the utmost respect for cheerleaders, that can be brutal. Little known fact- more high schoolers are injured cheering than in any other activity.
They're absolutely athletes, competitions are intense, but it's not a sport. Subjectivity destroys the integrity in my mind.
And Synchronized Swimming is just ridiculous.
-
Yeah, but even though Sychronised Swimming isn’t Faster, Higher, Stronger it’s incredibly technical, physically demanding and requires amazing co-ordination and precision. Doesn’t really float my boat, although I find it quite entertaining! Quite a few of the “sports” in the olympics (archery, some of the shooting events, some of the equestrian events for example) don’t fall into the F, H, S category in simple terms. I guess I like that the Olympics is so diverse, and showcases so many different “sports” that we wouldn’t normally consider watching (and also opens up the games to some countries which only have competitors in few disciplines). If you take out “subjectivity” then a lot of the gymnastics events wouldn’t qualify. No idea where I was going with this (apart from my need to disagree with G)… anyway, I’m enjoying it much more than I expected!
-
I thought you were watching beach volleyball, Seul. A sport which actually does have cheerleaders at the matches, by the way.;)
-
I agree completely with you, Madame B, about the technical and physical demands of Synchronized Swimming, but the whole thing is based on "pretty". They have to wear makeup and smile like coked up cruise directors. Same thing for gymnasts. I just don't like it. And whenever there's some sort of scoring drama/controversy, all I can think is that it wouldn't happen in an event like rowing. Did you cross the finish line first? Well, then you won. Congratulations.
I, like you, love getting to see less mainstream stuff (in the Winter Olympics I got seriously obsessed on curling). And the Olympics straddle the nexus of sports, entertainment, spectacle and pageantry, in my opinion. They're kind of the exception to all the rules.:)
-
Oh, and while I’m on my soapbox: am truly delighted with Team GB’s success, but we (and I think many other countries) rely very heavily on overseas training facilities and coaching - in particular in the USA - so whilst we’re patting ourselves on the back we should remember that (and say a huge thank you)
p.s. Totally agree with Chris about the forced presentation of many of these “sports”, the sparkly outfits and heavy make-up are gag-making
(oh, and we too got obsessed with the curling!) -
I think that was one of our rules- if you have to wear makeup or sequins, it's not a sport. Fun to watch, sure. Sport, no.
On a slightly different note, indoor volleyball has a totally different vibe than beach volleyball. I think I like it better.
