Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
prettypenny

More funding= More gold medals

Recommended Posts

prettypenny

I've read it a few times now from Olympians (Lauryn Mark) and commentators (Grant Hackett) that if Australia want more gold medals then the Government has to give more funding. That Australian athletes struggle to reach the level needed to win gold because they have to work a job and train, where other countries fund their athletes to train full time.

 

Personally I think they receive enough funding perhaps even too much. If a reduction in funding means we "only" win silver medals, well that's awesome.

 

I look at GB and their impressive gold medal haul which can be attributed to extra funding. Yet only last year there were riots in London and surrounds due to high unemployment amongst young people. A situation that hasn't improved. So once the Olympics have finished and all the gold medalists have had their moment of glory, these disenfranchised and unemployed youth remain exactly that. Wouldn't the extra money funneled into sport have been better spent on job creation, job training etc I realise that the increase for funding began a close to a decade ago but the problem with unemployment etc didn't occur overnight either.

 

Do you think the Australian Government should increase funding for sport or should we focus on other things like job creation, hospitals, education etc? WDYT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Telmatiaeos

Personally I'd rather see the funding go to grass-roots sports. Fund sports pitches, courts etc. That way many more people get the benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~Delilah~

While it would suck to have to hold down a job and train, professional sport is so far down on my list of areas that need more funding, it wouldn't even make the top 20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ComradeBob

Another who would rather see the funding directed to grass roots sports, as well as to properly designing new housing estates so that walking, cycling and public transport are the default options for getting around the neighnourhood because they're easy, convenient safe and quicker than taking the car 1km down the road to get milk and bread.

 

We'd solve quite a lot of the obesity issue through these steps alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Feral Grey Mare

How many children could be taught to swim using the funding currently allocated to one Olympian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Feral Becky
Another who would rather see the funding directed to grass roots sports, as well as to properly designing new housing estates so that walking, cycling and public transport are the default options for getting around the neighnourhood because they're easy, convenient safe and quicker than taking the car 1km down the road to get milk and bread.

 

We'd solve quite a lot of the obesity issue through these steps alone.

 

I agree. There are a few very fit athletes while the rest of the country groans with obesity.

 

Grant Hackett should keep a low profile at the moment too IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Soontobegran

It all depends on what you feel about the necessity of having the Olympics in our lives.

If you are a country who wants to send a team and you do not support them financially then don't complain when you don't bring home the gold!

GB is doing well because the 'home team' always does. They have enormous funding in the 8 years in planning and of course this funding will take away from other areas that people think are more worthwhile.

 

'Can't have your cake and eat it ' springs to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apageintime
While it would suck to have to hold down a job and train, professional sport is so far down on my list of areas that need more funding, it wouldn't even make the top 20.

 

Agreed, I'd rather be known as a country with a world class early intervention program for kids with extra needs, or a country with free dental, or hell, even a country without trachoma in indigenous communities rather than a country with gold medals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrsLexiK

Yes more funding will probably equal more medals. Look at us in Athens and then Beijing, that funding from the 2000 Olympics was still floating around and only really started paying off in 2004. That extra funding is now gone and we are being hit with a reality check. At present I do not think we should be giving more funding to Athlets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Feral Becky
Agreed, I'd rather be known as a country with a world class early intervention program for kids with extra needs, or a country with free dental, or hell, even a country without trachoma in indigenous communities rather than a country with gold medals.

 

:D

Me too.

 

Honestly, in two weeks nearly everyone will have forgotten about the Olympics.

I would rather we be known as a country of fit healthy people who win no medals than a country with a very few elite athletes who win a swag of medals and massive health problems through lack of fitness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FeralMinx

To me its pretty simple. Aus had an advantage as they had a well funded Institute of sport. They put a LOT of time and money into the science of the sports. Now, GB etc looked at what Aus did - and GB even recruited Aussie coaches - and replicated it... All things being EQUAL - Aus should NOT be anywhere near the top of the gold medal tally - as there is a much smaller pool of potential athletes to choose from. If money and science and 'will' to be the top country was all equal - the countries with the clear advantage shoud be those with more people in them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dadwasathome

At least the team is only 410 athletes these games, after 603 at the last Games. The GB team is a little more than 25% larger than ours, even though this is their home games and their population is almost 3 times Australia's.

 

Our obesession with sports has long sat uncomfortably with me. The increasing hubris of Aussie athletes (and Australia more generally) makes me even more uncomfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Soontobegran
Now, GB etc looked at what Aus did - and GB even recruited Aussie coaches

 

Haven't they just.

I have counted at least half a dozen times I have recognised the coaches for GB as being ours, one of them even had an interpreter doing the time out rants for him in basketball :)

I saw an interview this morning with Linford Christie, Michael Johnson and Daley Thompson and all of them alluded to the fact that GB had poached our athletic coaches and thanks very much for that! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
red_squirrel

The cuts to disability services in the UK in the past few years has been brutal and cruel. On the other hand Australia has improved its funding for early intervention through Fachsia funding (for Autism and other things) and is now roling out the National Disabilities insurance scheme.

I know which country I'd rather belong to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pull Up A Beanbag

interesting factoid brought up by the Vice chancellor at the end of the musical I was just in...

 

 

More people view products of the arts than they do sporting events in Australia.

 

and yet, our film industry struggles, our Arts funding is being slashed every year, I can't imagine how hard it must be for an Aussie pop/rock musician to get a leg up...

 

And that's without any discussion about funding for MH, NDIS etc etc...

 

SO many more worthy places to put the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BadCat

Perhaps the very cheap expedient of paying our coaches more so they'd stay here would do the job then.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stellajoy

Several of Australia's largest museums and galleries face closing in the next few years. So no, I don't think sports should get more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Expelliarmus

And yet, I have just read a story on the Aus Olympics website about how not since 1988 has an Australian woman finished in the top 20 of the marathon and we had a rep at 17th place yesterday.

 

There are a couple of athletes like that although I can't recall off hand all the stories.

 

IMO it's actually only the swimmers who are not doing their best.

 

But it is interesting to note who is training the Chinese swimmers ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellebelle

If Emily Seebohn and James Magnussen had won, we would be about 12th on the medal tally right now and I doubt we would even be discussing our performance since we are way ahead on silver and bronze. All the extra funding in the world wouldn't have made JM swim that fraction extra. Throw in the couple we look like (hopefully) getting for sailing and we would be coming 7th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JRA
Personally I'd rather see the funding go to grass-roots sports. Fund sports pitches, courts etc. That way many more people get the benefit.

 

Absolutely.

 

But, the argument goes, people want to get involved in grass roots sport when they see people excelling at things like the olympics. Everyone has told me hockey for instance always do well with new players with the olympics. God they are right. I have had about 20+ enquiries just in our club in the past week

 

If Emily Seebohn and James Magnussen had won, we would be about 12th on the medal tally right now and I doubt we would even be discussing our performance since we are way ahead on silver and bronze. All the extra funding in the world wouldn't have made JM swim that fraction extra. Throw in the couple we look like (hopefully) getting for sailing and we would be coming 7th.

 

Absolutely if both of those were less than 1/10 of a second faster, it would be a moot point.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FuzzyMum

I agree with other pps relating to redirecting funding to other areas. I also would like to see is more recognition given to achieving silver and bronze. They seem to be given very little respect within the media. I just don't really get the current means of placing countries primarily according to gold medals won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amica

Well, countries who I would like Australia to aspire to in so many ways (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland etc) have barely make a presence on the medal tally yet I've read they are the 'happiest' people on the planet.

 

That said, cut funding to elite athletes I say. We need to get over our obsession with elite sport and put the money where it really counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zande
That said, cut funding to elite athletes I say. We need to get over our obsession with elite sport and put the money where it really counts.

I agree with this. I would much prefer funding went to health care, education, special needs support etc. Things that benefit all Australians rather than the few athletes that benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~mimo~

When it comes down to it, how is XX winning a medal going to benefit me?

 

Education/roads/hospitals/free dental etc are goinng to benefit me or my kids, or a lot of other people.

 

I read an article today where someone told off the media because he "only" won silver, not the gold "all of Australia" wanted or expected. Good on him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dadwasathome

Interestingly, in terms of the size of our team, Australia is 28th (US 3rd), in terms of our population we're 6th (US 30th, UK 8th), in terms of our GDP we're 29th (the US is 43rd and UK 26th).

 

Don't mention the Kiwis though.! :) And Denmark (2 gold) is ahead of Australia on the medal table and the other three measures.

Edited by dadathome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...