Professionals register now to create your own content and profile, and gain other potential financial, networking and marketing benefits.
Consumers (athletes, enthusiasts) use our quick registration to enhance your experience of the site
Does Rugby matter in the world of sport?
I'm sitting here watching the Rugby sevens World Series (or something) on the telly (well, I say that, but really it's just
background) and wondering what people out there in the world (i.e. not the UK, France, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa - oh and some tiny Pacific Islands) would think of it all.I mean, there are other teams in it. France have just murdered Moldova (I think it was them, anyway) about a million to nil, and Russia and Portugal treated us to a display of ball dropping, but in these countries Rugby must be played about as much as Korfball (and I know you're thnking: What the **** is Korfball? - hint - ask Tom Cross). How this sport can have a "World Cup" and a "World Series" I don't know. It's about up there with Cricket.
Of course, I'm being deliberately provocative. Rugby can be an exciting sport to watch, although as a Scot (but neither a farmer nor a public schoolboy) I don't have a big emotional connection to rugby (Ok, another provocative statement).
Advocates will point to the greater respect shown to the referee, compared to football (soccer) and also the diving and feigning of injury that your see in football. It's interesting to note that football wasn't always like that. Of course, it is only very recently that Rugby became a professional sport. As it's profile grows, and the financial stakes increase, will we start to see a rise in the 'evils' that have befallen the beautiful game? Will rugby be able to keep its relative innocence (if you can count fist fights and stamping as innocent) as the game progresses commercially?
We'll see.
In the meantime, roll on the Olympics and the new football season.
Rob ;-)
Training hard in the gym during a grand slam tennis tournament?
I picked up this interesting quote from Andy Murray today, after his first round win in the French Open Tennis at Roland Garros. This is the exceprt from the the BBC.co.uk:
Murray revealed he had been on antibiotics since Tuesday for a throat infection which forced him to cut back his training.
"I was told to do half of what I would normally do," Murray said.
"I had to make sure I wasn't tiring myself out too much and getting a lot of sleep. I feel a bit better today but this has been the first day I have been feeling good.
"I'll take tomorrow easy and work hard in the gym on Tuesday."
I realise that professional tennis players have to do physical work all year round, a they pretty much compete all year round. However, I'm surpried to see that Murray is working hard in the gym during a major tournament.
Is this normal practice, or perhaps a sign that he is deliberately working through the French Open with the aim of peaking later on (Wiimbledon). I gather he doesn't have much of a record on clay, and maybe this has influenced his decision?
Any conditioning experts out there, or tennis coaches, that would have a view on this?
Euro 2008: The economic cost of non-qualification
I was listening to Radio 4 this morning, and the item that got the greatest attention in the sports news (alongside the Champions League final build up and the climax to the Scottish Premier League) was Ed Smith's (former cricketer) new book, What Sport Tells Us About Life. I mean no offence to Mr. Smith when I say this, but it must have been a quiet day in the world of sport yesterday. I mean, I'm sure it is a good book and all that...
Anyway, it got me thinking. Surely by now, if England had qualified for Euro 2008 we'd be gearing up for a major spree of flag waving and beer consumption, and if Scotland (when will we qualify again) and Northern Ireland had just managed to get through qualifying, then the frenzy would have been all the greater. (Sorry Wales, but as a half-Welsh Scot - and I don't often tell people about that - you were never in the running.)So how much would have this have been worth? There's the beer sales in pubs and supermarkets, of course, and lots of naff little flags to stick in your car window, and the loss of revenue to bookies and travel providers, amongst many other businesses. Then there's TV and other forms of advertising. How much would advertisers have spent trying to get our attention during the tournament?
The Centre for Economic and Business Research put the economic cost of England's failure alone at around £1 billion. This is based only on comparisons with 2006 and 2004, and therefore does not consider the impact of not having Scotland and/r Northern Ireland at the tournament. Of course, Scotland's economy is a lot smaller than England's, and Northern Ireland's smaller still, but the prospect of multiple British teams playing in a tournament for the first time since 1998 surely would have had created more excitement, across the whole of the United Kingdom (well, maybe not Wales).
Then again, maybe it's worth it not to have to go through all of the references to 1966 over and over again....
Roll on the Olympics
Join the world's sport and exercise community today!
My Olympic Star for 2008: Michael Phelps
Recently on the iStadia.com forum I asked who will be the stars of the 2008 Olympics, and why?I nominated Michael Phelps, the American swimmer, and thought I would expand on my choice in a blog. I'd really like to know who your choice would be.
As many of you will know, Phelps is widely expected to try and equal or better Mark Spitz's record of seven gold medals (all of which he also broke a world record in).
My argument is that if Phelps can win 7 golds in Beijng (he's may compete in 8-10 events), it would represent a greater achievement than that of Spitz - even if he doesn't get the world records to match. Training methods and sport science have helped to take the sport to a depth of competitiveness that I've not seen in any other sport. I watch athletics and see the field really strung out over a 400m - approximately 45 seconds worth of running - for example. Don't the controversy over swimsuits distract the argument either - for most of the top swimmers in Beijing will be wearing Speedo's LZR racer costume - and not the other way around.
Yet, Phelps still stands out as a phenomenon. He's like Michael Johnson with versatility. I really didn't think anyone would dominate the pool like Ian Thorpe did for a long time, but Phelps has outshone the 'Thorpedo' and a cynic might argue that his increasing dominance might even have played a part in Thorpe's decision to retire from the sport.
Michael Phelps's record is already incredible. In Athens (2004) he won four golds and two silvers, before winning 7 golds at last year's world championships in Melbourne. That was despite the American's being disqualified in the heats of the medley relay - an event that they probably would have won (Phelps won the individual 100 fly event).
Phelps will be 23 when he competes at this year's Olympic Games. Assuming he competes in London 2012, he may well surpass the achievements of Russian gymnast Larissa Latynina, who has the distinction of winning the most medals in Olympic history. What then.. ...well, perhaps the possibility of competing in a home Olympics in 2016 will keep him going until he's 31...
Check out our Sports Performance Center.
Join the world's sport and exercise community today!
Will there be baseball at the 2016 Olympics (should there be)?
Following on from my blog on the 2016 Olympic Bid cities, the prospect of the Games returning to the USA raises the question of whether baseball will again be inlcuded in the Games.
Although baseball was included between 1992 (Barcelona) and 2004 (Athens), and has appeared at other times as a medal event, in 2005 the International Olympic Committee voted it out of London 2012 (as they did softball, which is just baseball for girls, I believe).
And rightly so, I say. Only a total of 17 nations have compted in Olympic baseball competition to date. Surely on the grounds that it does not have a wide enough global base, this is a good decision. On the same basis, I wouldn't argue for the inclusion of Rugby or Cricket.
That's my reasoned argument. My less reasonable side just doesn't see the appeal of baseball. I know that I don't really understand baseball. Well, on a basic level I do. I know that you have to hit the ball and get round the bases. It's basically rounders with razzamatazz. At least I think it is. Except for the one time I went to a Major League Baseball game. It was the Philadelphia Phillies, at home, on a weeknight. My goodness it was dull. Even the little throng of kids that insisted on yelping "Charge" when the organ sounded, couldn't liven it up. What's with those organs anyway? Can't baseball fans generate their own atmosphere?*
Anyway, I digress. It isn't a sure thing, even if Chicago wins the bid, that there will be baseball in 2016. As this baseball fan points out, the MLB is unlikely to take a 2 week break in August to support the Games.
Shame.
(Of course I'm being provocative, but I would appreciate a blog post in response that explains to us uneducated Europeans the attraction of baseball. Oh, and by the way, a comparison with Cricket won't cut it, as I'm a Scot.)
Join the world's sport and exercise community today!
Who will host the 2016 Olympic Games?
Although the host city of the 2106 Olympic Games won't be decided until 2009, in Copenhagen, Denmark, the competition already appears to be hotting up.Seven cities have confirmed bids, including a very interesting mix. The cities are:
Baku, Azerbaijan
Chicago, USA
Doha, Qatar
Madrid, Spain
Prague, Czech Republic
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Tokyo, Japan
Howard Bloom, of Sports Business News, suggested last year that in 2016 it would be the turn of the Americas to host the Olympics, and that it would not be hosted in Brazil as they are hosting the FIFA world cup in 2014. Is that just the view of one man, or that of a US-centric media? Surely if it was such a done deal there would be little point in anyone else bidding?
As refreshing as it is to see Qatar, the Czech Repubic and Azerbaijan bidding, I can't see them being contenders, and maybe it is unrealistic that Europe will be given the games twice in a row. Then, by the same logic, will it be too soon for Japan to have a realistic chance?
So there we go. Back to the Americas. Will the FIFA world cup hosting really have an influence on Brazil's chances? If they do, then we are back to Bloom's prediction: Chicago.
(I wonder, if there is more than a token competition, what the 'hook' will be that the winners use - like London's legacy for youth?)
The logos:
Join the world's sport and exercise community today!
What a goal! Welsh Goalkeeper scores 80 yard cracker!
You'd put it down as an error if a voice hadn't called "He's off his line, Goody", just before the keeper took the kick.Anyway, according to the BBC, local MP Lembit Opik tabled a motion in the House of Commons, praising the 80-yard goal by non-league Montgomery Town goalkeeper Steve Goodwin as one of the "greatest and most spectacular goals" in British football history.
Join the world's sport and exercise community today!
If Manchester United is the most valuable football (soccer) club in the world, which is the most valuable sports club?
Forbes magazine have valued Manchester United Football Club at £905m ($1,800m), making them the most valuable
football (soccer) club in the world, ahead of Real Madrid at £646m ($1,285m) and Arsenal at £603m ($1,200m) in third.I was interested in finding out which sports clubs/teams are the most valuable in the world. With a bit of digging (also from Forbes) I found out that in American Football, the Washington Redskins are worth $1, 423 million, making them the most valuable NFL team.
In Ice Hockey, the Toronto Maple Leafs, the most valuable NHL team, are worth a paltry $332m, and the most valuable NBA team, the New York Knick are only worth $592.
Even the most valuable baseball team, the New York Yankees, are not worth as much as Manchester United, at $1,200m.
Note that these valuations were not all made at the same time, but even still, it is unlikely that any of these teams are currently more valuable than Manchester United.
I guess that shows that despite the incredible marketing pull of the American sports, the fact that football is played and watched the world over, is what drives their value?
Join the world's sport and exercise community today!
