The Medal Count

Are you guys really that pissed off, that your getting spanked by the brits. Thats great.

P.S The Russians are coming.

 

We've done plenty.

I'm talking about ALL sports, not only football.

You're missing the point. Prior to the tournament, the goal was to reach the QF and we did. You proclaim our status as 'bottler', but you have no real merit nor status to do so, since we derive our goals from our own point of view. We weren't tournaments favorites to begin with. After the impressive games against Italy and France our goals didn't change THUS we didn't underachieve by our own standards.

For the haters: you wish you were Dutch.

 

We aussies are annoyed because we are getting beaten by a group of countries posing as one. Great Britain at the inception of olympics is very different to the Great Britain in the world now.

The argument about history does not wash considering we even have liquid soap invented since that date. Bad pun on our olympic chief's joke about brits not washing.

The aussies are not whingers but we get annoyed about is when poms start crowing over us when they can't compete as individual countries. If we use the Great britain "history argument" then we should ensure all the ex-Soviet Union countries compete together as well as all the ex Yugoslav countries and so-on.

We are impressed that the Great brits have improved immensely in the cycling from a single medal in Athens to 8 gold in Beijing since they hired an aussie to take charge. We don't bear grudges against our pommie rivals, we helped you get back on your feet in the cricket with our coaches too.

 

LOL!!! You are famed for it!

Could Australia be any more bitter?
http://www.foxsports.com.au/beijing_olympics/story/0,27313,24221767-5016818,00.html

Those grapes must be tasting very sour by now!

The last sentence has me laughing the most, the fact the journalist doesn't even know that the cricket team they play against is called 'England & Wales' is just hilarious!! What an amatuer!

 

If a journalist does not even understand the basics as to how Britain can compete in the Olympics as one team yet choose not to in football then they should not be writing an article on it. It really isn't difficult to understand.

LOL @ an entire nation 'not getting it'.

 

Let's be fair Biscuit Australia may no longer be better than us at sport but think of all the contributions they've made to the arts, the sciences, literature and technology. It's not as if they focus entirely on sport because they have nothing else.

 

Poor, poor Australia

 

That is brilliant. Not only does he fall into the age old trap of Britain=English but he also has a little dig at one of our Cyclists who happened to be born in Belgium. Now as we all know everyone in Australia is a native and immigrants have no influence on the Australian population at all.

 

Dont forget, they also have a policy of trying to convince eastern block weightlifters to emigrate to Austraila, so as to increase their medal haul.

It's hilarious that the Aussies are so bitter.

 

It is logical that China wins so many medals, they have so many people living there, and they want to show the world something in their own country.
The same is with the United States, there are many people living in that country, and it is a really sports based country (like Australia).
Ok, India has many people too, but the only thing they do is cricket.

 

So, can we add another U.S. gold to the medal count for basketball?

 

Cuba beat the USA 10-2 in baseball, so no gold there for the US.

Kind of embarrassing that.

But yeah, if you look at some of the blow-outs in basketball, baseball, soccer, men's 200m, 110m hurdles, etc ... it really underscores how silly it is to equate a bronze or silver to a gold (which some medal-count tables are essentially doing).

 

I have to say I've never heard anyone equate the quantity of medals in total to the success, or otherwise, of a countries Olympic team. It's always been counted as gold first, then silver and then bronze.

This is the medal table on the BBC website and it's in exactly the same format as when the games began.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/medals_table/default.stm

 

here's a good storty from the bbc.... reflects many of the arguments here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7576446.stm

 

If people don't want to use the normal listing then the second list, (the one with 3 points for gold, 2 for silver and 1 for bronze), seems the fairest but, tbh, it all comes across as pretty pathetic. I mean, do they really think people don't remember how it's been done for past 100+ years???

 

Of course, the Europeans would rather spend the money on the former than the latter.

 

A lot do, especially when it is considered that gold medal chances are slim.