Bluntly, that's the truth. People are interested in the best athletes, not 'athletes who do quite well, considering'.
Obviously, you know I'm no disablist, but that is pretty much the reason. It's the same reason women's football gets little coverage: no-one is interested. They want to see the best football, the best athletics and so on.
Although the paralympics throws up a question for debate...
If you have a genotype/injury which is classed as a specific 'disorder', you get your own event category.
If you have a genotype/injury which means you are ungainly and unathletic, but not disabled, you don't get to compete in the main olympics because your genes mean that you aren't good enough; but you don't get to compete in the paralympics either.
Why does someone with CP get a specific event, but someone with a bad knee doesn't? A person with a bad knee can't be expected to compete equally against those without - so why don't they get the 'bad knee 200m'?
I don't think that's quite it. It's because the 'news' deciders don't care. People aren't interested simply because people haven't a clue that this quite amazing UK success story is happening.
Ya would think us coming second *ahead of the USA (never mind Australia) in anything would be 'news'.
Your general point is completely correct but this is part of the Olympics, it says something for the 'news' deciders that more isn't made of this.
...because nobody cares.
ReplyDeleteBluntly, that's the truth. People are interested in the best athletes, not 'athletes who do quite well, considering'.
Obviously, you know I'm no disablist, but that is pretty much the reason. It's the same reason women's football gets little coverage: no-one is interested. They want to see the best football, the best athletics and so on.
Although the paralympics throws up a question for debate...
If you have a genotype/injury which is classed as a specific 'disorder', you get your own event category.
If you have a genotype/injury which means you are ungainly and unathletic, but not disabled, you don't get to compete in the main olympics because your genes mean that you aren't good enough; but you don't get to compete in the paralympics either.
Why does someone with CP get a specific event, but someone with a bad knee doesn't? A person with a bad knee can't be expected to compete equally against those without - so why don't they get the 'bad knee 200m'?
Or are disabled people 'special'?
:-)
I don't think that's quite it. It's because the 'news' deciders don't care. People aren't interested simply because people haven't a clue that this quite amazing UK success story is happening.
ReplyDeleteYa would think us coming second *ahead of the USA (never mind Australia) in anything would be 'news'.
Your general point is completely correct but this is part of the Olympics, it says something for the 'news' deciders that more isn't made of this.
It hasn't been headline news - but I've certainly noticed that BBC News 24 seems to lead with in for their sports stories.
ReplyDeleteI tend to turn off at the first mention of sport, but I noticed it on the main news bulletins.