I couldn't give a rats arse about the Olympics - I have no interest in it at all and resent the fact that it's constantly shoved in my face at every possible opportunity. I hate the way that people see sport as more worthy than other hobbies/occupations. I see no more value on a couple of people running round a track to see who is fastest than an episode of reality TV that most people turn their noses up at. No, i couldn't run as fast as the people in the Olympics and that's because I have no interest in being able to run as fast as those people. Would it make me a better person if I could? No. Would it make my life anymore worthwhile if I could? No.
Rant over. I am right though.
Submitted by MickyBoinng on Thu, 14/08/2008 - 11:21.
I think voting for any one of those choices either makes it seem a little to glorious or makes myself seem a little too cynical. The original intention of the games is honourable - although, it's all entirely political. I think I am a bit too cynical these days.
I think voting for any one of those choices either makes it seem a little to glorious or makes myself seem a little too cynical. The original intention of the games is honourable - although, it's all entirely political. I think I am a bit too cynical these days.
I think that's the point though - either the sporting "glory" and honourable intention is enough to overcome the politics, or it isn't. I don't think it is. I think every last competitor in that games is lending their support, through ignorance or otherwise, to an abusive regime, and I think the decision to hold the games there in the first place was a shockingly bad one. It gives the government there a massive international endorsement that it simply doesn't deserve, and nobody on the IOC could have been unaware of that.
Plus I agree completely with Lisa, the way sport is constantly pushed as some kind of ultimate achievement drives me mad. It's not important, these are just a lot of childish games being given some kind of international significance for no reason. There's nothing more amazing about a 100m sprint in Beijing than a couple of the neighbour's kids running down the road - it's simply a hobby, a fleeting entertainment for those taking part. It doesn't change the world, it doesn't achieve anything (other than, again, a certain satisfaction for the participant), it seems to me to be nothing more than massive cultural diversion. I suppose it acts as some kind of outlet for our competitive urges, and maybe beating other nations with batons and hurdles reduces the urge to get out the tanks and bombs, but I doubt even that. The Olympics has been stopped in the past for World Wars, but not the other way around.
It's not important, these are just a lot of childish games being given some kind of international significance for no reason. There's nothing more amazing about a 100m sprint in Beijing than a couple of the neighbour's kids running down the road - it's simply a hobby, a fleeting entertainment for those taking part.
Tell that to all the kids who can't/won't move off their sofas and certainly wouldn't be able to run down the road, due to not being able to find their legs under all the mountains of junk-food induced flab!
I'm not a big fan of overly competitive attitudes, or sport in general. But, should we just sit back and say, "Oh I can't be bothered to support or be proud of any of the people who have been working their arses off for four years to represent us as a country, it's not important."?
If all The Olympics does is encourage kids to get up off their arses and go do something healthy, sociable and confidence building, then it has done the one thing very few others have ever achieved.
But the politics are another matter entirely.....like the Eurovision Song Contest.
Tell that to all the kids who can't/won't move off their sofas and certainly wouldn't be able to run down the road, due to not being able to find their legs under all the mountains of junk-food induced flab!
Well I'd be happy to, and who knows, maybe when they're tired of watching the Olympics on telly 24/7, or playing their official Olympics games on their Xbox 360's and Playstations, they might actually realise that healthy sport and games are just a bit of fun that they can go and do down the rec any old time, and don't have to be some massively over-competitive, over-commercial, over-serious mountain of self-importance that "professional athletes" do in big stadiums once every four years.
Quote:
I'm not a big fan of overly competitive attitudes, or sport in general. But, should we just sit back and say, "Oh I can't be bothered to support or be proud of any of the people who have been working their arses off for four years to represent us as a country, it's not important."?
Yes? Look, let's face it, the people taking part in these games are doing it because they want to be the best at what they do, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't mean any of us have a moral duty to cheer them on either. There are a great many people in this country and every other, who do a hell of a lot more important, and more selfless things to genuinely help people in the world, and make a difference, and who probably work a hell of a lot harder to do it. They don't expect applause or medals, and they don't get them either, and that's purely because what they do isn't entertainment. Sport is, and that's all it is.
Quote:
If all The Olympics does is encourage kids to get up off their arses and go do something healthy, sociable and confidence building, then it has done the one thing very few others have ever achieved.
There's been an Olympics every four years for a century or so, we still eat more junk than ever year on year, we still have more heart attacks, we still do less physical exercise, we're still less fit generally than we ever have been. Where's the achievement?
Submitted by CrazyDave on Fri, 15/08/2008 - 15:47.
I agree with Tim in that Sports are IMHO massively over commercialised, but then so is just about everything. We live in a very commercial world these days. If you tried to invent the olympics from scratch, you'd end up with something fairly similar I think.
A world wide competition to find the best sportsman (and woman) in a range of disciplines.
It ought to move around to be fair. You'd want to attract the best, so would have to make sure it was good for their reputation, to lure them in. So you'd want a massive global audience. So you want to make sure there's lots of "value add" beyond just the sport e.g. really spectacular opening ceremonies.
Tim wrote:
Jayne wrote:
If all The Olympics does is encourage kids to get up off their arses and go do something healthy, sociable and confidence building, then it has done the one thing very few others have ever achieved.
There's been an Olympics every four years for a century or so, we still eat more junk than ever year on year, we still have more heart attacks, we still do less physical exercise, we're still less fit generally than we ever have been. Where's the achievement?
It's well known that advertising affects kiddies a lot. If it wasn't for things like the olympics and commercial sports, I think a lot less kids would have a kick around in the park.
I couldn't give a rats arse
I couldn't give a rats arse about the Olympics - I have no interest in it at all and resent the fact that it's constantly shoved in my face at every possible opportunity. I hate the way that people see sport as more worthy than other hobbies/occupations. I see no more value on a couple of people running round a track to see who is fastest than an episode of reality TV that most people turn their noses up at. No, i couldn't run as fast as the people in the Olympics and that's because I have no interest in being able to run as fast as those people. Would it make me a better person if I could? No. Would it make my life anymore worthwhile if I could? No.
Rant over. I am right though.
I think voting for any one
I think voting for any one of those choices either makes it seem a little to glorious or makes myself seem a little too cynical. The original intention of the games is honourable - although, it's all entirely political. I think I am a bit too cynical these days.
.
I watch the bits I'm interested in and ignore the rest.
Sport is important, for a vast number of reasons, but I can't be arsed to go into that.
I think that's the point
I think that's the point though - either the sporting "glory" and honourable intention is enough to overcome the politics, or it isn't. I don't think it is. I think every last competitor in that games is lending their support, through ignorance or otherwise, to an abusive regime, and I think the decision to hold the games there in the first place was a shockingly bad one. It gives the government there a massive international endorsement that it simply doesn't deserve, and nobody on the IOC could have been unaware of that.
Plus I agree completely with Lisa, the way sport is constantly pushed as some kind of ultimate achievement drives me mad. It's not important, these are just a lot of childish games being given some kind of international significance for no reason. There's nothing more amazing about a 100m sprint in Beijing than a couple of the neighbour's kids running down the road - it's simply a hobby, a fleeting entertainment for those taking part. It doesn't change the world, it doesn't achieve anything (other than, again, a certain satisfaction for the participant), it seems to me to be nothing more than massive cultural diversion. I suppose it acts as some kind of outlet for our competitive urges, and maybe beating other nations with batons and hurdles reduces the urge to get out the tanks and bombs, but I doubt even that. The Olympics has been stopped in the past for World Wars, but not the other way around.
Tim wrote: It's not
Tell that to all the kids who can't/won't move off their sofas and certainly wouldn't be able to run down the road, due to not being able to find their legs under all the mountains of junk-food induced flab!
I'm not a big fan of overly competitive attitudes, or sport in general. But, should we just sit back and say, "Oh I can't be bothered to support or be proud of any of the people who have been working their arses off for four years to represent us as a country, it's not important."?
If all The Olympics does is encourage kids to get up off their arses and go do something healthy, sociable and confidence building, then it has done the one thing very few others have ever achieved.
But the politics are another matter entirely.....like the Eurovision Song Contest.
Jayne wrote: Tell that to
Well I'd be happy to, and who knows, maybe when they're tired of watching the Olympics on telly 24/7, or playing their official Olympics games on their Xbox 360's and Playstations, they might actually realise that healthy sport and games are just a bit of fun that they can go and do down the rec any old time, and don't have to be some massively over-competitive, over-commercial, over-serious mountain of self-importance that "professional athletes" do in big stadiums once every four years.
Yes? Look, let's face it, the people taking part in these games are doing it because they want to be the best at what they do, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't mean any of us have a moral duty to cheer them on either. There are a great many people in this country and every other, who do a hell of a lot more important, and more selfless things to genuinely help people in the world, and make a difference, and who probably work a hell of a lot harder to do it. They don't expect applause or medals, and they don't get them either, and that's purely because what they do isn't entertainment. Sport is, and that's all it is.
There's been an Olympics every four years for a century or so, we still eat more junk than ever year on year, we still have more heart attacks, we still do less physical exercise, we're still less fit generally than we ever have been. Where's the achievement?
.
This is why Tim and I never debate anything any more, because I always get trampled into the ground like a bug.
Tim's right, I'm wrong, there you have it.
I'll get me coat.
(Incidentally, I voted human rights.)
Dadadadada, dadadadadada..
Dadadadada, dadadadadada.. dadadadada, daddada, didididi didi didi, dididi di..
Sorry, just humming Chariots of Fire to break the silence...
Jayne wrote: Tim's right,
And Tim teases me for thinking I'm always right - see Tim, you are worse than me!
Jayne wrote: This is why Tim
I don't think he trampled you into the ground. He put across his view point. Debate back!
I voted waste of time, but you've talked me round.
I agree with Tim in that
I agree with Tim in that Sports are IMHO massively over commercialised, but then so is just about everything. We live in a very commercial world these days. If you tried to invent the olympics from scratch, you'd end up with something fairly similar I think.
A world wide competition to find the best sportsman (and woman) in a range of disciplines.
It ought to move around to be fair. You'd want to attract the best, so would have to make sure it was good for their reputation, to lure them in. So you'd want a massive global audience. So you want to make sure there's lots of "value add" beyond just the sport e.g. really spectacular opening ceremonies.
It's well known that advertising affects kiddies a lot. If it wasn't for things like the olympics and commercial sports, I think a lot less kids would have a kick around in the park.
.
I'll debate back later, when I've had a drink and feel a bit rar!!