Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Sports Personality Of The Year - Zara Phillips

Bob_the_lost said:
Which is clearly false. I doubt the GB curling team train 6 days a week. :rolleyes: ;)

Your arguement was that she shouldn't get the award because horseriding is a small sport. Yet you are willing to alter that descision in the case of rowing, an even smaller sport, because of the person involved or possibly because you think rowing is a more singificant sport despite your arguements to the contrary.

Golds (or at least some nice silverware) are needed for entry to the competition, but you're willing to sacrifice your principles for one person but not another, why?

Because it's not an even comparison is it? Redgrave won lots of international medals, over 15 years or so. When Philips has done that then fair enough, even though horseriding will still be a small sport.
 
haylz said:
im standing firm on this one.:p :D

untill one of them have been dragged down the side of a mountain by a hormonal mare, they can shove their mamby pamby training up thier jock straps:D

that sounds so dirty......
 
haylz said:
man/woman + boat (inanimate object)

man/woman + horse ( intelleigent creature)

there is no contest im afraid , the meeting of minds between animal and human is a powerful concept and reality that takes double the training physically and mentally than any rower imo....
Man + Man + Man + Man (+ Optional Midget) + Boat
Man/Woman + Horse (pretty bloody thick creature)

You missed out on the other three/four people in the boat, can't remember if he was in a coxed or coxless four. As far as meeting of minds goes you're only dealing with one. :p
 
Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
Because it's not an even comparison is it? Redgrave won lots of international medals, over 15 years or so. When Philips has done that then fair enough, even though horseriding will still be a small sport.


1). as has already been pointed out, she's holding two major titles at once.
2). why should the size of a sport disbar somebody from being recognised.

To use your Mercury analogy, wouldn't you like to see someone from an under-represented genre - breakcore, say - get the nod rather than another big indie band?
 
Bob_the_lost said:
Man + Man + Man + Man (+ Optional Midget) + Boat
Man/Woman + Horse (pretty bloody thick creature)

You missed out on the other three/four people in the boat, can't remember if he was in a coxed or coxless four.

Id put my faith in a horse over 3-4 other humans any day of the week:p
 
You have to admire the success of this annual piece of self-promotion bollocks.


I see some people - including the BBC - have sometimes taken to referring to it as 'Sports Personality of the Year', as if it's not a BBC contrivence ('personality' ? wtf).

Are people who's sport hasn't appeared on BBC tv allowed to win ?
 
For an individual event that can apparently cost the best part of £500k pa to compete in would it not be fair to say that - all other things being equal - someone with more money, fame and connections would be more likely to a) get a sponsorship deal, meaning b) be able to participate more fully in events and gain valuable experience and therefore c) be more likely to win?

To pretend that money or her position has had nothing at all to do with the success of Zara Phillips is frankly ludicrous IMO.

Still, fair play to her - difficult to blame the individual and all that - she still did it. I'd just rather have seen someone who genuinely battled against the odds get a look in for the BBC's award.
 
lighterthief said:
For an individual event that can apparently cost the best part of £500k pa to compete in would it not be fair to say that - all other things being equal - someone with more money, fame and connections would be more likely to a) get a sponsorship deal, meaning b) be able to participate more fully in events and gain valuable experience and therefore c) be more likely to win?

To pretend that money or her position has had nothing at all to do with the success of Zara Phillips is frankly ludicrous IMO.

Still, fair play to her - difficult to blame the individual and all that - she still did it. I'd just rather have seen someone who genuinely battled against the odds get a look in for the BBC's award.

As i said earlier, this isn't the Sports Personality Who'd Overcome The Most Ardous Personal Circumstances To Triumph Against All Odds Of The Year
 
Dubversion said:
1). as has already been pointed out, she's holding two major titles at once.
2). why should the size of a sport disbar somebody from being recognised.

To use your Mercury analogy, wouldn't you like to see someone from an under-represented genre - breakcore, say - get the nod rather than another big indie band?

1. Still no comparison to what Redgrave achieved is it? Anybody care to check how many titles he'd won before he got nominated for anything like this? (I can't be asked, I'm off home in a minute.)

2. I didn't say it should. I just think in such a tiny sport you need to achieve a bit more than she has to be thought of that highly.

And I'd rather see the Cheeky Girls win it than another bloody indie band - I have no argument for that though, that's pure prejudice.:p
 
London_Calling said:
You have to admire the success of this annual piece of self-promotion bollocks.


I see some people - including the BBC - have sometimes taken to referring to it as 'Sports Personality of the Year', as if it's not a BBC contrivence ('personality' ? wtf).

Are people who's sport hasn't appeared on BBC tv allowed to win ?

the award was concieved when BBC were the kings in terms of sports. They had pretty much all sports bar wrestling with Big Daddy.
 
PieEye said:
why does the sport have to cost little to mean that succeeding in it is worthwhile?
Because more people are given the opportunity to participate in it? Meaning any success is therefore more meaningful, and not just because you are one of the very few that can afford to compete?
 
lighterthief said:
Because more people are given the opportunity to participate in it? Meaning any success is therefore more meaningful, and not just because you are one of the very few that can afford to compete?


well if thats the case what about bloody rowing, its hardly an accessible sport to the working class either........
 
haylz said:
well if thats the case what about bloody rowing, its hardly an accessible sport to the working class either........

Or motor racing for that matter. I think this argument's going round in circles ...
 
Dubversion said:
1). as has already been pointed out, she's holding two major titles at once.
2). why should the size of a sport disbar somebody from being recognised.

To use your Mercury analogy, wouldn't you like to see someone from an under-represented genre - breakcore, say - get the nod rather than another big indie band?


1.)Joe Calzaghe is holding 2 major titles at once, he is the best pound for pound British boxer, he gave a boxing masterclass to "the next Mike Tyson" and he is unbeaten in 42 fights in a sport that is a lot more physically demanding than glorified pony trekking.

2.)No problem with the size of the sport but Calzaghe would have been a more deserving winner.
 
Buds said:
1.)Joe Calzaghe is holding 2 major titles at once, he is the best pound for pound British boxer, he gave a boxing masterclass to "the next Mike Tyson" and he is unbeaten in 42 fights in a sport that is a lot more physically demanding than glorified pony trekking.

2.)No problem with the size of the sport but Calzaghe would have been a more deserving winner.


that's fine - i never once said Phillips deserved to win. What I said is that the inclusiveness of the sport she participates in, and her background, shouldn't be factors.
 
Buds said:
1.)Joe Calzaghe is holding 2 major titles at once, he is the best pound for pound British boxer, he gave a boxing masterclass to "the next Mike Tyson" and he is unbeaten in 42 fights in a sport that is a lot more physically demanding than glorified pony trekking.

Sorry but you know fuck all about eventing if that's what you think :D
 
trashpony said:
Sorry but you know fuck all about eventing if that's what you think :D


You obviously know fuck all about boxing if you think less physically demanding than horse riding.
 
Buds said:
You obviously know fuck all about boxing if you think less physically demanding than horse riding.

I freely admit I know fuck all about it. Which is why I wouldn't make stupid statements comparing it to a scrap in the pub :)
 
trashpony said:
I freely admit I know fuck all about it. Which is why I wouldn't make stupid statements comparing it to a scrap in the pub :)

lol, thats funny... The overall descision did surprise me, but that could be down to my ignorance
 
Why all the fuss? This isn't some kind of nomination from the establishment to one of their own, it was voted for by the Great British Public, so, just 'cos your favourite didn't get it that's tough.....

...... and don't blame me, I voted for Monty, he didn't win but I'm not going to whinge about it... :D
 
nightowl said:
i've yet to meet one person who says they voted for her. fix?

Why would 'they' bother?

How many people do you know admits to watching X factor, reading the Sun or voting Tory..... shed loads of them around unfortunately....
 
Calzaghe didn't get a look in because he's a Taff.

Zara Horseface won because she's a royal. I'm not interested in the validity of the sport versus any other sport, but I do strongly believe that had she been anyone else other than a scion of the house of Saxe Coburg-Gotha, she wouldn't have won.
 
bendeus said:
Calzaghe didn't get a look in because he's a Taff.

Zara Horseface won because she's a royal. I'm not interested in the validity of the sport versus any other sport, but I do strongly believe that had she been anyone else other than a scion of the house of Saxe Coburg-Gotha, she wouldn't have won.


Bollocks - as the other, non-royal equestrian winners in the past demonstrate.

1/10. could do better
 
Back
Top Bottom