Epic Failure

Thankfully not a problem I'll have, unless I use a VPN. Unfortunately, I have to put up with the US commentators. Which is always fun.

Sorry, I realise that I worded my response poorly. I wasn't disputing what you were saying was true. After you posted I went to the WA website and looked at the various listings. So I wasn't doubting you. I was just saying that if the GBR coaches actually follow through with that in the 4x100m (as opposed to it just being a place holder/incorrect early form from WA), I might cry. I very much hope I'm wrong but I have serious doubts that a 4x100m team with both of them in it would qualify. Which would be a huge shame as I think that we absolutely would be in medal contention in the final if we got there.

Cost cutting at the Beeb has reached new levels...doesn't even cover travel expenses... https://www.bbc.com/sport/articles/cv2g4led1rwo

I tend to be the same but in reverse . I'm naturally pessimistic but I tend to always look for the counter point. Which makes me become more optimistic.

Obviously form will play a part but Richards has consistently been faster than Scott over 100m the last couple of years. Even with Duncan's relay prowess, it would be something of a shock if we made that change. Not completely unlikely, obviously.

So I have to defend myself here. My initial comment in this portion of the thread was simply saying that both you and CB had missed Tom from your lists of possible medalists. Nothing more. There was no negativity there. You responded defending why you had excluded him (fair enough) and I responded with why I think he shouldn't be excluded (also, I would argue fair enough). I don't class that as splitting hairs for hairs sake. I don't believe that you are disagreeing for disagreeing's sake/trying to put me in my place and I'd hope that you would afford me the same courtesy in assessing my motives. Any negativity that has come out in this discussion has been as a result of us both further defending our respective positions - which are at odds with each other obviously - and which has led to each of us simply digging in further, so to speak. Which, again, I do not dispute my part in. But I would say - and I mean this with all due respect - it takes two to tango. This was hardly a one sided discussion. It would be a shame if you decided not to continue posting. I don't have to agree with someone's positions but that doesn't mean that I don't want to hear the opposing views to my own.

I don't dispute your detective work but if they sacrifice the men's 4x1 like that, I might actually cry. Picking both him and Jack in that seems a risk too far, especially with Cohoon, Dean and Whittle all being there.

I mean, if we are being fair, your response was to suggest that I was claiming that Tom was more favoured than Duncan. And *then* you added agree to disagree. You continued the argument first, then tried to shut it down. If we're being fair. Also, if we're talking about not letting it lie and trying to draw a line under it, what do you think my initial "agree to disagree" was an attempt to do? Yes, I'm a dull man with time on my hands. But I'm a consistent dull man. And everything that you are (correctly) accusing me of, you are doing exactly the same. Just saying.

In fairness, I said agree to disagree and your response was to continue the argument. Don't blame me for continuing the discussion when you are doing exactly the same...

Sigh. I'm not saying Tom is favoured to finish ahead of Duncan. I've not made that argument once. What I think is illogical is that you are discarding Tom's chances based on the times of the others, but not Duncan's chances as well. The same people are ahead of them both on time. The only advantage Duncan has is that there is slightly less of a gap for him to close to those folk. Hence my last comment that he "should be almost as much of an outsider". The key word in that is almost! For the sake of clarity - I 100% agree that Duncan is more favoured than Tom. I 100% agree that Tom has a smaller chance overall. I just believe that there is a better chance of them coming silver (Duncan) and bronze (Tom) than you do!

Just because an athlete has performed at PB level during a season doesn't mean that they will continue to do so. Nor is the opposite guaranteed to happen. Some athletes time their taper better than others. By your logic, Duncan should be almost as much of an outsider as Tom, given his best in the last 12 months is a 1:55.9, which is substantially slower than Wang and Marchand, and at least a couple of tenths slower than both Casas and Foster. But you aren't writing Duncan off in the same way. Just seems a touch inconsistent, that's all. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

If anyone wants to donate money to help me to buy an angry octopus, let me know.

I mean he swam 2 tenths quicker at trials this year than he did last year before he went on to medal. Hardly terrible form. Again, I'm not hanging a medal around his neck but he certainly should be in the list of serious possible medalists. If Angharad is in the list as a possible medalist with the 6th best time of those competing in Paris, then Tom deserves to be with the 7th best!

Tom may not have the best time, but he's bronze medalist from the most recent real WC (ie not Doha), where he beat all 3 of Wang, Casas and Foster in a 1:56.07! I agree that the competition is fierce but I would argue that his proven record of championship performances deserves some respect. For me he's below the top bracket of expectation (Richards, Peaty, Proud etc) but ahead of the as-yet-unproven at Champ levels (Morgan, Evans etc)

That was sort of my point. I think the total number of medals is likely to be pretty accurate but I'm not remotely convinced that I got the colours right. One easy example to show what I was doing is that I have Molly Caudrey down for bronze. It certainly wouldn't be a shock if that's where she finished, but neither would it surprise me if she were a top the podium.

I mean 2021 was definitely a missed opportunity. But that's sport! But within reason it is also the nature of cup competitions as well. They tend to even the odds more than a league campaign does (which is why the big clubs want the CL to be more like a league/they tried to shoot off to the Superleague). I just don't attribute our failings to our mentality - if we were really weak in that area I don't think we would have made successive Euro finals. And our past history of being good but not great shows that the current crop is hardly letting the side down, so to speak. If we had been serial winners in the past, I'd say our current 'failings' would be more worthy of criticism.

Just back home from Boston, where we saw the Red Sox muller the A's last week. The most one sided game I've ever watched live. The kind of game that was crying out for a mercy rule.

I don't think it is down to not having a winning mentality, so much as it is that we're just not *that* good. We're good, but we're not true world beaters. Our club football has been greatly enhanced by all the foreign players. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we're some kind of minnows. But we're not or , or 21st century . It's worth noting that pre-Southgate we had only reached the SFs of either Euros/WC on 3 occasions in our entire history and 2 of those were when we hosted the tournament. The football may not be pretty at times - and we've had some lucky draws - but Southgate has got to 2 Euro finals, a WC SF and QF. For an England manager that's a heck of an impressive record. Anywho, fair play to - clearly the best team in the tournament and in Rodri have arguably the best player in the world right now, imo.

I've not done my total predictions yet but I've done and came up with 13G, 13S, 33B. It seems that I was trying not to be too much of a 'homer', but the total number of medals is roughly in line with other predictions - somewhere between 55-60 seems to be what most people are expecting. The breakdown by colour is obviously the great unknown.

You've both missed Tom Dean in the 200 IM.

It's worth noting that those runs from Lina, Jessie and Bianca and others were from La Chaux de Fonds. Which has a...questionable reputation amongst athletics fans. Good for head to head comparisons between those there but I wouldn't pay much attention to the raw times themselves. It's the track equivalent of the distances done in Ramona. That being said, Lina being ahead of VO is good for her claims to a relay spot no matter the circumstances.

I agree, but my point (which, again, is me rambling more than anything else) is that Tom has a better shot than Jacob, imo. Not as good as Matt obviously but a shot. Who knows, maybe Tom didn't want the spot either, like Duncan? Lots of moving parts that we don't know about. Assuming that Guliano hasn't dropped the 100m - in which case his replacement would be some unknown called Caeleb Dressel! - then he would be the only US swimmer impacted by the 100m/4x200m conflict. The rest of their 4x2 swimmers aren't sprinters really.

7th actually, I believe. But I think you missed my point. I think it is a tough ask for any of them to pull out! I agree that Matt has the best chance in the 100, but Tom is no slouch. And having both of them completely fresh would absolutely be the best thing for the relay. If the coaching was truly 100% laser focused on the relay, it would be doing nothing that might endanger that medal. Just absent minded chatter on my part really though. I'm not actually really critical of the decision.

I said maybe 6th because Jimmy pulled out of the 100m final at trials, so we don't know where his form is on that, although I take the point that Whittle is the quicker swimmer generally. I still think he's very lucky to get the swim over Cohoon. If they are really going 100% on the 4x2 relay, surprised they didn't ask Richards to drop the 100 as well! He was a DNS in Tokyo in the same situation. Agree that they are likely wary of Joe on the 100 free relay. The 4x2 relay gives the most leeway for him to have a poor swim but they might not risk having both him and MacMillan in the heat. If they put him in the medley, I think that only works if Peaty is in the heat as well. I guess in theory, they have the mixed medley to play with as well.

I mean Guy is our best fly swimmer in theory, so on that front it makes sense. But Whittle is arguably only 6th in the 100 free at the moment. I get Scott dropping it but I'm surprised it didn't go to Dean or Cohoon instead (less so Cohoon with him having the 50). Dean's schedule especially is not heavy this time around without the 200m free. I worry greatly if we put Joe in the freestyle relay. In order of relay safety, I'd say the 200m free is the safest to have him in, then the medley and then the freestyle.