Epic Failure

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)

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!

I can’t wait to show you my beautiful country and our beautiful capital of Paris. I hope you will be satisfied with our opening ceremony 

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 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.

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 could live with it if it were even as generous as the old B standard, which usually meant you could only bring 1 in the event, not three - so if you get two or three invites in an event, I can see the argument for going, ok Nuttall, Norman, Purchase, Strickler, Norris, yer in - but Kenny, Verity etc, sorry but we only take one invite per event - at least then the 'leading brit' represents the country.

Okoye has hit the UKA Q this season, at the DL in Doha. The current form criterion says athletes have to be "at or near" the standard between April 1st and June 30th. So he has done that. He's also been "near" on other occasions.
 
Obviously that criterion is there to give them an out, so to speak. But I don't think he's that much at risk.
 
Personally, I'd take everyone. But even if that wasn't going to happen, of those likely to miss out, Norris, Purchase and Hunt in the 200m are no brainers for me.
 
Hunt being in the 200m means that you can select Lansiquot in the 100m with no issue as well as Henry and Philip in the relay squad. Which allows Dina/Daryll more rest if they get to finals. As it is, assuming that we select Lansiquot, only 2 of the 3 others would be selected. Which also means we have to use one of Daryll or Dina in the heats (unless we use an out of form Bianca Williams).

UK Athletics Champs 2024
 
The following are essentially 100% qualified. They finished top 2 at the trials, and have either a WA Q, or have a UKA Q and are safely in a ranking spot, unless there are some crazy results this weekend elsewhere.
 
Men
 
100m - Louis Hinchliffe, Jeremiah Azu
400m - Charlie Dobson
800m - Ben Pattison, Max Burgin
1500m - Neil Gourley, George Mills
5000m - Patrick Dever
400m Hurdles - Alistair Chalmers - the luckiest man in Britain - was DQed for a false start, ran under protest, ran the Q time and was reinstated later!
Long Jump - Jacob Fincham-Dukes
Discus - Nicholas Percy
Shot Put - Scott Lincoln
 
Women
 
100m - Daryll Neita
200m - Dina Asher-Smith, Daryll Neita
400m - Amber Anning, Laviai Nielsen
800m - Phoebe Gill, Jemma Reekie
1500m - Georgia Bell, Laura Muir
100m Hurdles - Cindy Sember
3000m SC - Elizabeth Bird
High Jump - Morgan Lake
Pole Vault - Molly Caudrey
 
There are others who will definitely be picked if fit but did not compete this weekend (or did not run their chosen event), such as Josh Kerr, Matt Hudson-Smith and Keely Hodgkinson.
 
Then there are others who didn't get top 2 here but have the Q (Imani Lansiquot for example) - they will be sweating this week.
 
Between those athletes and relay runners I expect the final team size to be around 55-60.
 
Then there are a chunk of people who will get a WA invite but which will be rejected by UKA. Because 'reasons'. Sigh.

UK Athletics Champs 2024 Day 1
 
Men
 
100m - Louis Hinchliffe, Jeremiah Azu
Long Jump - Jacob Fincham-Dukes
Discus - Nicholas Percy
Shot Put - Scott Lincoln
 
Women
 
100m - Daryll Neita
100m Hurdles - Cindy Sember
3000m SC - Elizabeth Bird
Pole Vault - Molly Caudrey
 
Some of the above are 100% guaranteed, some have met the UK Athletics criteria but will be waiting for the WA invite to be 100% sure but I'm including them here.
 
There are other athletes who either have the Q but who weren't competing here (Dina Asher-Smith in the 100m for example), or are in an event where UKA - in their infinite wisdom - don't accept the invites. Sigh.

From a pov, Tom Pidcock in the MTB is probably up there. In that sport with the risk of injury/puncture there is never a guarantee but if he gets around on the bike without incident, I don't see him being beaten.
 
in diving is usually a lock for most of the events.
 
Summer in the 400IM is about as sure bet as you can get.

Not officially confirmed yet (team is due to be announced on Friday), but unless UK Athletics ignore their own policy that they have needlessly put in place, it's going to happen.
 
So if Zaltos stays in that spot in the rankings, he should move up into the qualifying spots once it all shakes out.

1. At home, cursing the world as I wake up at 3am thanks to my timezone.
 
2. , , - all 3 for family reasons essentially. I also will support any athlete over the age of 35, because I feel a kinship based on aging bones.

1. At home, cursing the world as I wake up at 3am thanks to my timezone.
 
2. , , - all 3 for family reasons essentially. I also will support any athlete over the age of 35, because I feel a kinship based on aging bones.

1. At home, cursing the world as I wake up at 3am thanks to my timezone.
 
2. , , - all 3 for family reasons essentially. I also will support any athlete over the age of 35, because I feel a kinship based on aging bones.

77.50m. So neither Norris nor Ikeji will make it. Frustratingly.

I would be shocked if they *were* selected. Once you start carving out exceptions for those who are close, you lose the justification to reject those further away.
 
History has shown they won't take close examples - they didn't take Lina Nielsen to the Worlds last year and she was only 0.06 off the Q mark.

100%
 
UKA treat a ranking invite as if it were the old 'B' standard - which only shows they don't understand the system. The ranking is actually supposed to be the main way to qualify, with the 'A' standard there to catch elite athletes who have slipped down the rankings through injury or inactivity. of course, it hasn't worked out that way in practice but the qualification for the 100m for men, for example, is 10 secs flat. That is ridiculous if you consider it the 'basic' qualification standard.
 
I actually hope WA move on this eventually, but I'll add only this. The USA accepts ranking invites. They don't believe in excellence?
 
The athletes who will likely miss out; Amelia Strickler-Campbell, Shot, Anna Purchase, possibly Charlotte Payne, hammer, Phil Norman Steeple chase, Hannah Nuttall and Verity Ockenden 5000

That works in a handful of events where we have strength in depth. But it is an approach that can have a bunch of downsides, some obvious, some less obvious.
 
Firstly, it's worth noting that the WA Q are intended to be difficult to achieve - they want half the field to qualify on time, the other half on ranking. So using the ranking isn't an easy way out.
 
Let's use Anna Purchase as an example. She has neither the WA nor the UKA standard. However, she is ranked 16th in the world. On top of that, she was 8th at the Euros this month. And was 11th in Budapest. She's not going to taken to Paris. Instead less talented athletes from other countries will take that spot.
 
Is that really what we want? If so, why are we taking, say, Amber Anning? After all, she's only 9th on time this year, so she might not make a final, right? Do we only take people we think are going to get medals?
 
Secondly, you never know when an athlete might break out. Let's use the French heptathlete from Rome, Auriana Lazraq-Khlass. She went into that competition with a PB of just over 6200. She then went crazy in Rome, winning a silver medal and setting a PB by 400 points. I mention that because last year Jade O'Dowda missed Budapest by a small margin like that because UKA wanted a higher score, even though she had a WA invite. Who is to say that she could not have had a breakout last year if she was selected? If athletics was so predictable, we wouldn't watch it.
 
Thirdly, there is the argument about experience. Sophie Hitchon went to several World and Olympic meets before she finally broke through for her medal. Likewise Holly Bradshaw. Can it not be said that the experience of the unsuccesful champs might have paid off eventually with the successful ones?
 
Finally, and this one is more subjective, but I firmly believe we should take all those who qualify, especially in events where we don't have strength in depth. What if seeing someone represent your country in, say, the shot were to inspire a young kid? If we stop sending those athletes, we risk the next generation being uninspired.
 
Representing one's country should be something we encourage. This policy does nothing but discourage people. It's a terrible policy in my opinion.
 

That works in a handful of events where we have strength in depth. But it is an approach that can have a bunch of downsides, some obvious, some less obvious.
 
Firstly, it's worth noting that the WA Q are intended to be difficult to achieve - they want half the field to qualify on time, the other half on ranking. So using the ranking isn't an easy way out.
 
Let's use Anna Purchase as an example. She has neither the WA nor the UKA standard. However, she is ranked 16th in the world. On top of that, she was 8th at the Euros this month. And was 11th in Budapest. She's not going to taken to Paris. Instead less talented athletes from other countries will take that spot.
 
Is that really what we want? If so, why are we taking, say, Amber Anning? After all, she's only 9th on time this year, so she might not make a final, right? Do we only take people we think are going to get medals?
 
Secondly, you never know when an athlete might break out. Let's use the French heptathlete from Rome, Auriana Lazraq-Khlass. She went into that competition with a PB of just over 6200. She then went crazy in Rome, winning a silver medal and setting a PB by 400 points. I mention that because last year Jade O'Dowda missed Budapest by a small margin like that because UKA wanted a higher score, even though she had a WA invite. Who is to say that she could not have had a breakout last year if she was selected? If athletics was so predictable, we wouldn't watch it.
 
Thirdly, there is the argument about experience. Sophie Hitchon went to several World and Olympic meets before she finally broke through for her medal. Likewise Holly Bradshaw. Can it not be said that the experience of the unsuccesful champs might have paid off eventually with the successful ones?
 
Finally, and this one is more subjective, but I firmly believe we should take all those who qualify, especially in events where we don't have strength in depth. What if seeing someone represent your country in, say, the shot were to inspire a young kid? If we stop sending those athletes, we risk the next generation being uninspired.
 
Representing one's country should be something we encourage. This policy does nothing but discourage people. It's a terrible policy in my opinion.
 

Assuming that I believe that what you are saying is 100% true - and I have my doubts considering your track record of accuracy in some of your claims is...not the best - it still doesn't change the central point that I'm making, which is that the evidence doesn't support that it will make a blind bit of difference.
 
I'd love to be wrong. I'd love for the public to be up in arms and force a change. But it ain't gonna happen.

things that didn't happen, and wont happen ^^ 

Yeah, I don't know where that has come from. The team is being selected on Monday, then announced on Friday. The next DL isn't until the Sunday after that.
 
Chalmers might be in a ranking position when the final list is released, but UKA isn't accepting that in the 400m H.

Just got even worse. Wightman out.
 
Bradshaw has the UKA Q and is in a quota spot, so she's probably fine.

Mills has dropped the 5k for just the 1500m here.
 
Pozzi out of the hurdles, which is a shame, although if they did want to select him I guess there's nothing stopping them. No Aimee Pratt either.
 
For what it is worth (not much), here's my thoughts:
 
100m - (M) Azu, Hinchliffe, Glave ;  (W) Neita, Hunt, Wedderurn-Goodison
200m - (M) MHS, Quainoo, Efoloko ; (W) DAS, Neita, Agyapong
400m - (M) Dobson, Carvell, Smith ; (W) Anning, Nielsen, Ohuruogo
800m - (M) Pattison, Giles, Sharman-Newell ; (W) Reekie, Gill, Baker
1500m - (M) Wightman, Gourley, Mills ; (W) Muir, Bell, Walcott-Nolan
5000m - (M) Dever, Atkin, Rowe ; (W) Fry, Nuttall, Fitzgerald
3000m SC - (M) Norman, Seddon, Pierce ; (W) Bird, Thorner, Tank
110m H - (M) Bennett, Ojora, King, : (W) Sember, Pawlett, Wakefield
400m H - (M) Chalmers, Faulds, Derbyshire ; (W) Nielsen, Knight, Newnham
 
HJ - (M) JCK, Grimsey, Jack (W) Lake, KJT, Ferguson
PV - (M) Heard, Hague, Coppell ; (W) Caudrey, Bradshaw, Ashurst
LJ - (M) JFD, Farquhson, Fortheringham ; (W) Hopkins, Irozuru, Olajide
TJ - (M) Falode, Ajala, Bright-Davies ; (W) Ojora, Metzger, Omitowoju
 
SP - (M) Lincoln, Cameron, Swan ; (W) Vincent, Omoregie, Campbell
Discus - (M) Okoye, Percy, Thompson ; (W) Lally, Law, Oladipo
Hammer - (M) Norris, Ikeji, T Campbell; (W) Purchase, Payne, Mayho
Javelin - (M) East, Evans, Bainbridge ; (W) Walton, F Jones, A Jones