Orangehair43

I can see changes to the system coming.. The race to the games doesn’t really work when half in it can’t take up their place.

I can see changes to the system coming.. The race to the games doesn’t really work when half in it can’t take up their place.

Some of them will. There was a lot of debate at the World Indoors

Be amazed if GB would agree.

She would have to take three years out through.

And next year for the worlds the standard will probably 78.00 or higher.

I would be amazed if they give anyone lean way.

And someone GB are lucky to have as he could have switched to Switzerland through parentage. This policy could well send some younger athletes to switching as teens.

A few others as well.

But the memories of Farah will still be there - so when Steve Cram has to mention there is no Brits there it will seem slightly odd. It’s funny two of our more dominant athletes events are now areas where we poor.

If they hit or exceed the medal target one suspects the standard will be even tougher going forward. Probably World or Olympic final qualification standard for all events like swimming is.

It’s shocking we have no one in the M 10000. And that will be noticed as it’s a single race and takes 30 mins of the evening.

We’re we not targeting 60 a few days ago. No we could be sub 45?

How many younger athletes have GB ever actually taken in Athletics?

He might be one of those pencilled in for a possible group interview.

The general public will notice when there are track events without a single British entrant even the heats and the filed events are a mess. If the team gets the medals it’s expected to those issues won’t matter through but if things do not go quite as well and the medal count is down things could get a lot of notice. A lot of pressure comes on the medal hopefuls. This also is linked to the wider entire games GB performance. Get above 50 - 55 medals and everything will be seen as reasonably successful but below that and questions will get asked about the funding model and if it’s sustainable.

Can we keep a list of those whose we expect to have invites rejected in the name of raising standards/ cost cutting.

Weather it’s true or not Athletes feel as if it’s cost cutting - particularly unpopular is the accepting invites in some events but not others as that is seen as trying to get a specific number going and hide some of the issues. Also if leads to some athletes being higher ranked in their event and having their invite rejected while the highest ranked British athlete in another event is lower ranked but goes because they in an event where they want someone in so will accept an invite or have a UKA standard that is lower and more achievable than the one created for their event. It’s not like swimming where the UK standard is based on a set 100% constant formula.

Only hidden in their website. But if they tweeted these are all the people invited and named them it then looks even more petty when associations reject them.

I think World Athletics should publicly announce who they have invited. Then national associations have to openly reject someone’s invite.

Yes it did and yes it probably will.

Well I know for a fact from talking to one that a group interview is being strongly considered by a group who think they will see their invites rejected. Obviously won’t be successful but unlike just individuals speaking out a whole group speaking out will generate a bit more coverage.

I’m not sure it will be when they are several events without a British competitor and the general public are told UK athletics were offered spots and rejected them

They changed those policies to fill a few spots so they don’t look too cost cutting.

I don’t think they realise just how angry some are and how outspoken some will be. The BBC are very welcoming to those complaining about selecton issues