:.
Sports news Part 2
Moving onto cricket, and the controversial Sydney Test match between Australia and India continues to stimulate debate, argument and the occasional slur between the nations. It's an issue that has undoubtedly simmered for a long time and needed only slight prompting to come to the surface. In this case, that prompting was provided by an alleged racial insult made by an Indian player (Harbhajan Singh) towards an Australian with West Indian heritage (Andrew Symonds).
The reports in the media have evolved (some would say devolved) into a collection of insults, allegations and threats, including the possibility that the entire Tour would be called off mid-way through! Thankfully, that has not happened, though the means by which the ICC managed to save the Tour (sacking the umpire and allowing the Indian spinner Singh to play on despite the ban that was initially issued for his alleged racial slur) sets what is politely being called a "dangerous precedent". Effectively, the governing body has bowed to pressure from the Indian Cricket Board, which is the game's economic powerhouse, and thus possibly the real "governing body" of cricket...
But one thing that I have found interesting is the allegations that are made about the spirit in which Australia plays the game. The Indians alleged that the Aussies are cheats and don't play in the right spirit. Some Australian media and ex-players have even climbed into their own time, others have defended the team. But in doing some reading, I came across this excellent post on a forum (it's the very top post), which I think more accurately than any other captures the reason why teams who win must remain absolutely, utterly beyond reproach when it comes to their behaviour, both on and off the field.
Now, I agree with most of what the posters says - forums often tend to become platforms for people to write uncensored nonsense, but this is a great piece, well put together. I will however say that while I agree with the poster Beatnik, I also think that the Australians have not helped themselves with their off-field behaviour and some of the quotes. For example, now is probably not the time to be suggesting that Australia will not change their attitude towards the game, as the current players have done. They probably shouldn't, I agree, but there's a lot to be said for diplomacy, and even silence sometimes...
As I said, the only thing that can be guaranteed is that when you win, people will attack you, and so leaving the door even a crack open is enough for the masses to charge it down. But let's hope that now that cricket will continue, the situation can be resolved and the game can emerge with minimal scarring. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that is the naieve optimist in me speaking...
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Cricket. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Cricket. Tampilkan semua postingan
Rabu, 09 Januari 2008
Pistorius decision due
Sports news part 5
In December last year, the IAAF issued a press statement saying that the decision around Pistorius' eligibility to run in Beijing would be made on 10 January. I have since read that the decision is to be delayed until the 12th, to allow Pistorius time to respond to the IAAF's decision.
It's one of the more poorly kept secrets around, since apparently, the lead researcher on the case, Prof Bruggemann, has said that the carbon fibre "Cheetahs" offer a considerable advantage to Pistorius. So it seems the IAAF is preparing for a challenge to the ruling, which is a highly costly affair (the testing they paid for cost between 70,000 and 100,000 dollars), and also, the expertise they had in Prof Bruggemann must rank as the best in the world. Finally, it's been theoretically argued that the limbs would provide the "considerable advantage" that has now been proven, so it's difficult to see what avenues he can pursue.
Now, this is an issue we've covered many times here at The Science of Sport, and we'll certainly wrap it up with analysis when that report is eventually released and we have a final decision.
In December last year, the IAAF issued a press statement saying that the decision around Pistorius' eligibility to run in Beijing would be made on 10 January. I have since read that the decision is to be delayed until the 12th, to allow Pistorius time to respond to the IAAF's decision.
It's one of the more poorly kept secrets around, since apparently, the lead researcher on the case, Prof Bruggemann, has said that the carbon fibre "Cheetahs" offer a considerable advantage to Pistorius. So it seems the IAAF is preparing for a challenge to the ruling, which is a highly costly affair (the testing they paid for cost between 70,000 and 100,000 dollars), and also, the expertise they had in Prof Bruggemann must rank as the best in the world. Finally, it's been theoretically argued that the limbs would provide the "considerable advantage" that has now been proven, so it's difficult to see what avenues he can pursue.
Now, this is an issue we've covered many times here at The Science of Sport, and we'll certainly wrap it up with analysis when that report is eventually released and we have a final decision.
Minggu, 06 Januari 2008
Cricket: State of the Game
The state of the game of cricket - emotions run high and perspective is lost
Cricket is a not a topic that we cover very much here at The Science of Sport. Most of our readers probably don't follow it, but being a South African, where cricket is one of the big three sports, I had to do a post on it today, and tie it into something I was writing the other day about team sports, character and moral fibre of champion teams. So even those who wonder what cricket is (Robin Williams called it "baselball on tranquilizers"!) do read on, there's more to this than simply a cricket discussion.
Australia beats India, and all hell breaks loose
Those who follow the game will have seen that Australia won their 16th consecutive test match yesterday, beating India in what was one of the most incredible and dramatic finishes to a Test Match that we have ever seen. The Indians, batting last, needed to survive the final day and fell about 7 balls short of doing so. It was magnificent entertainment and a great advert for the game.
However, no sooner had the Australian champagne corks fallen to the floor and the accusations began to fly. The allegations are numerous and varied, you can read them here if you wish, but basically, they revolve around two or three contentious incidents during the match.
The incidents - interpreted in the eye of the beholder
In the first incident, Ricky Ponting took a catch but the TV replays showed that the ball had touched the ground while in Ponting's hand. According to the rules, this is not a fair catch. Now, thankfully, the batsmen was not given out in this situation, and so the incident is argued distinct from the result of the match.
Not as distinct is the second incident, where the Australian fielder Michael Clarke claimed a low catch off Sourav Ganguly, and amidst doubt over whether the ball had been caught, it was Ponting who informed the umpire that the catch had been taken. This after Clarke had clearly indicated that he believed he had caught the ball. Nothing remarkable here, until you know that before the matches began, the Indian and Australian captains had agreed that they would follow an "honesty" principle when it came to these catches. Therefore, both captains agreed that they would be honest when it came to low catches, so quite why the Australians are now being accused of cheating is beyond me. For what it's worth, TV replays were inconclusive, as they usually are, but certainly do not suggest that the catch was unfair, as is now being claimed.
But more importantly, can you think of another sport where there is a verbal agreement between opposing teams that an "honesty policy" is implemented? Our readers in the USA, can you imagine if a batter would volunteer to give himself out if he felt the pitch was over the plate? Or that a wide receiver would admit to being out of bounds when he made a catch? Of course, it's a ridiculous notion, precisely because it gives the loser a platform to complain from. The winner will always enjoy the honesty system, the loser will resent it. And hence we have these accusations.
A justified disappointment, but irrational reactions
It simply does not add up. Now, one is tempted to dismiss the Indian rants as those of bad losers. But one does have to acknowledge that they do have a right to feel unhappy and upset about the result against Australia - the umpiring was poor and India deserved to get out of the match with at least a draw. Australia were, to be blunt, lucky. But how about this reaction from an Indian "expert" in a TV debate following the game:
And if you thought it was just some fans who were unhappy, the Indian team then threatened to pull out of the Tour to Australia based on the perceived injustices, including the 'incompetent umpiring'! This all against the backdrop of one of the Indian players being suspended for alleged racist remarks against Australia's Andrew Symonds, which is also threatening the status of the Tour.
When people react in this way, it's difficult to listen to anything else they say. For the Indians, their reaction displays a hypocrisy of enormous proportions, because rather than playing in the spirit of the game, they are holding their team to ransom, issuing death threats against umpires who "cost them the match", and generally behaving like 11-year olds after a school match gone wrong.
And so while the Australians are wrong to fight back, and don't endear themselves to anyone with their sometimes righteous attitude (it is of course easy to be perceived as righteous when you're winning all the time). This is where I do think that the Australians could take a lesson out of the professional book of behaviour from the NFL teams, who, as mentioned last week, have recognized that it's the TEAM character and virtue that is key to success on and off the field. It's all good and well to talk about individuals and their integrity, but it's the collective team integrity that is not optimally managed. I personally believe that Australia have this more correct than any other team (the sight of Andre Nel, Dale Steyn, Smith and Mark Boucher of South Africa verbally screaming at and abusing batsmen this past weekend was frankly embarassing and typical of the boorish attitude they have shown for years). But take a leaf out of the book of the Patriots, Packers and Cowboys, and we'll all be better off.
So let's hope that common sense prevails and people learn to be a little more analytical and thoughtful about sport, which is, after all, just a game.
Ross
Cricket is a not a topic that we cover very much here at The Science of Sport. Most of our readers probably don't follow it, but being a South African, where cricket is one of the big three sports, I had to do a post on it today, and tie it into something I was writing the other day about team sports, character and moral fibre of champion teams. So even those who wonder what cricket is (Robin Williams called it "baselball on tranquilizers"!) do read on, there's more to this than simply a cricket discussion.Australia beats India, and all hell breaks loose
Those who follow the game will have seen that Australia won their 16th consecutive test match yesterday, beating India in what was one of the most incredible and dramatic finishes to a Test Match that we have ever seen. The Indians, batting last, needed to survive the final day and fell about 7 balls short of doing so. It was magnificent entertainment and a great advert for the game.
However, no sooner had the Australian champagne corks fallen to the floor and the accusations began to fly. The allegations are numerous and varied, you can read them here if you wish, but basically, they revolve around two or three contentious incidents during the match.
The incidents - interpreted in the eye of the beholder
In the first incident, Ricky Ponting took a catch but the TV replays showed that the ball had touched the ground while in Ponting's hand. According to the rules, this is not a fair catch. Now, thankfully, the batsmen was not given out in this situation, and so the incident is argued distinct from the result of the match.
Not as distinct is the second incident, where the Australian fielder Michael Clarke claimed a low catch off Sourav Ganguly, and amidst doubt over whether the ball had been caught, it was Ponting who informed the umpire that the catch had been taken. This after Clarke had clearly indicated that he believed he had caught the ball. Nothing remarkable here, until you know that before the matches began, the Indian and Australian captains had agreed that they would follow an "honesty" principle when it came to these catches. Therefore, both captains agreed that they would be honest when it came to low catches, so quite why the Australians are now being accused of cheating is beyond me. For what it's worth, TV replays were inconclusive, as they usually are, but certainly do not suggest that the catch was unfair, as is now being claimed.
But more importantly, can you think of another sport where there is a verbal agreement between opposing teams that an "honesty policy" is implemented? Our readers in the USA, can you imagine if a batter would volunteer to give himself out if he felt the pitch was over the plate? Or that a wide receiver would admit to being out of bounds when he made a catch? Of course, it's a ridiculous notion, precisely because it gives the loser a platform to complain from. The winner will always enjoy the honesty system, the loser will resent it. And hence we have these accusations.
A justified disappointment, but irrational reactions
It simply does not add up. Now, one is tempted to dismiss the Indian rants as those of bad losers. But one does have to acknowledge that they do have a right to feel unhappy and upset about the result against Australia - the umpiring was poor and India deserved to get out of the match with at least a draw. Australia were, to be blunt, lucky. But how about this reaction from an Indian "expert" in a TV debate following the game:
"If Steve Bucknor walks the streets of Mumbai he would not be alive after an hour."Come again? Did I read that right? Are we saying that a game of sport is so serious, so important, and human error so bad, that people will be killed for their mistakes? In my country, when people get mugged and killed for 100 dollars it would be considered an outrage, never mind over a cricket match.
And if you thought it was just some fans who were unhappy, the Indian team then threatened to pull out of the Tour to Australia based on the perceived injustices, including the 'incompetent umpiring'! This all against the backdrop of one of the Indian players being suspended for alleged racist remarks against Australia's Andrew Symonds, which is also threatening the status of the Tour.
When people react in this way, it's difficult to listen to anything else they say. For the Indians, their reaction displays a hypocrisy of enormous proportions, because rather than playing in the spirit of the game, they are holding their team to ransom, issuing death threats against umpires who "cost them the match", and generally behaving like 11-year olds after a school match gone wrong.
And so while the Australians are wrong to fight back, and don't endear themselves to anyone with their sometimes righteous attitude (it is of course easy to be perceived as righteous when you're winning all the time). This is where I do think that the Australians could take a lesson out of the professional book of behaviour from the NFL teams, who, as mentioned last week, have recognized that it's the TEAM character and virtue that is key to success on and off the field. It's all good and well to talk about individuals and their integrity, but it's the collective team integrity that is not optimally managed. I personally believe that Australia have this more correct than any other team (the sight of Andre Nel, Dale Steyn, Smith and Mark Boucher of South Africa verbally screaming at and abusing batsmen this past weekend was frankly embarassing and typical of the boorish attitude they have shown for years). But take a leaf out of the book of the Patriots, Packers and Cowboys, and we'll all be better off.
So let's hope that common sense prevails and people learn to be a little more analytical and thoughtful about sport, which is, after all, just a game.
Ross
Selasa, 01 Januari 2008
2008 Preview: Science of Sport in the year ahead
The Crystal ball post: 2008 in Sport
As mentioned yesterday, today we thought we'd do a post looking at the year of sport that lies ahead. Of course, being an Olympic year, the year is centred around 3 weeks in August in Beijing, and I'm sure that come the Olympic Games, we'll pretty much be doing post after post on the events in Beijing. Even leading into Beijing, there will be a great deal of fascinating science of sport content - the heat, the humidity, the pollution, the training programmes, the tactics...and that's all before the events even take place!
Sports science and the Olympics
The field of Sports Science actually owes quite a lot to the Olympic Games. It was the 1968 Mexico City Olympics that gave sports sciences the public profile that they currently "enjoy", because that was really the first time that elite athletes were put into potentially compromising physiological situations with the extreme altitude. Some of the athletes benefited (think Bob Beamon just about jumping right over the long jump pit!), while others did not (Ron Clarke famously collapsed and had to be hospitalized after the 10000m race).
The profile created by these events happened to co-incide with the massive boom in running in the USA, and the field of applied sports sciences, in the public eye, took root! Let's hope that Beijing 2008 does a similar thing - I am sure it will, and here at the Science of Sport, we'll do our best to dig behind the stories to find it!
But Beijing is one of many events and sports to gaze at through our crystal ball. Here are but a few others...
Marathon running in 2008
The big marathons happen in April, October and November, but all eyes will be on Dubai on January 18, where Haile Gebrselassie runs his first marathon since his world record in Berlin. As is usually the case for Geb, he is talking up his chances of another world record. One wonders whether this is the realistic talk, or whether it's marketing hype to raise the profile of the admittedly publicity-hungry Dubai organizers, who have already thrown a truck load of money at the event. If Geb does succeed, he stands to pocket $1.25 million, which includes a $1 million dollar world record bonus.
My prediction for this race is that he'll run a mid 2:05, blame the weather for the failure to run 2:03 (which may or may not be a valid reason), and then return to the more serious business of preparing for Beijing, where he will aim to cap off his career. It's not that Geb doesn't have this 2:04 in him, but in this year, this Dubai marathon is the odd race out - the middle marathon between achieving a life-long goal in Berlin and achieving an even bigger one in Beijing. So don't expect a world record in Dubai (of course, these may be famous last words...!)
What of the other marathons then?
Well, my favourite runner at the moment is Martin Lel, and he's the man to win in London in April this year, defending the title he won last year, and making it three out of the three in the big races. He takes on a star-studded field in London (minus only Geb), but with 63-second final 400m speed, no one will beat him. As for the time, with so many great runners, don't expect anything faster than 2:06 (still unbelievable). I'd guess 2:07-something, with a serious final 2km.
Unfortunately for Boston, the best of the best are all signed up to race in London, so it's a little difficult to pick the winner there. We'll sit on the fence for now and pick a Kenyan, as runners from that country have won 17 of the last 20 editions of that race!
In the Northern Hemisphere autumn, some big races will suffer as a result of the focus of the world on the Olympic Games. But of the few big names left, let's go with Martin Lel to defend his title in New York, and win the World Marathon Series title. For the women, Gete Wami will have her work cut out to defend her title, with a lot depending on whether she races London. And when it comes to women's marathons, it's all eyes back on Paula Radcliffe, who has her sights set on Beijing. Whether this means she'll avoid any other marathons I don't know. If she runs London, she'll win it, and maybe New York at the end of the year, so I'd predict we'll see Lel and Radcliffe atop the podium twice each this year.
The Olympic Marathon
But again, it's all eyes on Beijing. And the Beijing marathons are the hardest to call. It's too early to know who is even going to run, we only know Geb and Baldini for sure. I'm sure Geb will be the massive favourite before the race, but my personal call here is that if you want to bet on anyone, go with a Kenyan who is now based in Japan, or with a South Korean runner who runs a regular 2:07 to 2:08 time. I don't think that Beijing will be the day for the 2:05 men. It's too hot, too humid and too attritional for the fast men, and so they will have to think long and hard about how they prepare.
You may say that a 2:05 guys are the favourites, regardless of the conditions (after all, they are clearly the best/fastest in the field), but the reality is that the situation is likely to be so harsh and attritional that acclimation, local familiarity and preparation will beat speed and pedigree in Beijing. And I feel that habitual acclimation is the key - guys can spend the month before Beijing in Macau or Osaka all they want, but those who live there year round have the upper hand. So if I were a Kenyan selector, the first name down on my team would be Sammy Wanjiru, who is based in Japan (assuming he wants to run), and second down would be Luke Kibet, who won the World title in Osaka, showing he can handle the conditions. They are my favourites.
On the women's side, I'm afraid it doesn't look good for Paula Radcliffe. As much I would love for her to win the Olympic title, I think that heat and humidity, combined with her size (bigger people are severely disadvantaged in hot conditions) and lack of habitual acclimation means that the smart money must be on either Chunxiu Zhou (London champ in 2007), Mizuki Noguchi (defending Olympic Champ), or Catherine Ndereba. Ndereba showed that she can handle the conditions by winning in Osaka, and has shown the ability to get the preparation right for big races - two golds and a silver in the last three big Championship marathons. So Radcliffe will really have her work cut out. I'll go with the Chinese, with Ndereba picking up a minor medal, although I'd love to see Radcliffe win and will be rooting for her.
As we get closer to the time, though, we'll take a closer look at the heat, the humidity and just who's likely to suffer more, survive better, and why...
Cycling - can the Tour stay drug-free, just this once?
As far as cycling goes, we'll stick to the showpiece event, the Tour de France, and when it comes to the Tour, the only thing we can predict with certainty is that drugs will move the riders out of the headlines, yet again. 2007 was a tumultuous year for cycling, with the media and sponsors eventually exerting their muscle by pulling their money out of the sport. Media in many European countries pulled coverage of the Tour off the airwaves and out of the papers, and sponsors dropped their teams by the dozen! Even Discovery, which boasts the winner of 8 of the last 9 tours, failed to find a sponsor, having NEVER even returned a positive test! The sentiment among sponsors may ultimately rescue the sport, by forcing the hand of the organizers, who, frankly, are complicit in the problem.
2007 was actually one of the more exciting Tour de France races. It has been a long time since we saw the jostling, attacking, defending and racing we saw in this year's race, but unfortunately, it was dominated by the positive test of Vinokourov, and the sacking of Michael Rasmussen by his Rabobank team. It took the gloss of the race, but in truth, the gloss is merely varnish applied to a spoiled, warped, rotting surface anyway. So many big names tested positive, retired under doping clouds, or been suspended in 2007 that it's difficult to watch the sport without enormous scepticism. Let's hope 2008 is not the same, but honestly, I doubt it.
So the certain prediction is that the sport will continue to struggle as it attempts to clean up. The biggest problem facing the sport, incidentally, is denial. I saw an interview with Pat McQuaide, head of the UCI, and he denied that the sport had a doping problem. Well, the sponsors seem to think otherwise. So while the UCI bury their head in the sand (as they've done for years), let's hope the sponsors save the sport, in an indirect way.
Perhaps the biggest non-race related event will be to follow the ongoing Floyd Landis story - having failed in arbitration in the USA, Landis was last heard talking about the CAS in Switzerland, and time will tell. And then the million dollar question - will Lance Armstrong stay out of the doping headlines for another year, or could the Armstrong-doper movement gain more momentum in 2008?
On the racing side, don't back Contador to defend his title in France this year. The smart money, according to the crystal ball, is on Leipheimer. Contador is good for some mountain stages, and some exciting racing, but I think the steadiness of Leipheimer gives him the upper hand. Now that's what you call an "out-there" prediction! I do reserve the right to "forget" everything I've written here, by the way!!! And come July, this becomes history!
NFL - the Patriots go the whole way, unbeaten
As a South African, I realise I'm in the distinct minority when it comes to following the sport of Gridiron, or American Football. It's not big here in South Africa, where we consider it a poor cousin to our sport, rugby (personally, I think the athletes who play in the NFL are exceptional and make rugby's best athletes look average). I must confess that I find the sport fascinating. I have recently made a point of watching the games on ESPN every week, and have been lucky enough to read books written by some of the great NFL coaches - Bill Walsh and the like. And I must say, South African sport can learn from NFL in a big way. In particular, our cricket side should pay close attention to the words of Bill Walsh, who said that the character of the team is the most important thing it can nurture for success (ahead of technical skills), and that this character is determined by the team's leadership - the captain and senior players.
In South Africa, we have an enormous problem with team character (in my opinion) and it stems from the senior players and on-field leadership, which has created the bullies of the cricket world, cricketers who curse when they don't win, abuse the opposition when they do, and who display a decided lack of integrity, respect, fibre and intelligent cricket.
Which brings me to my prediction (or rather I should say "fascination") with NFL's New England Patriots. I watched them overturn a 12-point deficit against the Giants last week to record win number 16 of the season. They broke numerous NFL records in the process, but what has struck me most is the attitude and approach they show towards their own "greatness". It appears to me, as an "ignorant" outsider, that the Patriots have a sense of pride, not arrogance (SA take note) in their achievements, but have remained humble and focused on the goal. Interviews I have seen with Tom Brady, Randy Moss and Bill Bilicek (key players and the coach, by the way, for those who don't follow the game) have impressed me so much for their humility, focus on the team, respect for team mates AND OPPOSITION and their apparent calm as they pursue their place in history. It's a fantastic case study in how to mold, shape and manage a team, and many teams would do well to pay attention, even if they don't appreciate the actual game.
So given this approach, I pick the Patriots to go all the way, and win the Super Bowl come February 3rd. But then again, I'm a South African, so if anyone feels the need to educate me on this one, I'm all ears! But it's more the approach to man-management shown by the head coaches that the sporting world should take note of.
There is more to follow later on, but right now, I'm off for a jog! I'll be back tomorrow to finish off with another look into the crystal ball - still to come, soccer, rugby, and some of the Olympic Track events! Check in then!
Ross
As mentioned yesterday, today we thought we'd do a post looking at the year of sport that lies ahead. Of course, being an Olympic year, the year is centred around 3 weeks in August in Beijing, and I'm sure that come the Olympic Games, we'll pretty much be doing post after post on the events in Beijing. Even leading into Beijing, there will be a great deal of fascinating science of sport content - the heat, the humidity, the pollution, the training programmes, the tactics...and that's all before the events even take place!
Sports science and the Olympics
The field of Sports Science actually owes quite a lot to the Olympic Games. It was the 1968 Mexico City Olympics that gave sports sciences the public profile that they currently "enjoy", because that was really the first time that elite athletes were put into potentially compromising physiological situations with the extreme altitude. Some of the athletes benefited (think Bob Beamon just about jumping right over the long jump pit!), while others did not (Ron Clarke famously collapsed and had to be hospitalized after the 10000m race).
The profile created by these events happened to co-incide with the massive boom in running in the USA, and the field of applied sports sciences, in the public eye, took root! Let's hope that Beijing 2008 does a similar thing - I am sure it will, and here at the Science of Sport, we'll do our best to dig behind the stories to find it!
But Beijing is one of many events and sports to gaze at through our crystal ball. Here are but a few others...
Marathon running in 2008
The big marathons happen in April, October and November, but all eyes will be on Dubai on January 18, where Haile Gebrselassie runs his first marathon since his world record in Berlin. As is usually the case for Geb, he is talking up his chances of another world record. One wonders whether this is the realistic talk, or whether it's marketing hype to raise the profile of the admittedly publicity-hungry Dubai organizers, who have already thrown a truck load of money at the event. If Geb does succeed, he stands to pocket $1.25 million, which includes a $1 million dollar world record bonus.
My prediction for this race is that he'll run a mid 2:05, blame the weather for the failure to run 2:03 (which may or may not be a valid reason), and then return to the more serious business of preparing for Beijing, where he will aim to cap off his career. It's not that Geb doesn't have this 2:04 in him, but in this year, this Dubai marathon is the odd race out - the middle marathon between achieving a life-long goal in Berlin and achieving an even bigger one in Beijing. So don't expect a world record in Dubai (of course, these may be famous last words...!)
What of the other marathons then?
Well, my favourite runner at the moment is Martin Lel, and he's the man to win in London in April this year, defending the title he won last year, and making it three out of the three in the big races. He takes on a star-studded field in London (minus only Geb), but with 63-second final 400m speed, no one will beat him. As for the time, with so many great runners, don't expect anything faster than 2:06 (still unbelievable). I'd guess 2:07-something, with a serious final 2km.
Unfortunately for Boston, the best of the best are all signed up to race in London, so it's a little difficult to pick the winner there. We'll sit on the fence for now and pick a Kenyan, as runners from that country have won 17 of the last 20 editions of that race!
In the Northern Hemisphere autumn, some big races will suffer as a result of the focus of the world on the Olympic Games. But of the few big names left, let's go with Martin Lel to defend his title in New York, and win the World Marathon Series title. For the women, Gete Wami will have her work cut out to defend her title, with a lot depending on whether she races London. And when it comes to women's marathons, it's all eyes back on Paula Radcliffe, who has her sights set on Beijing. Whether this means she'll avoid any other marathons I don't know. If she runs London, she'll win it, and maybe New York at the end of the year, so I'd predict we'll see Lel and Radcliffe atop the podium twice each this year.
The Olympic Marathon
But again, it's all eyes on Beijing. And the Beijing marathons are the hardest to call. It's too early to know who is even going to run, we only know Geb and Baldini for sure. I'm sure Geb will be the massive favourite before the race, but my personal call here is that if you want to bet on anyone, go with a Kenyan who is now based in Japan, or with a South Korean runner who runs a regular 2:07 to 2:08 time. I don't think that Beijing will be the day for the 2:05 men. It's too hot, too humid and too attritional for the fast men, and so they will have to think long and hard about how they prepare.
You may say that a 2:05 guys are the favourites, regardless of the conditions (after all, they are clearly the best/fastest in the field), but the reality is that the situation is likely to be so harsh and attritional that acclimation, local familiarity and preparation will beat speed and pedigree in Beijing. And I feel that habitual acclimation is the key - guys can spend the month before Beijing in Macau or Osaka all they want, but those who live there year round have the upper hand. So if I were a Kenyan selector, the first name down on my team would be Sammy Wanjiru, who is based in Japan (assuming he wants to run), and second down would be Luke Kibet, who won the World title in Osaka, showing he can handle the conditions. They are my favourites.
On the women's side, I'm afraid it doesn't look good for Paula Radcliffe. As much I would love for her to win the Olympic title, I think that heat and humidity, combined with her size (bigger people are severely disadvantaged in hot conditions) and lack of habitual acclimation means that the smart money must be on either Chunxiu Zhou (London champ in 2007), Mizuki Noguchi (defending Olympic Champ), or Catherine Ndereba. Ndereba showed that she can handle the conditions by winning in Osaka, and has shown the ability to get the preparation right for big races - two golds and a silver in the last three big Championship marathons. So Radcliffe will really have her work cut out. I'll go with the Chinese, with Ndereba picking up a minor medal, although I'd love to see Radcliffe win and will be rooting for her.
As we get closer to the time, though, we'll take a closer look at the heat, the humidity and just who's likely to suffer more, survive better, and why...
Cycling - can the Tour stay drug-free, just this once?
As far as cycling goes, we'll stick to the showpiece event, the Tour de France, and when it comes to the Tour, the only thing we can predict with certainty is that drugs will move the riders out of the headlines, yet again. 2007 was a tumultuous year for cycling, with the media and sponsors eventually exerting their muscle by pulling their money out of the sport. Media in many European countries pulled coverage of the Tour off the airwaves and out of the papers, and sponsors dropped their teams by the dozen! Even Discovery, which boasts the winner of 8 of the last 9 tours, failed to find a sponsor, having NEVER even returned a positive test! The sentiment among sponsors may ultimately rescue the sport, by forcing the hand of the organizers, who, frankly, are complicit in the problem.
2007 was actually one of the more exciting Tour de France races. It has been a long time since we saw the jostling, attacking, defending and racing we saw in this year's race, but unfortunately, it was dominated by the positive test of Vinokourov, and the sacking of Michael Rasmussen by his Rabobank team. It took the gloss of the race, but in truth, the gloss is merely varnish applied to a spoiled, warped, rotting surface anyway. So many big names tested positive, retired under doping clouds, or been suspended in 2007 that it's difficult to watch the sport without enormous scepticism. Let's hope 2008 is not the same, but honestly, I doubt it.
So the certain prediction is that the sport will continue to struggle as it attempts to clean up. The biggest problem facing the sport, incidentally, is denial. I saw an interview with Pat McQuaide, head of the UCI, and he denied that the sport had a doping problem. Well, the sponsors seem to think otherwise. So while the UCI bury their head in the sand (as they've done for years), let's hope the sponsors save the sport, in an indirect way.
Perhaps the biggest non-race related event will be to follow the ongoing Floyd Landis story - having failed in arbitration in the USA, Landis was last heard talking about the CAS in Switzerland, and time will tell. And then the million dollar question - will Lance Armstrong stay out of the doping headlines for another year, or could the Armstrong-doper movement gain more momentum in 2008?
On the racing side, don't back Contador to defend his title in France this year. The smart money, according to the crystal ball, is on Leipheimer. Contador is good for some mountain stages, and some exciting racing, but I think the steadiness of Leipheimer gives him the upper hand. Now that's what you call an "out-there" prediction! I do reserve the right to "forget" everything I've written here, by the way!!! And come July, this becomes history!
NFL - the Patriots go the whole way, unbeaten
As a South African, I realise I'm in the distinct minority when it comes to following the sport of Gridiron, or American Football. It's not big here in South Africa, where we consider it a poor cousin to our sport, rugby (personally, I think the athletes who play in the NFL are exceptional and make rugby's best athletes look average). I must confess that I find the sport fascinating. I have recently made a point of watching the games on ESPN every week, and have been lucky enough to read books written by some of the great NFL coaches - Bill Walsh and the like. And I must say, South African sport can learn from NFL in a big way. In particular, our cricket side should pay close attention to the words of Bill Walsh, who said that the character of the team is the most important thing it can nurture for success (ahead of technical skills), and that this character is determined by the team's leadership - the captain and senior players.
In South Africa, we have an enormous problem with team character (in my opinion) and it stems from the senior players and on-field leadership, which has created the bullies of the cricket world, cricketers who curse when they don't win, abuse the opposition when they do, and who display a decided lack of integrity, respect, fibre and intelligent cricket.
Which brings me to my prediction (or rather I should say "fascination") with NFL's New England Patriots. I watched them overturn a 12-point deficit against the Giants last week to record win number 16 of the season. They broke numerous NFL records in the process, but what has struck me most is the attitude and approach they show towards their own "greatness". It appears to me, as an "ignorant" outsider, that the Patriots have a sense of pride, not arrogance (SA take note) in their achievements, but have remained humble and focused on the goal. Interviews I have seen with Tom Brady, Randy Moss and Bill Bilicek (key players and the coach, by the way, for those who don't follow the game) have impressed me so much for their humility, focus on the team, respect for team mates AND OPPOSITION and their apparent calm as they pursue their place in history. It's a fantastic case study in how to mold, shape and manage a team, and many teams would do well to pay attention, even if they don't appreciate the actual game.
So given this approach, I pick the Patriots to go all the way, and win the Super Bowl come February 3rd. But then again, I'm a South African, so if anyone feels the need to educate me on this one, I'm all ears! But it's more the approach to man-management shown by the head coaches that the sporting world should take note of.
There is more to follow later on, but right now, I'm off for a jog! I'll be back tomorrow to finish off with another look into the crystal ball - still to come, soccer, rugby, and some of the Olympic Track events! Check in then!
Ross
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)