At last, the real Olympic legacy

  fourm member 21 Apr 13
Locked

It is good to see that, at last, we've found the proper British way to treat the gold medallists from London 2012. Mo Farah has been accused of cashing in.

  spuds 21 Apr 13

And the point of the post is?.

I would imagine that dozens or even thousands would or have done the same thing, but they might not be as important or of 'celebrity' status?.

  fourm member 21 Apr 13

The point is that the British way is to condemn success.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood and I thought I was criticising Mo Farah. I wasn't.

  Aitchbee 21 Apr 13

"The point is that the British way is to condemn success."

I would substitute 'success' with 'greed' in this case.

  fourm member 21 Apr 13

Aitchbee

'I would substitute 'success' with 'greed' in this case.'

Why?

A private business has decided that it makes commercial sense for it to pay Farah to appear. What is greedy about him accepting the offer?

You're demonstrating the point perfectly. The British way is to be jealous of someone else's success and try and bring them down as a result instead of saying 'Well done' or even 'If I work as hard as that at what I do, maybe I'll be successful'.

  WhiteTruckMan 21 Apr 13

I would be more inclined to question the nature of the race itself. I think the large majority of participants are amateur runners, running for no personal gain other than the achievement itself. And yet there are professional athletes taking part for financial gain. It's one thing to offer a prize for the winners, thats the nature of competition, but quite a different thing to be paid just for appearing.

WTM

  fourm member 21 Apr 13

WTM

It has been that way for a long time.

These days, there are a lot of marathons and they compete to attract the star names.

Having star names attracts sponsors. Having sponsors increases the resources available to the organisers and allows more runners to take part. More runners means more charity fundraisers and more funds raised for charity.

  fourm member 21 Apr 13

The first London Marathon had 7,741 entrants. This year it is about 35,000.

  Forum Editor 21 Apr 13

WhiteTruckMan

One of the main reasons for the success of the London Marathon has been the way it has been marketed - partly by getting famous runners to take part. They've taken part because they've been paid to do so, and their participation has made the London Marathon into the world's biggest and best known.

Mo Farah has a talent, and he's profiting from it - I see nothing wrong with that at all. It happens in all fields of human endeavour, and in most countries it's admired.

  WhiteTruckMan 21 Apr 13

FE

They've taken part because they've been paid to do so

Which says more for their financial aspirations than their sporting/athletic ones, imho.

WTM

  spider9 21 Apr 13

WTM

Completely agree, one would like to think that 'famous' Olympic athletes (many of whom would have previously benefitted from facilities and grants to enable them to achieve their fame) might have felt that they could support this charity by just running with no fee - as a way of repayment, possibly?

They would surely have ample opportunity to 'cash-in' with other more commercial enterprises, advertisement fees, even opening shops etc.!!

Advertisement

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Should I upgrade to Windows 10? 8 reasons why you should upgrade to Windows 10... and 2 why you…

We are being sold the ability to spend money we don't have. And we love it

See 24 hours in London in 1 minute with Paul Richardson's hyperlapse film

How to use Apple Music in the UK: Complete guide to Apple Music's features

We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message