Goals have been clearly set for some time so those who qualify to the standards we’ve set will know they’re capable of returning from Athens having achieved something – they’re not simply going to the Olympic Games as excess baggage.
This is a quote from a very Henryk Lakomy, Sports science & fitness director at British Swimming.
So they feel that Mark Foster is excess baggage ! :mad:
He could win a medal, but i guess we will never know and that is one less medal for Britain. Ah well, there is always the breaststroke. Which seems to be the only stroke that UK swimmers can do well !:mad:
Parents
Former Member
I have some sympathy for Foster but I think that this discussion needs some perspective on British swimming. In 2000, for the first time ever, there were no British olympic swimming medals. There were also very few PBs in swimming at the games. In fact, the British swimming team at Sydney were perhaps best known for keeping our triple-jumper, Jonathan Edwards, awake at night through their partying.
After Sydney, Bill Sweetenham came in and changed attitudes hugely. He did this by setting very high expectations of the swimmers, both in training and at meets. One part of this was the setting of high hurdles in terms of entry times for the Olympics. The reason presumably was that if the standards were tough, the best would rise to the challenge and meet them. Of course, some would try very hard and unfortunately fail, but overall Britain would have a better team and the chance of being competitive in several events. This is what has happened, we now have the chance of winning a few medals in Athens with the like of Mew, Gibson, Edmonds, Cook, Marshall, Davies, Smith, Parry, Tait, Goddard, Turner, Francis etc.
So, by being tough, a good team has been produced and British swimming will benefit. Some individuals are disappointed and maybe the wrong swimmer has been left at home for one or two events but that's the way of sport. If Sweetenham hadn't turned things around, its likely that we'd be sending another non-competitive team to Athens.
Of course Mark Foster would probably get into the 50m free final and maybe even win a medal so why not bend the rules for him? If its done for him, who else will appeal? How will the qualifying standards be perceived next time around- flexible? Foster knew what he needed to do and unfortunately didn't achieve it. Let's also remember that Foster has already been to four Olympics. If I remember correctly, his best position was 6th.
I have some sympathy for Foster but I think that this discussion needs some perspective on British swimming. In 2000, for the first time ever, there were no British olympic swimming medals. There were also very few PBs in swimming at the games. In fact, the British swimming team at Sydney were perhaps best known for keeping our triple-jumper, Jonathan Edwards, awake at night through their partying.
After Sydney, Bill Sweetenham came in and changed attitudes hugely. He did this by setting very high expectations of the swimmers, both in training and at meets. One part of this was the setting of high hurdles in terms of entry times for the Olympics. The reason presumably was that if the standards were tough, the best would rise to the challenge and meet them. Of course, some would try very hard and unfortunately fail, but overall Britain would have a better team and the chance of being competitive in several events. This is what has happened, we now have the chance of winning a few medals in Athens with the like of Mew, Gibson, Edmonds, Cook, Marshall, Davies, Smith, Parry, Tait, Goddard, Turner, Francis etc.
So, by being tough, a good team has been produced and British swimming will benefit. Some individuals are disappointed and maybe the wrong swimmer has been left at home for one or two events but that's the way of sport. If Sweetenham hadn't turned things around, its likely that we'd be sending another non-competitive team to Athens.
Of course Mark Foster would probably get into the 50m free final and maybe even win a medal so why not bend the rules for him? If its done for him, who else will appeal? How will the qualifying standards be perceived next time around- flexible? Foster knew what he needed to do and unfortunately didn't achieve it. Let's also remember that Foster has already been to four Olympics. If I remember correctly, his best position was 6th.
