Ronnie O' Sullivan - more runner than snooker player

thirtyfoot

Reading Ian O' Riordan's excellent weekly column in the Irish Times, its about how Ronnie has taken up running and is addicted. He now regards himself a runner first, then a snooker player and if he had to choose he would take the running. He ran the Essex Cross-Country Champs and finished 28th and gets in 50 miles a week. Its exercised a lot of his demons too.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7240545.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/othersports.html?in_article_id=420712&in_page_id=1781

http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/sport/localsport/display.var.1949075.0.woodford_in_for_big_medal_haul.php

He was just outside the scoring 6 on the winning team of Woodford Green AC.

A P

Great to hear he has found a way to conquer his demons. I think his fastest 147 break was in 5 minutes 20 seconds - I wonder if he can run a mile that fast yet?!

aburke

A P wrote: »

Great to hear he has found a way to conquer his demons. I think his fastest 147 break was in 5 minutes 20 seconds - I wonder if he can run a mile that fast yet?!

Probably...
According to the Daily Mail article, he has run 36:10 for 10km.
Good enough for a 5:01 mile on the McMillian Calculator

T runner

You certainly nearly always do feel a little better after a run .

One of the comments on the BBC link cites Drinking and Bad diet as contributors to depression. Maybe running could be an ante-dote in the coming years for irelands present ills?

run_Forrest_run

T runner wrote: »

You certainly nearly always do feel a little better after a run .

One of the comments on the BBC link cites Drinking and Bad diet as contributors to depression. Maybe running could be an ante-dote in the coming years for irelands present ills?

I think you are not far from the truth!
In the last few years I have seen a surge in the amount of people running the roads etc. And yes, I feel pretty good after a run, even after a 'bad' run I feel happy for doing it.

The only thing that gets me down when running is them feckin walkers with their dumb dogs off the leads :mad::mad::mad: Yesterday was hell, the local walkway at Rochestown was only mobbed with walkers and their dogs..I have no problem with walkers or dogs but when they are not on a lead (the dogs!) it makes it very hard to run past them without being knocked over or jumped on.

TheRoadRunner

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

I think you are not far from the truth!
In the last few years I have seen a surge in the amount of people running the roads etc. And yes, I feel pretty good after a run, even after a 'bad' run I feel happy for doing it.

The only thing that gets me down when running is them feckin walkers with their dumb dogs off the leads :mad::mad::mad: Yesterday was hell, the local walkway at Rochestown was only mobbed with walkers and their dogs..I have no problem with walkers or dogs but when they are not on a lead (the dogs!) it makes it very hard to run past them without being knocked over or jumped on.

Don't get me started on stupid dog owners ! I have had a few very nasty incidences in the past. Once I ran around a corner and ran into a boxer who was exiting a bush. I frightened the living daylights out of him so he clenched his jaw on my calf. Thankfully he let go and ran off before he broke the flesh. His owner was about 100 meters ahead on her mobile ! I was livid.

I'm always wary of dog owners who say "you'll be grand he won't go near you". Hand on my heart a guy said that to me last summer while his rottweiler had me pinned to the ground. Again I was livid. I have had many other bites and nips also

I don't think dogs are allowed off their leads in public parks but this is never obeyed. I have a dog myself and while I may allow it off the lead I always make sure that there is nobody around!

run_Forrest_run

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

...
I don't think dogs are allowed off their leads in public parks but this is never obeyed. I have a dog myself and while I may allow it off the lead I always make sure that there is nobody around!

exactly!! Sure once when I was running two dogs wandered across my path, I had to stop, they were big fellas. The girl walking them followed and I said to her that the dogs should be on a lead and she said no, it's a public walk and I replied, "Yes, a public walk, all dogs must be on a lead in public..", she really didn't like hearing it so she went off on one and I gave it as good as I got it...and her last comment was " why don't you go run on a thread mill anyway?", I was fuming with the cow but after I actually have to laugh at her comment, funny but still a smart cow


oops, sorry, taking from the original thread.

Slogger Jogger

Great to hear about Ronnie - the good feeling he gets when he is running is exactly how I feel when the form is good.

I can't say I feel the same about the Irish Times athletics journalist. It comes across all to well that he thinks that runners who don't run up to his level of brilliance as time wasters. In a previous article he was scornful of marathon runners who do the marathon just for the sake of it. He redeems himself somewhat by doing the piece on Ronnie, but it would be good to see him see things from an ordinary runners side of things for a change. Lighten up please.

T runner

I believe hes signed up for Connemara Slogger. While youre down there you could find out if hes an elite boxer as well as an elite runner! (only kidding ofcourse)

thirtyfoot

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

I can't say I feel the same about the Irish Times athletics journalist. It comes across all to well that he thinks that runners who don't run up to his level of brilliance as time wasters. In a previous article he was scornful of marathon runners who do the marathon just for the sake of it. He redeems himself somewhat by doing the piece on Ronnie, but it would be good to see him see things from an ordinary runners side of things for a change. Lighten up please.

In all fairness he is only one of a few who writes about the elite end of things (Brendan Mooney or Foley in the Indo too I suppose) and its badly needed. Greg Allen would be similar as well as the Newstalk guys. Ireland doesn't have an Athletics Weekly which may appeal to those interested in the top level of the sport as Irish Runner(although they have a good balance) and Lindie Naughton's column are mainly geared towards the mass participation markets and proper order as they are the bigger markets and they need to sell issues. We don't need another Lindie style column talking about Mary Bloggs winning her third meet and train league race with Joanne Cuddihy's 400 record as a 2 line footnote.

O' Riordan knows his stuff, he is from good stock too, was a handy US collegiate athlete and ran a decent marathon himself (2:25 I think after he had retired for a few years).

The football writers don't write about the Astro league:D

TheRoadRunner

Tingle wrote: »

The football writers don't write about the Astro league:D

Classic !

jackfrost

Tingle wrote: »

The football writers don't write about the Astro league:D

true, but the football writers don't slag off the Astro turf boys, the just ignore them which is fair enough. O'Riordan wrote a column after he competed in the Jamacia (i think) marathon bemoaning the amount of sloggers in the field and the fact that the winner finished around the 2hr 30m mark - I think what annoyed IOR most is that he finished in the middle of all the fun runners! he described marathon running as 'a phoney test for the get-fit generation' and anyone who wasn't finishing sub 3 hours shouldn't be out there. I assume the prize money in marathons such as Dublin are part funded through the entry fee everyone pays and therefore even the sloggers are contributing to the elite runners careers?

Either way, he's entitled to his opinion, but based on it no one would play any sport for recreation purposes. Good writer though, I always read his article in the Saturday edition of the IT.

run_Forrest_run

fun runners in a marathon is one thing but what boils my blood is people who take part in small charity races and give it the name 'mini marathon'!
I've had this argument before but c'mon, a 5k or 5 mile run should not have the word 'marathon' in it.

TheRoadRunner

jackfrost wrote: »

I think what annoyed IOR most is that he finished in the middle of all the fun runners! he described marathon running as 'a phoney test for the get-fit generation' and anyone who wasn't finishing sub 3 hours shouldn't be out there. I

Well if that is the case then it is a bit of bad form.

I have to say I never thought he came across that way myself. I think he's a great journalist myself and like you enjoy his columns.

Bobby04

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

I've had this argument before but c'mon, a 5k or 5 mile run should not have the word 'marathon' in it.

Reminds me of a friend years ago announcing to me that she was busy training for the marathon. Smelling a rat, I asked the rather lame question "how far do you have to run in that then?" 10K she said, it's for women.:p

run_Forrest_run

Bobby04 wrote: »

Reminds me of a friend years ago announcing to me that she was busy training for the marathon. Smelling a rat, I asked the rather lame question "how far do you have to run in that then?" 10K she said, it's for women.:p

yep, that's what I'm on about! arg! at least U had better patience than I would have had.

TheRoadRunner

Or the classic conversation.

Friend: I hear you are running the Dublin marathon
TheRoadRunner: Yes I am
Friend: Well best of luck
TheRoadRunner: Thanks
Friend: How far is the Dublin marathon ?
TheRoadRunner: (trying not to sound too smart) 26.2 miles same distance as all marathons.

or an even better one

TheRoadRunners Boss: I heard you ran the marathon Monday.
TheRoadRunner: Yes I did.
TheRoadRunners Boss: Ah that would explain your limping and the fact you are walking backwards up the stairs.
TheRoadRunner: Yeah that would be it.
TheRoadRunners Boss: How long did it take you
TheRoadRunner: under 3 hours new pb blah blah.
TheRoadRunners Boss: (looking unimpressed) Well done
TheRoadRunner: Thanks.
TheRoadRunners Boss: My sister did a marathon under an hour.
TheRoadRunner: Eh I reckon that might have been a 10k

run_Forrest_run

i must put my hand up and admit it, many years ago and before I ever took up running I was chatting to a runner friend who was talking about the New York marathon and i stupidly asked the dreaded 'how long is...' question myself...:o

I felt like a right eejit when i got the answer and actually spared a second to think about it!
Since then, i have been asked the same question countless times.

T runner

There may be a role here for official starter for the 2008 mini-marathon:

Starter to give their views on mini-marathon and correct marathon distances to the assembled crowd and then tear up the course with 40,000 women in chase. Like the rabbit in a greyhound race...

Seriously if a race can boast 40000 people and all the good that comes out of it (sponsorship, fitness, craic etc) they can call it anything they like as far as Im concerned. I suppose theyre free to call it anything they like anyway, no matter what I think.

Mini-marathon isnt too inaccurate either: it has all the atmosphere and organisation of a big marathon but shorter distance.

Another good example of running benefitting (a lot of) people, the name is not too important.

copacetic

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

In a previous article he was scornful of marathon runners who do the marathon just for the sake of it. He redeems himself somewhat by doing the piece on Ronnie, but it would be good to see him see things from an ordinary runners side of things for a change. Lighten up please.

really? have you a link to that article? doesn't sound like him, will be very dissapointed if he wrote anything like that..

Slogger Jogger

Hi,

The article about the Jamaica marathon I think was the one, which a previous poster has refered to. I applaud anyone writing about athletics and I read those articles avidly. But, there is no need to be looking down at us in the middle to lower ranks of runners. We're doing our best, and even if we're not cracking 40 mins for a 10K, and not the 30 mins that he wrote about the other day, it shouldn't matter a damn.

Cheers.

SJ

P.S. I expect IOR to win the Conn half so!!!

jackfrost

copacetic wrote: »

really? have you a link to that article? doesn't sound like him, will be very dissapointed if he wrote anything like that..

Article is here.
Subscription required (published Dec 15 2007)

rovers_runner

Yeah, I'm familiar with the IOR article in question.
He strikes me as extremely bitter, possible because he didn't make it.

I probably took twice as long as his pb when I did Dublin last year but I can guarantee I got as much satisfaction as he did, as did the many finishers just before and after me.

He completely misses the point with the effort and enjoyment people are getting out of running/jogging/walking.
Would he rather we all sat on our holes so he could turn his nose up even higher?

jackfrost

it must have been awkward at the Irish Times Christmas party after that article was published - soccer writer Emmet Malone did the Dublin marathon in around 4 hours and I believe Fintan O'Toole came in some time after that

TheRoadRunner

OK. That article is a bit OTT and I'm surprised at that.

He seems to have had an eventful trip so maybe it was written in transit on his way home. Seems a bit narky to me !

copacetic

jackfrost wrote: »

Article is here.
Subscription required (published Dec 15 2007)

cheers, always a pity when someone like o'riordain turns out to be a tosser:

Irish Times wrote:

finished in three hours, 25 minutes and 54 seconds - a time I have absolutely no respect for. Yet I finished 21st. The average finishing time was four hours, 39 minutes and 32 seconds. The winner ran two hours, 31 minutes and 43 minutes - a time I also have no respect for because I once ran quicker.

That's what is wrong with the Negril marathon in Jamaica and most other town and city marathons around the world. This once great distance, made sacred by Philippides and Spiridon Louis and made famous by Emil Zatopek and Abebe Bikila, is now a phoney test of endurance, an achievement fraud. It doesn't matter anymore if you run under three hours or over six hours, but it's nice to say you ran quicker than Katie Holmes.

The people of Negril aren't to blame for this. December is low tourism season and so seven years ago they figured they'd boost things up a little by staging a marathon. Of course it wouldn't be competitive. This would be the Reggae Marathon, with reggae bands along the route and a trophy of Bob Marley for the winner. There would be a Rasta Party instead of a Pasta Party and if the marathon was too far you could always cut off early and do the half marathon, which most people did.

Clearly the marathon is now the fast food of the so-called fitness generation, and there's no going back. There was a time I would laugh at any man who told me he'd run the marathon in over three hours, and yet there I was among them, happy to take a couple of breathers along the way and listen to some reggae.

The marathon was never intended as a fun run, but that's what places like Negril have turned it into. Maybe there's no harm in that and who cares how long it takes when we can all share fresh coconut milk at the finish before moving on to the rum and Cokes.

But there's a big difference between finishing a marathon and running it, and Negril really proved that. The line between the two has somehow been blurred.

The only marathon runners I respect anymore are the ones like Martin Fagan, who is currently trying to get back into the US, where he's been training for the past five months with the intention of running the two hours and 15 minutes qualifying time for the Beijing Olympics.

thirtyfoot

"But there's a big difference between finishing a marathon and running it"

Can't argue with that, makes sense to me.

copacetic

Tingle wrote: »

"But there's a big difference between finishing a marathon and running it"

Can't argue with that, makes sense to me.

except he means that if you don't finish in under 3 hours you haven't 'run' it. As most people know it is likely a much bigger challenge to finish a marathon when it it taking you four hours than under 3, and most people at 4 hours run all the way.

He doesn't 'respect' anyone who runs over 2.15? He is a tosser of the worst kind imo.

rovers_runner

Tingle, if someone completes a marathon to the best of their ability at a given time and they took longer than is deemed "acceptable" does that mean they shouldn't have taken part in the first place?

run_Forrest_run

he sounds like a guy in cork who now does physical therapy (:eek:) and used to run marathons in 2 Olympics representing a country north of USA..not naming names or anything:rolleyes:

doke

Dogs....grrrrr. Didn't realise they were required to be on a lead in public parks: ammunition for my inevitable next confrontation with "Ah sure he won't go near you" owner. Usually I tell them that I contacted the guards about the last dog that bit me and the dog was destroyed. Total lie of course, but effective.

Funniest one was in Porterstown Park when the bloody big dog of a bloody big posh Castleknock lady decided to chase me in the middle of a speed session. My wife was on stopwatch duties and she ventured her opinion rather colourfully, to which the dog owner responded in kind, and as I did a recovery jog all I could hear was my wife unloading as many expletives as she could in her thick French accent and the shocked Castleknacker screaming back "You can't talk to me OR MY DOG like that". She eventually gave ground and withdrew a few hundred metres from my formidable wife (who would have pwned her in a physical fight, let me assure you) but thought it would be funny to hang around at the other end of my circuit and mock my efforts to hit the time I was shooting for.

Any elite runner looking down their nose at the middle-of-the-pack runners is a fool. All performances are relative to genetic potential, ability to train etc.

And the minimarathon....grrrr. Why can't they just call it a 10K and have done with? Or should the 400m be renamed the minimile? 10K into a real marathon, you're barely warmed up.

TheRoadRunner

doke wrote: »

And the minimarathon....grrrr. Why can't they just call it a 10K and have done with? Or should the 400m be renamed the minimile? 10K into a real marathon, you're barely warmed up.

I know its a pet peeve but you hit the nail on the head for me there

louthandproud

doke wrote: »

Dogs....grrrrr. Didn't realise they were required to be on a lead in public parks: ammunition for my inevitable next confrontation with "Ah sure he won't go near you" owner. Usually I tell them that I contacted the guards about the last dog that bit me and the dog was destroyed. Total lie of course, but effective.

Unless there is a specific rule in the particular park dogs can be without a lead. In the Phoenix Park for example the "must have a lead" rule applies at specific times of the year and is signposted (deer breeding time). It would be nice to have somewhere to report abuses of these rules though, as people don't adhere to them in any case. Bad for the deers and other park users, especially runners.

thirtyfoot

rovers_runner wrote: »

Tingle, if someone completes a marathon to the best of their ability at a given time and they took longer than is deemed "acceptable" does that mean they shouldn't have taken part in the first place?

No, not all. Is IOR saying that? Not sure.

What he could be saying is that people who merely 'finish' a marathon aren't really 'marathon runners'. They are two different sports really, the elite end and the mass participation end. Marathon is unique in that both ends race in the same race but they are two different sports and IOR is coming from the elite side of things. I respect all runners and I'm sure IOR does too but the title of being a 'marathon runner' is probably a bit tarnished now in that so many do it, a bit like climbing everest! There is elitism everywhere and its all relative, eg, people peeved at a 10k being called a mini-marathon.

I think everyone agrees its good to have a quality Athletics column in a quality paper on a regular basis, the sport needs it. I buy the Irish Times every saturday to read it while vegging on the couch for the afternoon after training that morning. Long may it last (even if the journalist is a tosser)

louthandproud

Tingle wrote: »

No, not all. Is IOR saying that? Not sure.

What he could be saying is that people who merely 'finish' a marathon aren't really 'marathon runners'. They are two different sports really, the elite end and the mass participation end. Marathon is unique in that both ends race in the same race but they are two different sports and IOR is coming from the elite side of things. I respect all runners and I'm sure IOR does too but the title of being a 'marathon runner' is probably a bit tarnished now in that so many do it, a bit like climbing everest! There is elitism everywhere and its all relative, eg, people peeved at a 10k being called a mini-marathon.

I think everyone agrees its good to have a quality Athletics column in a quality paper on a regular basis, the sport needs it. I buy the Irish Times every saturday to read it while vegging on the couch for the afternoon after training that morning. Long may it last (even if the journalist is a tosser)

If you run Marathons on any kind of regular basis and plan to continue to do so then you are a 'marathon runner'. If you are currently running in a marathon you are a 'marathon runner'. It's simple English, IOR is being an elitist pain in the butt, not the kind of journalism that would endear people to athletics or to just running in general.

The more people that get out running and participate in Marathons, 10K's, mini Marathons or whatever for their own personal betterment or even competitively the better. This king of elitist cr*p shouldn't even make it to print.

copacetic

Tingle wrote: »

No, not all. Is IOR saying that? Not sure.

What he could be saying is that people who merely 'finish' a marathon aren't really 'marathon runners'. They are two different sports really, the elite end and the mass participation end. Marathon is unique in that both ends race in the same race but they are two different sports and IOR is coming from the elite side of things. I respect all runners and I'm sure IOR does too but the title of being a 'marathon runner' is probably a bit tarnished now in that so many do it, a bit like climbing everest! There is elitism everywhere and its all relative, eg, people peeved at a 10k being called a mini-marathon.

I think everyone agrees its good to have a quality Athletics column in a quality paper on a regular basis, the sport needs it. I buy the Irish Times every saturday to read it while vegging on the couch for the afternoon after training that morning. Long may it last (even if the journalist is a tosser)

as far as I can tell tingle you are saying that IOR doesn't actually mean what he writes. You are in fact saying he believes the opposite to what he has written.

thirtyfoot

copacetic wrote: »

as far as I can tell tingle you are saying that IOR doesn't actually mean what he writes. You are in fact saying he believes the opposite to what he has written.

Exactly, what else would you expect from a tosser.

copacetic

Tingle wrote: »

Exactly, what else would you expect from a tosser.

good point.

thirtyfoot

louthandproud wrote: »

. This king of elitist cr*p shouldn't even make it to print.

Check out Lindie's articles in the Herald on thursdays, very wholesome, grassroots and caters for all and not a sniff of how our potential olympic athletes are getting on. She has a book out too, Lindie is the future, go Lindie, she'll probably meet all your athletic reading needs in one. She loves everyone (except prima donna sprinters that is):D

TheRoadRunner

Tingle wrote: »

Check out Lindie's articles in the Herald on thursdays, very wholesome, grassroots and caters for all and not a sniff of how our potential olympic athletes are getting on. She has a book out too, Lindie is the future, go Lindie, she'll probably meet all your athletic reading needs in one. She loves everyone (except prima donna sprinters that is):D

She is a bit too grassroots in my opinion and she makes no effort to hide it.

Fair enough I like to hear who won local races etc. I usually compete in the majority of these so sometimes you get your mug into the paper also.

However if you want any info on national championships etc forget about it.

Having said that she does have some favourites amongst the track fraternity and she will give them a mention where ever possible !

louthandproud

Tingle wrote: »

Check out Lindie's articles in the Herald on thursdays, very wholesome, grassroots and caters for all and not a sniff of how our potential olympic athletes are getting on. She has a book out too, Lindie is the future, go Lindie, she'll probably meet all your athletic reading needs in one. She loves everyone (except prima donna sprinters that is):D

Not sure if that is sarcasm or not, in any case I would love to see lots more coverage of Athletics in the print media and all other media too, including and especially on elite Athletics, especially Irish Elite athletics. However a journalist should be able to discuss elite athletics without belittling all other athletes no matter how good or bad they are. Running as a sport has mass appeal and long may that continue and grow. I call myself a marathon runner whatever IOR thinks.

thirtyfoot

louthandproud wrote: »

However a journalist should be able to discuss elite athletics without belittling all other athletes no matter how good or bad they are. .

Lindie is the opposite, she writes about the average Joe and belittles the elite, Ian about the elite and apparently belittles the Joe. Something for everyone, maybe they could come together and we would have a super balanced approach to athletic writing.:D. Lindie telling us about average Josephine winning the 3k mountain race in 56 mins, Ian piping in Dunphy speak saying "that rubbish, your a spoofer Lindie, a charlatan" and so on.

I should have added more :D:D:D to my previous post too as I was taking the p*ss.

T runner

Tingle wrote: »

. Lindie telling us about average Josephine winning the 3k mountain race in 56 mins

Its true: there is no elitism on the hills--and fair play to them for it-good grounded people. There has even been the odd Irish 10,000 track champion compete on the mountains and even they have been humbled!

copacetic

Tingle wrote: »

Lindie is the opposite, she writes about the average Joe and belittles the elite, Ian about the elite and apparently belittles the Joe. Something for everyone, maybe they could come together and we would have a super balanced approach to athletic writing.:D. Lindie telling us about average Josephine winning the 3k mountain race in 56 mins, Ian piping in Dunphy speak saying "that rubbish, your a spoofer Lindie, a charlatan" and so on.

I should have added more :D:D:D to my previous post too as I was taking the p*ss.

why did you feel the need to drag lindie into it? why the 'apparently' above, there is no apparently about it. It's there in black and white

Racing Flat

It's a poor attitude from IOR based on that article. How narrow-minded to say 'I have no respect for 2.31 because I ran faster once'. Can't he see that the runner who does 6.15 could just as easily claim to have 'no respect' for 6.31, but huge respect for 5.59? He's shown up really bu Brendan Foster and Steve Cram who are happy to commentate on the elite runner but also don't mind being involved with the 6hour runners in the London marathon etc. Maybe they're not bitter because they really 'made it'.

Slogger Jogger

Interesting discussion ensued there guys. Seems there are lots of types of runners. 2 kinds are obvious offhand...
1. The kind that enjoys their running for what it is and makes the most of it (very much in a Ronnie O'Sullivan type of way, which is the way I'm enjoying my running at the moment I have to say.... I can't wait to get out there each day..)
2. The nark. Runs, but doesn't particularly enjoy it and you wonder why they do it and you wonder why they debate and write about it. Hey narkies out there... do a ronnie!

Regards,

Slo Jogger (and happy at it)

aburke

My 2 cents.

Any sport, running included, has an elite end.
They all have lower levels too.

I've always considered myself a Junior C runner [if you ever played GAA you'll understand], with aspirations of making the senior team.

Running is a bit peculiar, in that ALL levels can take part in the one event such as a big Marathon. This doesn't happen in GAA or any team sports really.

Ian writes more about the elite end of things, and his rant, from what I can see, is bemoaning the lack of an elite field in that particular race.
3:25 is a long way down the field even in Dublin. 2:31 is along way down the top end in Dublin, yet good enough for 1st in Jamica.

When he talks about having 'no respect' for a time, I read it as in comparison to a an elite time, which is fair enough, if you're interested in the elite end of things.

I don't see it being too much different from Dunphy bemoaning the lack of "great" players in the modern game.

Later
Alan

thirtyfoot

copacetic wrote: »

why did you feel the need to drag lindie into it?

Lindie is dragged in because she is the alternative weekly column and to be honest its grand if it was a regional/local newspaper. IOR gives an alternative, which me and most of my athletics peers have more of an interest in. Talk to any athletes at the National Senior Championships in Santry and ask what they think of Lindie's column. Ask non-athletic people who have a passing interest in the sport which they would prefer to read. Thats all really, IOR gives an alternative to the stuff Lindie has, which in my opinion is dreadful.

thirtyfoot

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

Interesting discussion ensued there guys. Seems there are lots of types of runners. 2 kinds are obvious offhand...
1. The kind that enjoys their running for what it is and makes the most of it (very much in a Ronnie O'Sullivan type of way, which is the way I'm enjoying my running at the moment I have to say.... I can't wait to get out there each day..)
2. The nark. Runs, but doesn't particularly enjoy it and you wonder why they do it and you wonder why they debate and write about it. Hey narkies out there... do a ronnie!

Regards,

Slo Jogger (and happy at it)

Two main types to me:

1. Club athlete - competes in club events like x-country, track etc and also 10k-marathon. I'd put Ronnie in here (finished 28th in Essex x-country champs!)
2. Recreational runner - do mainly 10k-Marathon and many times beat club athletes.

Very few run and don't enjoy it. Club athletes who don't enjoy running soon give it up as the commitment required is such that if you aren't enjoying it, its too much like hard work. Thats why many young athletes give up in the 16-21 age group, they just don't like it. Same applies to recreational runner.

If you're implication is that IOR is a nark who doesn't like running, you are wrong I'd say. He is so steeped in the sport, he'd be a bit of a masochist if he didn't enjoy. He is well liked by many of out top athletes from what i understand.

Back on the topic of athletic journalism the likes of the tripe written around Olympic time by Jerome O' Reilly in the Sindo a few years back is what we (the athletic/running community) should really be pi**ed off about. On the back of one of his tirades against our athletes 'wasting tax-payers money' at the Olympics, one athlete got hate-mail to their home address (I saw the letter) and while not too aggressive left the athlete pretty shook and asking some unjustified questions of themselves. Nice way to be treated when representing your country at the bloody olympics of all things.

copacetic

Tingle wrote: »

Lindie is dragged in because she is the alternative weekly column and to be honest its grand if it was a regional/local newspaper. IOR gives an alternative, which me and most of my athletics peers have more of an interest in. Talk to any athletes at the National Senior Championships in Santry and ask what they think of Lindie's column. Ask non-athletic people who have a passing interest in the sport which they would prefer to read. Thats all really, IOR gives an alternative to the stuff Lindie has, which in my opinion is dreadful.

so, no reason then. just to try to make IOR look better? and now you are trying to spin Jerome O'Reilly into it too?


The 'running community' is 99% made up of the people IOR was slagging off in the article above. Trying to make out that it doesn't matter is a transparent attempt at deflecting the justiifed criticism of IOR on here. He appears to be just bitter about the fact that he was never good enough himself as racing flat says.

run_Forrest_run

lads this is all getting very tiring!
so, who's doing Ballycotton?, getting close now.