European Indoor Championships - Belgrade 4th-5th March

average_runner

Chivito550 wrote: »

It does not work like that. All athletes have to walk through the mixed zone. First are TV and radio, then written press. There's no way David Gillick should have to run after her to the team hotel later to catch an interview, and no way will she stick around for an hour for an interview she'd rather just get over and done with. It's not just RTE she has to talk to, it's all of the media including written press. It's an obligation one has as an athlete and she knows this and I can't imagine she would have an issues with it either.

If it was a rich sports star they would tell the media where to go, which happens most in the UK.

No one wants to see an interview like that. Leave the girl alone for a little while.

RacoonQueen

average_runner wrote: »

If it was a rich sports star they would tell the media where to go, which happens most in the UK.

No one wants to see an interview like that. Leave the girl alone for a little while.

Absolutely. No way she'll have been happy to be interviewed at that time in that state. They could have interviewed her another time, absolutely no need for that, doesn't have to be done directly after the event. Disgusting really.

roseybear

Chivito550 wrote: »

It's an obligation one has as an athlete and she knows this and I can't imagine she would have an issues with it either. There's people there just trying to do their jobs.

Im not sure they do have an obligation. It might be expected but have never heard that there's anything in writing saying they have to do it. As you say, I'm sure she doesn't have an issue doing it, but it might have been a bit more tactful to avoid doing it live. had they interviewed her immediately, as they did, but delayed airing it until they had the chance to hear her responses and see her reaction they could assess the situation and then determine if it is of benefit to the athlete and the viewers to see the response. Gillick could then have just reported what she had said rather than showing it to everyone. Reminds me of Annalise Murphy after her 4th place. Obviously no one knows how someone is going to feel post race but it might be something for RTE to consider in the future.

Chivito550

Seriously, take it up with the EAA and IAAF. They're the ones who design the media process. David Gillick is only doing his job. That's the only time he can interview her unless you want him chasing after her around the complex. Once an athlete leaves the mixed zone they are near impossible to chase down. This is the only opportunity for broadcasters and journalists to do their jobs. I'm no defender of RTE in general, but they did nothing wrong here. Every other TV network is doing the same and Ciara isn't the only disappointed athlete to walk through the mixed zone this weekend.

In theory they aren't obligated to talk to anyone but everyone does, because they are for the most part decent folk.

It wasn't even that bad of an interview. I've seen worse. Remember Mad Len announcing his retirement from the sport post London Olympics. He won a Euro indoor medal 6 months later. She'll be fine. She's been through far worse and she's tough, resilient and talented. Sport is about highs and lows. We take the good with the bad.

In order for RTE to let her gather her thoughts first, logistically she would have had to stay out on the track for 30 minutes or so as she has to eventually walk through that mixed zone. No way would she have wanted to do that.

Just stating how the process works. You can dislike the process and that's fine, but unless you want journalists hounding athletes at the warm down track and team hotel then this is the best way. RTE have done nothing wrong here. They have just followed protocol.

average_runner

Chivito550 wrote: »

Seriously, take it up with the EAA and IAAF. They're the ones who design the media process. David Gillick is only doing his job. That's the only time he can interview her unless you want him chasing after her around the complex. Once an athlete leaves the mixed zone they are near impossible to chase down. This is the only opportunity for broadcasters and journalists to do their jobs. I'm no defender of RTE in general, but they did nothing wrong here. Every other TV network is doing the same and Ciara isn't the only disappointed athlete to walk through the mixed zone this weekend.

In theory they aren't obligated to talk to anyone but everyone does, because they are for the most part decent folk.

It wasn't even that bad of an interview. I've seen worse. Remember Mad Len announcing his retirement from the sport post London Olympics. He won a Euro indoor medal 6 months later. She'll be fine. She's been through far worse and she's tough, resilient and talented. Sport is about highs and lows. We take the good with the bad.

In order for RTE to let her gather her thoughts first, logistically she would have had to stay out on the track for 30 minutes or so as she has to eventually walk through that mixed zone. No way would she have wanted to do that.

Just stating how the process works. You can dislike the process and that's fine, but unless you want journalists hounding athletes at the warm down track and team hotel then this is the best way. RTE have done nothing wrong here. They have just followed protocol.

While you make valid points you miss one thing. Rte didn't have to do that interview and it achieved nothing. It just shows rte in more bad light.

average_runner

Chivito550 wrote: »

Seriously, take it up with the EAA and IAAF. They're the ones who design the media process. David Gillick is only doing his job. That's the only time he can interview her unless you want him chasing after her around the complex. Once an athlete leaves the mixed zone they are near impossible to chase down. This is the only opportunity for broadcasters and journalists to do their jobs. I'm no defender of RTE in general, but they did nothing wrong here. Every other TV network is doing the same and Ciara isn't the only disappointed athlete to walk through the mixed zone this weekend.

In theory they aren't obligated to talk to anyone but everyone does, because they are for the most part decent folk.

It wasn't even that bad of an interview. I've seen worse. Remember Mad Len announcing his retirement from the sport post London Olympics. He won a Euro indoor medal 6 months later. She'll be fine. She's been through far worse and she's tough, resilient and talented. Sport is about highs and lows. We take the good with the bad.

In order for RTE to let her gather her thoughts first, logistically she would have had to stay out on the track for 30 minutes or so as she has to eventually walk through that mixed zone. No way would she have wanted to do that.

Just stating how the process works. You can dislike the process and that's fine, but unless you want journalists hounding athletes at the warm down track and team hotel then this is the best way. RTE have done nothing wrong here. They have just followed protocol.

While you make valid points you miss one thing. Rte didn't have to do that interview and it achieved nothing. It just shows rte in more bad light.

Chivito550

average_runner wrote: »

While you make valid points you miss one thing. Rte didn't have to do that interview and it achieved nothing. It just shows rte in more bad light.

You'd then have people moaning that she wasn't interviewed. Our top star not interviewed post race with loads tuning in hoping to get her reaction. Wasting tax payers money yada yada yada. Can't win.

Djoucer

Thought it was a good interview myself. It was honest, it was raw and far more informative than any interview that occurs during a press conference an hour later.

The interview distils athletics to its very core, to its harshness, to its unfairness. It's all about who is best on the day. No-one cares about who you beat last week, last month. Did you win when it mattered?

And that's why interviews immediately after a race/match reveals more than any sit down interview, profile, press conference.

There's no league campaign, no opportunity to bounce back. That's it. Game over. If you object to the interview, you should object to the winner takes all approach in athletics. There's no second chances. And that's the appeal. See you in two/four years.

Chivito550

Djoucer wrote: »

Thought it was a good interview myself. It was honest, it was raw and far more informative than any interview that occurs during a press conference an hour later.

The interview distils athletics to its very core, to its harshness, to its unfairness. It's all about who is best on the day. No-one cares about who you beat last week, last month. Did you win when it mattered?

And that's why interviews immediately after a race/match reveals more than any sit down interview, profile, press conference.

There's no league campaign, no opportunity to bounce back. That's it. Game over. If you object to the interview, you should object to the winner takes all approach in athletics. There's no second chances. And that's the appeal. See you in two/four years.

+1

Thought she handled the interview fantastically. She didn't need to apologise for anything, but other than that, I thought she gave an honest interview. No bullsh1t. I doubt she cares that RTE interviewed her, and in no way has she given it a second thought.

It's just a blip. It's all about outdoors in this sport, either on the track or in the marathon. Indoors and cross country is just a lead up to these. She'll be fine. Jerry Kiernan may say some daft stuff (albeit entertaining) but he's no fool and he'll manage this blip well I've no doubt.

unichick

Didn't the same happen Sonia walking off the track after feeling sick &'there was no interview until much after. Poor Ciara. I hope she's ok.

George Hamilton is the most overused broadcaster & he misses glaringly obvious things in athletics. Can someone else with a passion for it not do it? Whatever happened that man who used to co commentate with him? He was extremely knowledgable. Love Jerry in studio & Derval.

Chivito550

unichick wrote: »

Didn't the same happen Sonia walking off the track after feeling sick &'there was no interview until much after. Poor Ciara. I hope she's ok.

George Hamilton is the most overused broadcaster & he misses glaringly obvious things in athletics. Can someone else with a passion for it not do it? Whatever happened that man who used to co commentate with him? He was extremely knowledgable. Love Jerry in studio & Derval.

Tony O'Donoghue? He retired a good while back. Agree regarding Hamilton. He's incredibly lazy regarding athletics. I accept his knowledge is poor and his voice can make up for it, but only if he does his research which he clearly doesn't.

Sonia had a horrible interview immediately after bombing out of the 1500 heat in Atlanta with the other Tony O'Donoghue (football guy) from memory, where she said this is the end. She went on to win 2 world cross gold, 2 European gold, 2 European silver, a world indoor silver, and that wonderful silver in Sydney Olympics. These post race interviews mean nothing. The athletes have more to worry about during disappointment than a crappy interview post race.

ultrapercy

Sport on TV is aimed at people who don't like sport. The best angle ,for TV, is emotion and the best emotion is sadness, this is why nothing good ever happens in a soap. People who actually like sport don't need any extra drama added in to appriciated it but unfortunately TV networks must compete with "Dancing with the barely known" to make money. Explaining this on a national forum makes me feel both superior and inferior at the same time. Sometimes I feel like your all just testing me. David Gillick was blameless 100%, RTE just did what they have to do. Nobody was wrong so nobody is to blame so why did I feel like watching it from behind my couch? Who killed Davey Moore?

walshb

average_runner wrote: »

While you make valid points you miss one thing. Rte didn't have to do that interview and it achieved nothing. It just shows rte in more bad light.

They did have to do it. How could they know what "state" she would be in. Pro athletes have to take the rough with the smooth. Some of the OTT reactions here about RTE doing their job makes us sound like a nation of windbags. She lost a race.....hardly earth shattering.


.

average_runner

walshb wrote: »

They did have to do it. How could they know what "state" she would be in. Pro athletes have to take the rough with the smooth. Some of the OTT reactions here about RTE doing their job makes us sound like a nation of windbags. She lost a race.....hardly earth shattering.


.

It was obvious what state she was in coming off the track.

It was a pointless interview.

dna_leri

In fairness to RTE and Gillick, Ciara could have dodged the interview herself if she wanted. Could have said she was in pain etc and would talk to them later - that was her call. She's an adult. Different story if a 17 year old when I would expect RTE to take some responsibility. Ciara chose to talk, probably felt some guilt for DNF. I think Gillick handled well.

Chivito550

average_runner wrote: »

It was obvious what state she was in coming off the track.

It was a pointless interview.

How was it pointless? It was a great interview. It highlights the pure emotion of sport. The highs and lows of it. Honestly everybody watching that race would have wanted to hear what went wrong and hear her thoughts on it. Had RTE not interviewed her you'd be whinging too. I've spelt it out for you in plain English how the media process works. You seem incapable of comprehending it. Do you want David Gillick and the camera person chasing around Belgrade after her for an interview? Probably the last thing Ciara wants too. Just something an athlete would rather get over and done with as soon as possible.

walshb

average_runner wrote: »

It was obvious what state she was in coming off the track.

It was a pointless interview.

So going forward RTE should now drop interviews if they feel the athlete maybe isn't all that up to it?

Interviews shortly after the race comes with the territory. Man up and get on with it.

Nonevernomore

There was no need for the interview. We could see what sort of pain she was and the anguish she felt. What sort of person enjoys watching another suffer and wants to know the reason for their failure directly after the event?

I'm not going to have a go at all journalists but this is what they're taught. The story is the most important thing and upsetting anyone is irrelevant to that. Morals and ethics go out the window for many journalists and Gillick is now one of them. You could tell he was uncomfortable doing the interview, I wouldn't put blame on him.

Nonevernomore

On a separate note, these championships have been absolutely pathetic from an Irish view point. Indoor Europeans is one of the few events where we should expect plenty of finals and even medals. I know English wasn't there but some of the performances have been woeful.

RacoonQueen

Silly bickering going on now over the interview...move on. People have different opinions on whether it should have continued or not - no need for the sort of tone in some of these posts.

Chivito550

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Silly bickering going on now over the interview...move on. People have different opinions on whether it should have continued or not - no need for the sort of tone in some of these posts.

You brought it up yourself. You're tone towards me on twitter was far more unacceptable than anything here.

BeepBeep67

RacoonQueen

Chivito550 wrote: »

You brought it up yourself. You're tone towards me on twitter was far more unacceptable than anything here.

First: Arguing with mod instruction on thread...

Second: I didn't bring it up

Third: You've continued arguing over it

Fourth: Twitter? Really?

Fifth: Less aggression / condescension from all regarding the interview if we are going to continue talking about it please folks

Chivito550

RacoonQueen wrote: »

First: Arguing with mod instruction on thread...

Second: I didn't bring it up

Third: You've continued arguing over it

Fourth: Twitter? Really?

Fifth: Less aggression / condescension from all regarding the interview if we are going to continue talking about it please folks

Well I'm just telling you how the media process works. As I said take it up with EAA or IAAF. Not RTE.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

Well I'm just telling you how the media process works. As I said take it up with EAA or IAAF. Not RTE.

It's RTÉ not RTE.

Joe_ Public

Personally, I think there is little to be gained by immediate post-match or -race interviews and too much to be lost, by which I mean the dignity of the athlete involved. I don't just mean Ciara Mageean in particular but in general. The Katie Taylor Olympic fight is another case in point, what did we learn from that interview other than she was devastated and could barely put a sentence together? I believe common sense should prevail, although that's always going to be trumped by tv ratings, or at a very minimum, I don't see why a grace period of 5-10 minutes shouldn't be allowed. If I was a coach, team manager, I'd make sure and advise athletes that they are simply under no obligation to do these interviews in times of stress and vulnerability, regardless of what the terms of contract say.

One case I recall is that of an American skier at the last Winter Olympics (Bode Miller, I think his name was) who had recently suffered a death in his family. After his run, he ducked down behind an advertising bollard to hide his emotion only for a cameraman to follow him and stick the thing straight in his face, horribly intrusive and indefensible.

Chivito550

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Personally, I think there is little to be gained by immediate post-match or -race interviews and too much to be lost, by which I mean the dignity of the athlete involved. I don't just mean Ciara Mageean in particular but in general. The Katie Taylor Olympic fight is another case in point, what did we learn from that interview other than she was devastated and could barely put a sentence together? I believe common sense should prevail, although that's always going to be trumped by tv ratings, or at a very minimum, I don't see why a grace period of 5-10 minutes shouldn't be allowed. If I was a coach, team manager, I'd make sure and advise athletes that they are simply under no obligation to do these interviews in times of stress and vulnerability, regardless of what the terms of contract say.

One case I recall is that of an American skier at the last Winter Olympics (Bode Miller, I think his name was) who had recently suffered a death in his family. After his run, he ducked down behind an advertising bollard to hide his emotion only for a cameraman to follow him and stick the thing straight in his face, horribly intrusive and indefensible.

What's the solution though? Where do you want the athlete to be for those 5-10 minutes while he/she composes him/herself? They can't just stay out on the track as the next race needs to start. They could hang about at the edge of the track I suppose but nobody will do that. The only exit is through the mixed zone and the first people they encounter are TV broadcasters. She could have stayed there with Gillick for 10 minutes I suppose, and composed herself there. But do you think she wants to hang about there? Not a chance. In theory she could have refused the interview and walked straight through the entire mixed zone but she didn't do this. Very few will ever do this. Also remember that after talking to RTE she then basically had to answer the exact same questions off a number of Irish journalists for radio and the written press. The written press are in a totally separate area so have no access to the RTE interview, plus they each have their own questions to ask.

Nonevernomore

It's a horrible process for athletes, even when things don't go as bad as they did for Mageean yesterday. Basically they have to parade themselves in front of all these journalists who are looking to make money off them, repeat themselves over and over again, answer some inappropriate questions on many occasions as the journalists want a quote to make their story juicier. Of course athletes such as Mageean and others have to do this! They don't get a lot of money and increasing their profile is what they have to do. It's all a game and as we seen yesterday, it's not a very nice one.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

It's a horrible process for athletes, even when things don't go as bad as they did for Mageean yesterday. Basically they have to parade themselves in front of all these journalists who are looking to make money off them, repeat themselves over and over again, answer some inappropriate questions on many occasions as the journalists want a quote to make their story juicier. Of course athletes such as Mageean and others have to do this! They don't get a lot of money and increasing their profile is what they have to do. It's all a game and as we seen yesterday, it's not a very nice one.

I don't disagree with you here. It can be a pain for an athlete who has performed badly. But remember how little journalists earn and how hard it is for them to find work. Most of them self fund their own trips to these championships. If athletes don't stop for them, then they have no work. Without media publicity the sport suffers particularly in this GAA dominant society. It's all a necessary evil.

But let's put things in perspective. If somebody has a bad race, there's another race around the corner. It's not life or death.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

I don't disagree with you here. It can be a pain for an athlete who has performed badly. But remember how little journalists earn and how hard it is for them to find work. Most of them self fund their own trips to these championships. If athletes don't stop for them, then they have no work. Without media publicity the sport suffers particularly in this GAA dominant society. It's all a necessary evil.

But let's put things in perspective. If somebody has a bad race, there's another race around the corner. It's not life or death.

Yes, it's true that many journalists are struggling freelancers but that leads to some of the issues. So many of them are in debt and want their big break so much that morals go out the window for many! It's understandable in a way, everyone has to earn a living but it's why the level of journalism we see in Ireland is reaching the low levels we've seen in England.

Anyway, that's kind of a separate subject. Interviews like yesterday make hard viewing but they're part and parcel of it unfortunately.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

Yes, it's true that many journalists are struggling freelancers but that leads to some of the issues. So many of them are in debt and want their big break so much that morals go out the window for many! It's understandable in a way, everyone has to earn a living but it's why the level of journalism we see in Ireland is reaching the low levels we've seen in England.

Anyway, that's kind of a separate subject. Interviews like yesterday make hard viewing but they're part and parcel of it unfortunately.

To be honest I've never once seen any of the Irish journalists engage in unethical behaviour at any of the 5 championships I've been in the mixed zone for. Can you provide an example where an Irish athletics journalist has engaged in this please? Some journalists are former athletes themselves (not necessarily at a high level) so have complete empathy. Same can't be said for football where most journalists have never played their sport.

Joe_ Public

Chivito550 wrote: »

What's the solution though? Where do you want the athlete to be for those 5-10 minutes while he/she composes him/herself? They can't just stay out on the track as the next race needs to start. They could hang about at the edge of the track I suppose but nobody will do that. The only exit is through the mixed zone and the first people they encounter are TV broadcasters. She could have stayed there with Gillick for 10 minutes I suppose, and composed herself there. But do you think she wants to hang about there? Not a chance. In theory she could have refused the interview and walked straight through the entire mixed zone but she didn't do this. Very few will ever do this. Also remember that after talking to RTE she then basically had to answer the exact same questions off a number of Irish journalists for radio and the written press. The written press are in a totally separate area so have no access to the RTE interview, plus they each have their own questions to ask.

I don't know about solutions. But in team sports, apart from a couple of cursory pitch-side interviews, the main body of interviews don't take place until the teams are showered, changed and debriefed in the dressing rooms, as painful as that must be for the deadline-addled journos. I honestly don't see why athletics shouldn't be set up the same way. Surely that's how it used to be before the current mixed zone system was implemented?

Of course I understand the media has a job to do. If I was an rte producer or director, i'd probably be urging my on field reporters to get the interviews as quickly as possible. They trade in emotion after all, it makes great tv or radio. That's their job.

But equally, if I was an athletes coach or the team manager, I'd make sure I was right there on the spot to steer athletes through potentially embarrassing or stressful situations as much as possible. If Pete Taylor was still on board during the Olympics, for example, I'm almost certain his daughter would have been let nowhere near a camera until a lot more time had elapsed.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

To be honest I've never once seen any of the Irish journalists engage in unethical behaviour at any of the 5 championships I've been in the mixed zone for. Can you provide an example where an Irish athletics journalist has engaged in this please? Some journalists are former athletes themselves (not necessarily at a high level) so have complete empathy. Same can't be said for football where most journalists have never played their sport.

Oh I was talking about Irish journalism in general, that's why I said it's a separate topic. I haven't seen anything bad with athletics journalism here (apart from Jerry Kiernan! ). As has been said though, athletics doesn't get much coverage anyway.

Chivito550

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I don't know about solutions. But in team sports, apart from a couple of cursory pitch-side interviews, the main body of interviews don't take place until the teams are showered, changed and debriefed in the dressing rooms, as painful as that must be for the deadline-addled journos. I honestly don't see why athletics shouldn't be set up the same way. Surely that's how it used to be before the current mixed zone system was implemented?

Of course I understand the media has a job to do. If I was an rte producer or director, i'd probably be urging my on field reporters to get the interviews as quickly as possible. They trade in emotion after all, it makes great tv or radio. That's their job.

But equally, if I was an athletes coach or the team manager, I'd make sure I was right there on the spot to steer athletes through potentially embarrassing or stressful situations as much as possible. If Pete Taylor was still on board during the Olympics, for example, I'm almost certain his daughter would have been let nowhere near a camera until a lot more time had elapsed.

Football has a squad of around 16, multiplied by 2. That's around 32 people who can be interviewed, all relating to one game, and relating to just 2 teams. Athletics is an individual sport with several hundred people competing each day, in several events, each athlete with their own individual result (unlike team sports). Your idea would not work. It would be a farcical mess.

Regarding having a team manager walk through the mixed zone with an athlete, 1) they are not children and 2) team managers do not have access to the mixed zone to the best of my knowledge. At least they can't enter it from the track the way the athlete enters it.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

Oh I was talking about Irish journalism in general, that's why I said it's a separate topic. I haven't seen anything bad with athletics journalism here (apart from Jerry Kiernan! ). As has been said though, athletics doesn't get much coverage anyway.

Yep, and if we start proposing the idea of athletes passing up interviews then that small coverage will shrink to the levels of badminton or swimming in this country. We are doing well enough to actually get TV coverage of our sport on RTE. We need as much media publicity as we can get. If anything Ciara's interview yesterday is good publicity for our sport among the general public. The raw emotion is the type of thing that wins people's hearts. Sonia was loved not just for her incredible dominance but also her vulnerability and frailty in bad times. We need more well known figures in our sport and we need media coverage to create that. If Ciara makes the final in London or wins a medal in Berlin next year, it will make the story all the better. Like it or not, you need to build characters for the sport to thrive in such a competitive market here.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

Yep, and if we start proposing the idea of athletes passing up interviews then that small coverage will shrink to the levels of badminton or swimming in this country. We are doing well enough to actually get TV coverage of our sport on RTE. We need as much media publicity as we can get. If anything Ciara's interview yesterday is good publicity for our sport among the general public. The raw emotion is the type of thing that wins people's hearts. Sonia was loved not just for her incredible dominance but also her vulnerability and frailty in bad times. We need more well known figures in our sport and we need media coverage to create that. If Ciara makes the final in London or wins a medal in Berlin next year, it will make the story all the better. Like it or not, you need to build characters for the sport to thrive in such a competitive market here.

Actually, coverage will increase if athletes start performing and making finals/winning medals! Sonia was loved because she was a champion. Using a woman in distress to gain publicity is not the way to do it.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

Actually, coverage will increase if athletes start performing and making finals/winning medals! Sonia was loved because she was a champion. Using a woman in distress to gain publicity is not the way to do it.

Well funny enough we've won far more medals in recent times than we did in the 80s. Derval, English, Britton, Mad Len, Gillick, Cragg, 4x4 relay indoors, Paul McKee, Heffernan, Loughnahe, Gillian O'Sullivan. Then you've got Barr's 4th in Rio which tops all of the above IMO. In the 80s we won less medals yet the sport was more popular, so I'm not sure merely winning medals is the answer to popularity in today's society. We live in an era of reality TV nonsense. Results aren't enough anymore it seems. Not saying I agree with this but calling it the way it seems to be.

In 2009 we had a silver (now gold), a 4th, 6th and 10th at the Worlds.

In 2011, Deirdre Ryan came 6th and Len 10th at Worlds.

Rob Heffernan won gold in 2013 Worlds.

That to me is success and yet RTE didn't bother covering any of these championships.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

Well funny enough we've won far more medals in recent times than we did in the 80s. Derval, English, Britton, Mad Len, Gillick, Cragg, 4x4 relay indoors, Paul McKee, Heffernan, Loughnahe, Gillian O'Sullivan. Then you've got Barr's 4th in Rio which tops all of the above IMO. In the 80s we won less medals yet the sport was more popular, so I'm not sure merely winning medals is the answer to popularity in today's society. We live in an era of reality TV nonsense. Results aren't enough anymore it seems. Not saying I agree with this but calling it the way it seems to be.

In 2009 we had a silver (now gold), a 4th, 6th and 10th at the Worlds.

In 2011, Deirdre Ryan came 6th and Len 10th at Worlds.

Rob Heffernan won gold in 2013 Worlds.

That to me is success and yet RTE didn't bother covering any of these championships.

When those medals were won there was a lot of coverage! Headlines on the news, all over RTÉ and the papers. Interest in athletics has reduced because of the image of the sport being dirty, that's the real fact of it.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

When those medals were won there was a lot of coverage! Headlines on the news, all over RTÉ and the papers. Interest in athletics has reduced because of the image of the sport being dirty, that's the real fact of it.

No live coverage of any of these though. Derval had to be interviewed by Phil Jones on BBC after her phenomenal 4th in Berlin because RTE weren't there.

Regarding the doping issue, it's true that people perceive athletics as dirty. The reality is it is probably less dirty than football, rugby and tennis, but those sports put self financial interests over fair play and turn a blind eye, therefore most people think those sports are clean.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

No live coverage of any of these though. Derval had to be interviewed by Phil Jones on BBC after her phenomenal 4th in Berlin because RTE weren't there.

Regarding the doping issue, it's true that people perceive athletics as dirty. The reality is it is probably less dirty than football, rugby and tennis, but those sports put self financial interests over fair play and turn a blind eye, therefore most people think those sports are clean.

RTÉ don't have coverage of many sports!

Ah come on, those other sports have drug problems but athletics is top of the heap alongside cycling! Look at the recent stuff with Farah even!

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

RTÉ don't have coverage of many sports!

Ah come on, those other sports have drug problems but athletics is top of the heap alongside cycling! Look at the recent stuff with Farah even!

LOL. Of course you'll be top of the heap when you test the most. Football is utterly filthy and I'd be confident that if FIFA tested as much as the IAAF do then you'd see massive levels of big names getting busted. But FIFA don't want to expose a problem that most are oblivious to, and most football journalists are not interested in discussing the topic.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

LOL. Of course you'll be top of the heap when you test the most. Football is utterly filthy and I'd be confident that if FIFA tested as much as the IAAF do then you'd see massive levels of big names getting busted. But FIFA don't want to expose a problem that most are oblivious to.

No, athletics is top of the heap because it has a disgraceful history of high profile drugs cheats that continues to this day. I believe soccer has a drug problem but that's all we can go on. We have no proof of anything. In athletics the proof is there for all to see.

Joe_ Public

Chivito550 wrote: »

No live coverage of any of these though. Derval had to be interviewed by Phil Jones on BBC after her phenomenal 4th in Berlin because RTE weren't there.

Regarding the doping issue, it's true that people perceive athletics as dirty. The reality is it is probably less dirty than football, rugby and tennis, but those sports put self financial interests over fair play and turn a blind eye, therefore most people think those sports are clean.

Absolutely spot on.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

No, athletics is top of the heap because it has a disgraceful history of high profile drugs cheats that continues to this day. I believe soccer has a drug problem but that's all we can go on. We have no proof of anything. In athletics the proof is there for all to see.

Yep no proof because testing is awful. Imagine if athletics followed football's route all along. We'd be as oblivious to Ben Johnsons doping as we are to that of the German team of 54, the Ajax team of early 70s, to name just a couple. It's easy to have no proof when you don't look for proof, and football has never seriously looked for proof.

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

Yep no proof because testing is awful. Imagine if athletics followed football's route all along. We'd be as oblivious to Ben Johnsons doping as we are to that of the German team of 54, the Ajax team of early 70s, to name just a couple. It's easy to have no proof when you don't look for proof, and football has never seriously looked for proof.

So we're left with the facts that athletics have a long, disgraceful history of drug abuse that continues to this day, hence people have lost interest!

Joe_ Public

Chivito550 wrote: »

Football has a squad of around 16, multiplied by 2. That's around 32 people who can be interviewed, all relating to one game, and relating to just 2 teams. Athletics is an individual sport with several hundred people competing each day, in several events, each athlete with their own individual result (unlike team sports). Your idea would not work. It would be a farcical mess.

Regarding having a team manager walk through the mixed zone with an athlete, 1) they are not children and 2) team managers do not have access to the mixed zone to the best of my knowledge. At least they can't enter it from the track the way the athlete enters it.

Fair enough, I don't know enough about the logistics to appreciate what is feasible or preferable. If the present system is the only possible way, then so be it. It's not really that big an issue.

I'm not saying the athletes should be treated like children, just that it can be a stressful and confusing position to be in when things have gone badly wrong and you can't even process your thoughts in your own mind, let alone order them for someone sticking a microphone in your face. Maybe a team manager could be close at hand just to offer a comforting word, maybe ask the interviewers to give it 5 minutes, maybe just bring a note of common sense to proceedings.

Maybe the logistics don't make any of that possible, but it doesn't make it right in my opinion.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

So we're left with the facts that athletics have a long, disgraceful history of drug abuse that continues to this day, hence people have lost interest!

I don't believe doping has a huge impact on popularity. Everyone and their dog knows that the NFL is juiced and look at its popularity. Look at the crazy numbers that come out to support the Tour de France. The World Athletics Championships are oversubscribed for later this year in London. Usain Bolt is arguably the most popular sportsperson right now so athletics seems to be quite popular on a global level. It's not here but that's more to do with the AAI and also our obsession with field sports than it has to do with doping, especially considering we haven't had a huge amount of doping scandals in Irish athletics.

average_runner

Chivito550 wrote: »

I don't believe doping has a huge impact on popularity. Everyone and their dog knows that the NFL is juiced and look at its popularity. Look at the crazy numbers that come out to support the Tour de France. The World Athletics Championships are oversubscribed for later this year in London. Usain Bolt is arguably the most popular sportsperson right now so athletics seems to be quite popular on a global level. It's not here but that's more to do with the AAI and also our obsession with field sports than it has to do with doping, especially considering we haven't had a huge amount of doping scandals in Irish athletics.

Also around 2000 turned up for the indoor meet in Athlone.

Maybe we get another indoor meet in Dublin?

Nonevernomore

Chivito550 wrote: »

I don't believe doping has a huge impact on popularity. Everyone and their dog knows that the NFL is juiced and look at its popularity. Look at the crazy numbers that come out to support the Tour de France. The World Athletics Championships are oversubscribed for later this year in London. Usain Bolt is arguably the most popular sportsperson right now so athletics seems to be quite popular on a global level. It's not here but that's more to do with the AAI and also our obsession with field sports than it has to do with doping, especially considering we haven't had a huge amount of doping scandals in Irish athletics.

It's all well and good saying everybody knows this about a sport and everyone knows that. It's cold, hard facts that influence people. For instance many could say Bolt isn't clean but where's the proof!
With drugs been such an issue in athletics it has an influence on where parents send their kids. Could be a reason why kids do field sports in Ireland.

Chivito550

Nonevernomore wrote: »

With drugs been such an issue in athletics it has an influence on where parents send their kids. Could be a reason why kids do field sports in Ireland.

Ah here, will ya stop. Completely OTT stuff. You can count on one hand the number of doping scandals in Irish athletics, and one of them is a masters athlete.