Tag Archives: review

London 2012 – Review

Posted on by
2

18 September 2012

Hits, Misses and Meltdowns

“You must be so disappointed, what happened?”, what was the question asked by Giaan Rooney to Australia’s 4x100m men’s relay that flopped big time. If only this was the exact sort of question asked to the swimmers for almost 20 years, then maybe the predicament they were in now, and the disappointment and shock that the country felt, would not have occurred. As is typical of these modern times, this seemingly harsh critique of performances was suddenly the target of lame, non-sporting commentators and celebrities exclaiming that the athletes were brats and should be satisfied with silver, or fourth as was the case for the relay team. Shockingly one such “voice of reason” was Shane Gould on ABC’s Q&A program. Of course, she’s easy to talk, having won her 3 gold medals in Munich before suddenly quitting the sport because competition was suddenly of no interest to her.

This mentality to be content with second best and that the Olympics is not just about winning is the very reason the swimmers returned this horrific result. The word “result” is the key word. While the objective of sport should not be about statistical side of winning, it is about results, the most basic of which is meeting or improving your standard – ie: “doing your best”. These swimmers did not fail because they did their best and found an opponent better on the day. No, as they’ve done in many Olympics before, they failed to get even near their best. That is where the indictment lies, especially when the sport is heavily funded by the Australian tax-payer.

Anna Meares wins the women's sprint at London 2012 Olympics
Anna Meares wins the women’s sprint at the London 2012 Olympics for Australia

Readers of Socceroo Realm reviews of previous Olympics will no doubt be aware of the harsh criticism placed on the swimmers. In truth, the team for London actually performed no worse than the team for Beijing. In London, they were favoured only for two gold, and won one. In Beijing, they were favoured for 12 gold, and won six. The failure rate is identical. It’s just that six is a nicer number and the hyperbolic chest-beating that this coerces clouds the shambolic performances far more readily than one gold medal can.

With Australia reeling on the medal table with just one gold for the first 10 days, the air of mediocrity began to descend on the team to accept their lot, and to reinforce to the public that even winning just any medal was not easier. The aforementioned Giaan Rooney would, nearing the end of the swimming meet, tweet that “times don’t win races, people do”. Rubbish! Who produce times? People! If the swimmers could simply produce their times, then would come the basic benchmark of success of “doing your best”.

Mitchell Watt, after flopping in the long jump, had the most galling and insulting argument saying to Australia “you need to wake up” and that only an infinitesimal amount of people in Australia have won an Olympic medal, insinuating that those without medals have no right to criticise or have no idea of the difficulty of winning one. Watt’s jump of 8.16 was 38cm off his personal best, with the competition won with just 8.24 – the shortest leap to win gold since Munich. Watt went on to say, “I can’t believe I am a silver medallist with 8.16. On the one hand I’ve lost count of the times I’ve jumped over 8.30 – it’s probably over a dozen competitions”. Bingo! He then continued to say, “an Olympic gold medal is bloody hard to get… If people can’t realise a silver medal is a great achievement then there is something wrong with them”. No, there’s something clearly wrong with Watt and others of his ilk. He’s exposed his own contradiction and folly without even realising it. For someone that can regularly jump 8.30, he could win a silver medal running backwards, with gold simply meeting his standard. Yes, an Olympic medal is hard for anyone off the street to win. It’s not for an athlete clearly ranked number one in his event and afforded all the funding and pampering to get there. All he really had to do was execute his day job to a close approximation of his everyday standard. He didn’t. He failed. Just as his comrades in the pool did.

Quotes from others…

James Magnussen: “I can hold my head high and I’m proud of my achievements this week”. After the debacle of the 4×100 relay, Magnussen went on to lose the 100free by 1/100th of second despite seemingly have a clear lead on the last stroke. He didn’t dive for the wall strongly enough. Also, he was over half a second off his PB. He’s joking if he can really be proud. In fact, he is joking. Upon returning to Australia, he occasionally slipped out among all the contrived gibberish and that there is a fire to atone at Rio 2016.

Cate Campbell said it was “a little bit hurtful” of the criticism: “Its not that we haven’t been performing, its just that the world has stepped up”. No, the Australians failed. When you can’t manage personal bests, questions must be asked.

Melanie Schlanger said the attitude of the Australian public would “be a lot better” if Magnussen and Seebohm won: “The difference between being slammed and being praised is quite harsh”. So it should be. The disappointment against those two is that they failed to produce their best. It’s not even about medals. Jessica Fox’s silver in the kayak slalom was the toast of the nation because she exceeded all expectations. Whereas when Magnussen hyped himself so much, only to under-perform, the criticism must be harsh, and the disappointment must be enduring.

Nick Green, chef de mission, said all Australian silver medallists were delighted with their results. “In no way has it been a negative for them or our team”.

Thankfully, not all athletes were in this mode of making excuses. In fact, the biggest story that provoked the mentality of accepting mediocre performances was Emily Seebohm. She was heart-broken and distraught at missing the gold. It was so good to see her cry, unlike the relay men making excuses in denial. Seebohm at least has some defence. While she was way slower than her heat and semi that saw her set an Olympic record, in the final the American was only 1/10th off this record. While Seebohm would have won gold had she matched her OR, the fraction is so small that she can be forgiven.

We should want to see our athletes cry. Most have dedicated huge portions of their lives to their sport and there simply must be an opposite emotion to the joy of winning. As Australia rejoiced in the women’s 4×100 relay victory, there was an opposing story for the Dutch – the hot favourites – losing. They collectively cried after the medal ceremony and one of the Dutch papers headlined with “Golden Girls Fail”. Let’s never be too precious or gloating of victory in these circumstances, because that’s just one minor chapter of an entire event’s story. When it’s our turn to read one of the bad chapters, we must do so with humility and acceptance.

Seebohm’s result highlighted the main intrigue of these Olympic flops. How can swimmers swim slower in the final or not even do a personal best? This pattern of slow times in finals has been omnipresent. At Beijing, while the entire world was breaking world records and setting PBs in the “super suits”, the Australians mysteriously were not. If they did break a world record, they’d do it in the semi and then swim slower in the final, as Eamon Sullivan did. Even in Seebohm’s race in London, the Australian in seventh did so with a PB. Why couldn’t Seebohm? It seemed – like most of these flops – they go out too fast. Seebohm admitted this herself, that she was really hurting by the end of the race.

WHY THE FLOPS?

Clearly it’s psychological and/or work ethic and/or attitude. Too often there’s been a wimp factor associated with our elite runners and swimmers. Ian Thorpe quit the sport primarily because the work to keep pace with the world was too tough and he preferred the easier life associated with his monetary riches that also saw him courted as one of the glitterati for pompous parties and speaking engagements. He sensationally switched coaches just before Athens to Tracey Menzies, primarily for motivation – ie: she told him stuff exactly that he wanted to hear. Cathy Freeman is an even a greater blight on the country in terms of quitting, when she retired just one year before Athens and forsaked almost the certainty of becoming a dual gold medallists given the slow winning time of her particular event. Again, talked out of it by some soft-belly psychologist saying something like “you’ve done so much for your country, go out and have fun for yourself”, rather someone ram the fire up her butt and telling her that destiny awaits.

Then there’s the easy life. In athletics, once you’re on the team, there’s an endless circuit of World Championships, World Cups, World Indoor Events, Commonwealth Games and Olympics. This began in the early 80s and with that Australia has remained stagnant. With the low profile of the sport in Australia, these athletes are simply now content to the travel the world and enjoy the pampering and pandering. Come the early 90s, swimming began to expand its calendar, almost now as full as athletics. With this perpetual state of an Australian team, there’s now such little incentive to drive harder for the Olympics. Ron Clarke once famously said that he never saw a pair of sunglasses win a race, and now Rob de Castella pinpointed this low work ethic as well. It’s true. The source of this laziness is the easy endorsements and cosy international life. No more is this typified in an athlete like Tamsyn Lewis. She’s been on the scene for over a decade and never got near her PB in years. No doubt her angst at missing the Olympics was for the social aspect and to advertise for her sponsors, not for a chance to perform. The only solution is much tougher qualification times.

Just as this blog is being written, news comes about that men’s 4x100m relay team causing havoc with a rambunctious bonding session just days before Olympic Games. Drinking and disturbing female swimmers asleep in the hotel. Along with the fiasco of swimmers plugged into social networks on the eve of their events, such incidents typified the arrogance and frivolous attitude that many had competing for Australia. Liesel Jones, no doubt the biggest choker and under-performing swimmer in Australia’s history, could not stop telling interviewers that she’s in London to have fun. When asked of her advice to team-mates, it was to have fun and not worry about race results. Compare her and Seebohm’s entry to the pool deck and they are giggling and waving, then look at the swimmers of most other nations, and it’s all seriousness. Heck, look at Sally Pearson’s steely approach and unwavering concentration through her rounds of 100m hurdles. The impression is stark. Just as stark as the final results.

In defeat, compare the likes of Watt and Jones that publicly state their pride in the silver, or bronze, or fifth. Because an Olympic medal is hard and most important is to have fun! Then look at Australia’s coxless four in rowing, or team pursuit in cycling, absolutely gutted to finish second. These were events where Australia almost only had to show up for a silver and that the fight was for gold was much like the situation for Watt in the long-jump. Except Watt still has his international circuit, endorsements and lifestyle. While many of the cyclists are fortunate enough to return to professional teams, the rowers must slug it out juggling everyday life for their sport. No wonder the huge disparity in reactions. That’s not to suggest that athletics needs to cut all their major competitions. That means it’s up to the sporting authorities to implement tougher standards for continued financial support. Ideally, level of funding should be based on Olympic results.

WHY SHOULD AUSTRALIA BE SO AGGRIEVED AT THIS OLYMPIC FAILURE?

These athletes are heavily funded by the Australian taxpayer. That money is for us to stoke our national pride every four years, not for them to have fun, acquire as many follower on twitter as possible and get inked with a new tattoo. $310 million went to this Olympic campaign, with just under $40m to the swimmers alone. Questions must be asked at all levels, with each individual sport made accountable to the AOC and the government. That includes the AOC itself.

One problem immediately noted was the lack of psychologists. Instead, the likes of Steve Waugh, Layne Beachley, John Eales and Kieren Perkins were there as “liaison officers”. What the hell would they know? The sporting careers of Waugh, Beachley and Eales consisted of a pampered lifestyle against minimal or dubious world opposition. Much of their success was dished up on a plate thanks to fat contracts and massive funding. None were accountable in defeat. Cricket is notorious for excuses and sticking by their mates, while rugby could always call on the excuse that only two states played the sport. As an athlete, I’d want to be hearing from someone that really did it tough. No doubt these clowns imparted such flaccid wisdom of “just do your best… results will come… oh, and have fun”. That might work in the tame world of cricket and women’s surfing, it doesn’t work in an Olympics whether there’s dozens of hungry athletes out to execute their one shot of glory every four years. Even Perkins, he could only relay his famous victory in Atlanta. That was off the back of success already in the same low-key event in Barcelona, so hardly motivation for those new to the game.

The good news is that despite the outburst against the failure and that athletes should be far be more appreciative and less petulant about their results, there’s a virtual unanimous acceptance by athletes, commentators, media and – most importantly – the AOC, the Australian government and various sporting bodies, that this Olympics was a failure. The issues that saw this failure have been embedded for nearly 20 years, and it took until a Games like this and that one lonely gold medal for reality to bite.

THE HITS

Sailing – 3 Gold, 1 Silver

It’s actually been a long time coming. The sailors have been strong in several events with World Champions since Atlanta. Minor medals there, two gold in Sydney, a disastrous total wipe-out in Beijing, and now 3 gold in London. Most of all, the three winning classes were all hot favourites for their event and flung the pressure off their trapeze and hiking straps with ease, and duly won. Tom Slingsby in the Laser had the most pressure, after being hot favourite in Beijing and finishing 22nd, he just couldn’t fail in London. The women’s match-racing team showed how a young and emerging force should compete: with fearless respect, concentration and determination. They lost the final 3-2 to Spain, being behind twice in the series, and unlucky in two races, first with losing a crew member after a freak wave, and then a penalty in the decider.

Sally Pearson – Athletics, 100m Hurdles, Gold

It’s not just because her result was one of most exciting, this woman is a true inspiration. She has the right attitude and the right work ethic. No mention of “having fun” in these quotes leading into her event…

I’m really hard on my self as well.. Nothing is good enough for me in training. I always want more. I always want to give 100%. I use my training like a competition. I imagine these girls [Dawn Harper and Kellie Wells] next to me every single time I’m going over those hurdles in training.

I’ve been given a gift from somewhere. I’m not sure where. For me I don’t want to waste it. You want to use it every single time you’re out there.

I am number 1 and everyone else is second and let’s hope that’s how it turns out on the night.

Anna Meares – Cycling, Sprint, Gold

While Pearson was favoured to win her event, Meares has often come up short. She was humbled in the World Championships in Melbourne earlier in the year, and just seems to have that brittle edge to her that many top Australian sports people do. It proved that it was her rival, Victoria Pendleton, that cracked, entering the back straight too slow after Meares had forced her to lead, Meares pounced. She herself couldn’t believe it. After rightfully edging past Pendleton in the first heat after a relegation, surely the second one should not be this easy? Most of all, Meares deserved it. It meant so much to her. Her reactions after receiving the medal should be bottled and shown forever to our swimmers to show medals can’t be taken for granted and are just so damn precious.

Kakak Slalom – Jessica Fox, Silver; Kayak Sprint – Men’s K4 1000, Gold

Proof that you don’t need gold for success. Just do your best. Or, in Fox’s case, exceed your best. As a winner of the 2010 youth Olympics, she had potential. Few expected her to finish second. If you listen to Fox, despite revelling in the silver, she’s still a little annoyed that gold was only half a second a way. She lost considerable time in one of the up-water gates. Don’t worry. That will keep her fired up for Rio.

The men’s K4 went into London on the back of silver at the last world championships and has clear fasted qualifier for the final. They kept their concentration and won accordingly.

MISSES

Cycling – 1 Gold, 2 Silver, 3 Bronze

Much was made of the rivalry with Great Britain on the track at these Games. It proved non-existent with Britain winning 7 of the 10 gold medals on offer on the track. Australia won the women’s sprint, Germany the women’s team sprint, while Denmark won the men’s omnium. The latter event, Australia was dead unlucky. Glenn O’Shea – the world champion – led the event into the scratch race, only to be marked out of it by his competitors. He missed the key breakaway and finished a lowly 14th. He took third in the final event of the 1km time trial to no avail. Of the six events he finished third 4 times, 8th and 14th. Even a top 8 in the scratch race would have been enough for gold.

The women’s omnium had a similar story, with one bad result costing Annette Edmondson. She still finished third. The marquee men’s pursuit race ended with a British victory in world record time. They’d broken the world record in qualifying and the first match-race. Women’s pursuit were .082 off the gold/silver ride – again, as is the trend for Australian failures, out too hard. They ended with nothing. Women’s kierin was the big miss. More on that later.

Australia were unlucky in two sports in London, targeting them that in any other year would have paid rich dividends. This year the host nation also had them targeted. The other sport of target was…

Rowing – 3 Silver, 2 Bronze

While one or two crews flopped, others had the formidable British in their way, most particularly the event of the men’s coxless four. Both crews streeted the field.   Britain were just too strong. Like cycling, Australia unfortunate to have their sporting strengths the same as the British.

Athletics* – 1 Gold, 2 Silver

Kudos to Sally Pearson and Jared Tallant for holding their end of the bargain – and the pressure – to get the medals they deserved. What about the rest of this mob that was funded to the tune of $31mil? Other than the emerging Steven Soloman, did any other athlete make a final? Even our relay teams flopped, or didn’t even qualify for the Games, with only the men’s 4×100 squeaking into the final. A total embarrassment.

Cycling BMX – 1 Silver

Australia had the female world record holder and the male world champion. Both easily qualified for the final. Caroline Buchanan was slow off at the start, race over. Sam Willoughby was out-punched by defending champion, Maris Strombergs of Latvia. Strombergs looked in trouble during the 3-heat semi-finals, only just squeaking through to the final in the last heat with a high place. Was he conserving energy? It seemed so, because Willoughby had no answers. In fairness to both of Australia’s athletes, BMX is a one-off cut-throat final after going through qualifying, and then multiple quarter and semi rounds. It seems absurd. While in regular BMX racing, all rounds are sudden death, in the Olympics in probably should be fairer with a 3-heat final as well.

MELTDOWNS

Swimming – 1 Gold, 6 Silver, 3 Bronze, 1 lousy fourth place by the men’s 4×100 relay

As already mentioned, swimming returned results of farcical proportions. The number of minor medals tells the story. The gold won was actually unexpected. Of the two “certain” golds, one was the 4×100 men’s relay that swam 3 seconds below their best; the other James Magnussen in the 100 freestyle, touched out by 1/100th of a second despite seemingly leading on the last stroke, not to mention he was over half a second off his personal best. Stephanie Rice’s shoulder injury just hadn’t recovered enough to allow her to perform at her best. Expected better of either Sullivan or Magnussen in the 50m free. The latter couldn’t even make the final.

Of the “chances” as described in the preview, most of these took the minor medals.

Of the “hopes”, the women’s 4×100 relay team came through. In the women’s 200im, Alicia Coutts was dead unlucky to meet the super Ye Shiwen – the Chinese swimmer grossly unfairly the topic of drug smears. Coutts was one to consistently swim at or above her personal bests.

Tennis – Fail

Samantha Stosur should do better on grass. While winning was unlikely, the two women’s doubles and the mixed doubles were all bundled out in the early rounds. In men’s singles, ironically, the fading Lleyton Hewitt went the furthest in the tournament. Men’s doubles couldn’t even qualify a team. An absolutely appalling return given Australia’s rich history in tennis.

All Team Sports – 3 Bronze

As we know, neither football team could even qualify. That left the banner for hockey, basketball and water-polo. Men’s hockey – the perennial massive chokers of Australian Olympic team sports – did it again, leading Germany in the semis and losing. Both water polo teams led their semis before falling apart. The women recovered to take bronze. Women’s basketball lost to France in the round robin, forcing a showdown with the USA in the semi. They led at half time before wilting. They then won the bronze medal match over Russia and celebrated like winners. Never has a third place podium seen such a party. That’s because it felt like a “win”, compared to silver being awarded for losing the gold medal game.

Cycling – Anna Meares, Kierin, Fail

This woman should have been a double gold-medallist and real star of the Games. Instead, this failure will be forgotten as “swimmers syndrome” of winning gold in one or two events and forgetting the failures everywhere else. This event should not be forgotten. Ironically, Meares was a similar victim to Pendleton in their sprint decider. Meares entered the back straight too slow (read: too cocky) and got swamped. Race over.

Shooting – Michael Diamond, Single Trap, Fail

How could someone set an Olympic record and equal the world record with a score of 125 out of 125 in the preliminary rounds, only to miss 5 shots in the 25-shot final, including 3 of the last 5 shots to lose gold? Michael Diamond did. That’s right, he only needed to hit 23 of those 25 shots in the final round to win gold. He ended fifth of six finalists, missing a medal altogether – a total meltdown. He blamed “getting ahead” of the target – ie: trying to predict it rather than spot and shoot. That sounds more like poor concentration or maybe even the traditional Australian bullish arrogance. Then once there’s a miss, pressure is piled on.

Athletics – Steven Hooker, Pole Vault, Farcical

If there’s one “athlete” that sums up the weak Australian mentality and seemingly the focus to prance around in a dodgy hairdo and delusional strut, it’s this ultra sook, Steven Hooker. This was the athlete with the “yips”, then when presented with a chance to get more practice in the Olympic arena, he led a revolt during qualifying to force the remaining 14 men through to the final – as distinct to the usual 12 – because the last 4 were tied and that would have elongated the qualifying competition too long to split them. Naturally in the final he “no-heighted”, running through twice and crashed the bar down on the only leap that cleared the ground. At least with this humbling loss (if it’s not, it should be), the pressure’s gone, so as a has-been, he might be able to summon the will to become a been-again.

THE PREDICTED 8 TO 30 GOLD MEDALS?

That was the prediction, with 8 being the absolute lowest while 18 being optimum. Let’s look at the optimum gauge with the final result in brackets…

Athletics 1 (1)*
Cycling 4 (1)
Equestrian 1 (0)
Gymnastics 1 (0)
Hockey 1 (0)
Rowing 2 (0)
Sailing 2 (3)
Shooting 1 (0)
Swimming 3 (1)
Misc 2 (1)

Total 18 (7)*

Lauren Mitchell was apparently still recovering from injury that caused her stumble on the beam. Her best result was 5th on the floor. Equestrian had a disaster in the cross country for 3-day eventing, losing a rider and incurring too many penalties. Show-jumping was the other miss. The miscellaneous gold is courtesy of the kayak sprint, men’s K4 1000. Cycling should have delivered at least one more, either women’s kierin or either of the BMX; swimming at least the men’s 100m freestyle; and, shooting the men’s trap. That would have seen 10 – the actual AOC prediction.

An interesting comparison is between Australia and Great Britain and their respective home Olympics. GB won just six more medals at their home Games than did Australia in Sydney. Out of those medals, they won 29 gold compared to 16 (with 25 silver). Of course, neither of these compare to Spain’s result in Barcelona: 13 gold, 7 silver, 2 bronze. Now that’s a conversion rate. The official IOC predictions were practically spot on for total medals in London. GB did finish with 64, while Australia was 4 shy of the 39. The big error was the nature of those medals: GB won 29 gold, not 19, while Australia won 7, not 10.

AUSTRALIA’S FINAL MEDAL TALLY

Sailing 3 1 0 – 4
Swimming 1 6 3 – 10
Cycling 1 2 3 – 6
Athletics* 1 2 0 – 3
Kayak/Canoe 1 1 0 – 2
Rowing 0 3 2 – 5
Diving 0 1 0 – 1
Triathlon 0 0 1 – 1
Water polo 0 0 1 – 1
Field hockey 0 0 1 – 1
Basketball 0 0 1 – 1

Total* 7 16 12 – 35

THE FUTURE

Already most sports are conducting major reviews, especially swimming, while the Australian Sports commission will conduct a review. The broad issue is of directing money. Australia spent $310mil for 7 gold out of 35 medals (16 silver, 12 bronze); Britain spent $390mil for 29 gold out of 56 medals (17 silver, 19 bronze). Something clearly went wrong. You see a nation like Kazakhstan win 7 gold (1 silver, 5 bronze), with 4 from weight-lifting, including 3 by women. Korea exploited archery, fencing and shooting to help build their 13 gold. Britain took 8 gold from cycling, 5 from rowing, 4 from athletics and 3 from boxing and equestrian. Note that their swimmers failed, cycling and rowing still missed a few, sailing was unlucky with 4 silver, and their hot favourite in women’s triathlon came fifth. New Zealand targeted, and exploited, rowing for 3 of their six gold.

It’s not even about total gold medals, it’s about efficiency. Comments from the AOC that Australia should aim for top 5 on the medal tally is nonsense. The more medals won actually diminishes their value. Ironically, most Australians could name every gold medal at these Games. Could the British do so with their 29 gold? Had Australia won 15 or 20 gold, would our superb sailors get the adulation and credit they deserved? No. Winning between 5 and 10 is probably the right balance. More importantly it is that the athletes must perform and that ratio of medals is roughly equal. Because, as much as commentators and media and some athletes praised the silver medals as great results, the tune quickly changed once Slingsby, Meares and Pearson won gold.

Australia also makes the mistake of spreading funding around too broadly. Team sports should rely more on their own and funding based more on public participation. Depending on the sport, twenty athletes in a final Olympics squad, plus the massive program to support them, all for a chance to win 1 gold medal per event. In swimming, one athlete can win 6 individual gold, as we’ve seen with Michael Phelps. The public just see the gold, and individuals are far easier to laud as heroes. Only aficionados of the sport could care if basketball or water polo won a gold. Look to football, who even cared that Australia didn’t make it?

Within a sport, there are ways to be smarter. Holland and swimming, they only pour money into shorter freestyle events. With that you might get a butterflyer and a decent medley relay. Otherwise, you get 50, 100, 200 and 4×100 relay events. In Sydney they won 5 gold from 2 athletes (and 3 more gold from 1 cyclist). In London they won 2 gold and were the shock losers to Australia in the women’s 4×100 relay. Spending money on longer distance swimming and there’s really only the 1500, maybe the 400 for a special athlete. Note that of the apparent legend status of Kieren Perkins, he never won Olympic 400m. No point in lamenting that Australia is now a dud at distance events. Much more worthwhile to lament the dud results in the shorter and far more numerous shorter events with a far greater depth of talent.

Athletics is the other big sport for scrutiny. Before Pearson’s gold was Cathy Freeman’s in 2000 then Debbie Flintoff in 1988. That’s a twelve year cycle, and note that the men have won none on the track, and only Steve Hooker’s 2008 pole vault is the only success of anyone in the field. That is absolutely appalling for a sport that gets $31mil and returned just two medals at these Games at $15.5mil a pop and barely got anyone else into a final. Before 1988, Glynis Nunn won heptathlon in the boycott-hit 1984 Games, and then you need to revisit 1968 for the last success. In fact, one of the two gold there was Ralph Doubell in the 800m, and he still holds the Australian record. Reprehensible. Like swimming, athletics will still be funded because it’s so high profile. It just needs better accountability.

– All figures on Olympic funding courtesy of The Age newspaper, 11/08/2012

* Jared Tallent’s silver medal in the 50km Walk was upgraded to Gold in early 2016 after the Russian winner was disqualified for drug use. Australia’s final tally is 8 Gold, 15 Silver and 12 Bronze, with Athletics returning 2 Gold and 1 Silver.

THE HAPPY AND GLORIOUS GAMES

It not just about Australia, and this Olympic Games was the first one that you actually really experience. Thanks to the eight channels on Foxtel, Australia’s woes were made trivial next to the overwhelmingly glorious sporting spectacle on offer. While channel 9 only offered the gold medal race in the sailing events, those on pay-tv could keep track of the entire regatta, where the real drama lay. While Australia were largely untouchable by the time of their 3 Gold Medal races, other classes went down to the wire. China won the women’s laser in a virtual four-boat match race, Sweden stole gold from Britain in the Star class thanks to a late windshift, New Zealand kept the Brits aside in the women’s 470, and Britain’s Ben Ainslie won his fourth straight Olympic gold after a monumental battle against Denmark. Look to cycling, rowing and even swimming, where Lithuania’s Ruta Meilutyte, at just 15 years old, won the 100m breast-stroke, holding off American world champion Rebecca Soni. Amazing. Thanks to twitter, you get a direct feeling of her emotions too. These additions just made the experience so fabulous.

For me, mornings were used to watch the overnight recording of channel 9’s telecast and certain sporting sessions on Foxtel, with early afternoon reserved to watch repeated sporting sessions on Foxtel or a recording. By 4 or 5 PM it was a few hours catching up on the internet, reading newspapers both here and the UK, twitter feeds and viewing videos and photos from AOC and London2012 websites. At around 7pm was “off-peak” where only the odd rowing or kayak final or some basketball could drag major attention, before sailing was on at around 10pm. Around midnight was another small off-peak period where I could explore and catch up with other parts of life (like showering!), before bed time around 2 to 3am. It was full on.

The best Olympics ever? Before London I had Barcelona and Sydney as joint equal. Barcelona was the Games where Australia began to come of age, the boycott era was an extra 4 years behind, and who could forget some of the iconic images like the Olympic Flame lit via the archer’s arrow and the outdoor swimming pool? Sydney regaled most in national pride and setting a benchmark for following Games. London exceeded that, and put on a far superior sporting spectacular. While that’s no doubt aided by far greater exposure of the sporting contest, the host nation themselves performed so well, they produced iconic moments, plus the city itself was majestic in its deliverance. Easily the best Olympic Games ever.

Melbourne Cup 2015 Review

Posted on by
Reply

4 November 2015

Normally each year you can look in hindsight and find a reason for a horse winning the Melbourne Cup, and then bash yourself for not having a few dollars on it. As wise as we so often are in hindsight, only a total loon could find the answer this year. Even Prince Of Penzance’s second place in his final preparation race 10 days before the Melbourne Cup, all that told us was there was a far superior alternative.

As much as Prince Of Penzance ran well in the Moonee Valley Cup, he was walloped into second by The United States, and in track record time. Also, the MV Cup itself, it’s been notoriously a poor guide for 25 years now. Is it any wonder “No hope” was the common conclusion given to Prince Of Penzance for the Melbourne Cup? If not explicitly, it was certainly by acquiescence. Not one single commentator or racing expert could even have Prince Of Penzance as their “rough” chance. He shared the title of rank outsider with one other horse at $101.

Why did Prince Of Penzance win the Melbourne Cup? Quite simply he was the right horse at the right time in the right Cup. Put him in most other Cups and the trainer’s best hope of a top 10 would be the most likely result – if he’s lucky.

Michelle Payne wins the 2015 Melbourne Cup on Prince Of Penzance (c) Mark Knight

Michelle Payne wins the 2015 Melbourne Cup on Prince of Penzance, becoming the first female jockey to ever win Australia’s greatest race. A beautiful depiction here by Herald-Sun cartoonist Mark Knight.

The four key reasons to Prince Of Penzance’s victory:

1) The most advantageous reason was the ridiculously slow pace of the race. On good ground, they ran 7 seconds outside the race record. They ran the last 400m in 22.6 seconds, which was a second faster than the winners of the much shorter Caulfield Cup and Cox Plate. As a sit and sprint, no horse from beyond midfield could win the race.

2) Outside 10 metres wide in the home straight, the track was soft. Even with a fast tempo, back-markers would still have been at a big disadvantage having to swoop wide. This soft ground was caused by that part of the track used for training gallops the week prior, and then it rained on the Saturday, causing the section to absorb more moisture. While it sounds like calamitous stupidity, the track managers were unlucky. There’s always practice gallops and more rain arrived than expected.

3) Several potential challengers suffered interference, notably Criterion and Gust Of Wind. Max Dynamite caused the main interference, when veering out and pushing Gust Of Wind onto a bunch of other horses. Big Orange drifted in to block Our Ivanhowe a potential run, while the minor shifting of Excess Knowledge out and Trip To Paris in combined to squeeze Criterion (briefly halting his progress), Who Shot Thebarman (already peaked on his run) and Snow Sky (already tiring).

4) Last and not least, the brilliant ride by Michelle Payne. Sitting on the fence behind Criterion and Max Dynamite, with 1000 metres to go, she elected to leave the fence and search for a run wider. By the 800 metres mark, she was outside of Max Dynamite and following the run of Trip To Paris, who sat outside Criterion for the trip. From there it was race over. Sky Hunter, who was outside TTP, tired upon entering the straight, which allowed Prince Of Penzance clear passage past TTP. Max Dynamite was still stuck behind horses, only getting clear with 250 metres to go, after checking past the heels of both TTP and POP.

What else did we learn?

The Caulfield Cup again proved a poor form race. Trip To Paris (2nd in it) finished fourth in the Melbourne Cup, Our Ivanhowe (3rd) 10th, Gust Of Wind (4th) 6th, Snow Sky (5th) 23rd and Fame Game (6th) 13th. The CC winner Mongolian Cup did not run in the MC due to illness.

The Geelong Cup continued to be a rubbish form race in recent years. Almoonqith (1st) finished 18th.

The Ascot Gold Cup (English race over 4000m) winner again failed to win the 3200m Melbourne Cup (5th). The sprint that Trip To Paris showed in the Caulfield Cup was sadly missing. He had a great run, loomed up like the winner and could not go on. He’s the one big disappointment of the race. Other Europeans that failed to sprint were Big Orange (led into the straight), Snow Sky and Quest For More.

International runners without a lead-up run in Australia mostly failed. The best result was Max Dynamite in second and Big Orange in fifth. Then you look at Bondi Beach 16th, Kingfisher 19th and Sky Hunter 22nd. It would be unfair to include Red Cadeaux, who despite not looking a winning chance, sustained an injury and did not finish the race.

Even in a slow Cup, it seems several decent chances didn’t run the trip: Preferment, Our Ivanhowe, The United States, Sky Hunter, Hartnell, Bondi Beach and Almoonqith.

Mostly it was a Cup to avoid drawing too many concrete conclusions. The slow pace and the uneven track hurt Fame Game and any other horse out wide; interference hurt Criterion, Gust Of Wind, Quest For More and Who Shot Thebarman. Others down the list including Preferment (20th) and Hokko Brave (17th) had no hope anyway despite the interference, because they were so far back.

Still a memorable Cup

Winning a few dollars is only a bonus. The real enjoyment comes from watching the race as a spectacle and enjoying the result. We got one hell of a result this year and a tremendous story with the first female jockey winning the Cup, on a $101 outsider, strapped by her adorable Down Syndrome affected brother Stevie Payne, and trained by your quintessential Australian bush trainer in Darren Weir.

Then there was also the plight of Red Cadeaux, that upon seeing his strapper run onto the track, my heart sunk expecting the worse. It halted the enjoyment of watching Michelle Payne’s celebrations on Prince Of Penzance. Thankfully it all worked out fine with the fetlock injury not life threatening, and then I could to relive the celebrations on TV recording that evening. Payne’s a class act with so much poise and professionalism, Weir so humble and likeable, and, of course, not to forget Prince Of Penzance, so brave as all the horses are, and the true hero of the day. It was victory to saviour.

Finishing Order

01. PRINCE OF PENZANCE T: Darren Weir J: Ms Michelle Payne
02. MAX DYNAMITE T: Willie Mullins J: Frankie Dettori
03. CRITERION T: David Hayes & Tom Dabernig J: Michael Walker
04. TRIP TO PARIS T: Ed Dunlop J: Tommy Berry
05. BIG ORANGE T: Michael Bell J: James Spencer
06. GUST OF WIND T: John Sargent J: Chad Schofield
07. EXCESS KNOWLEDGE T: Gai Waterhouse J: Kerrin McEvoy
08. THE OFFER T: Gai Waterhouse J: Damien Oliver
09. QUEST FOR MORE T: Roger Charlton J: Damian Lane
10. OUR IVANHOWE T: Lee & Anthony Freedman J:Ben Melham
11. WHO SHOT THEBARMAN T: Chris Waller J: Blake Shinn
12. SERTORIUS T: Jamie Edwards J: Craig Newitt
13. FAME GAME T: Yoshitada Munakata J: Zac Purton
14. THE UNITED STATES T: Robert Hickmott J: Joao Moreira
15. HARTNELL T: John O’Shea J: James McDonald
16. BONDI BEACH T: Aidan O’Brien J: Brett Prebble
17. HOKKO BRAVE T: Yasutoshi Matsunaga J: Craig Williams
18. ALMOONQITH T: David Hayes & Tom Dabernig J: Dwayne Dunn
19. KINGFISHER T: Aidan O’Brien J: Colm O’Donoghue
20. PREFERMENT T: Chris Waller J: Hugh Bowman
21. GRAND MARSHAL T: Chris Waller J: Jim Cassidy
22. SKY HUNTER T: Saeed bin Suroor J: William Buick
23. SNOW SKY T: Sir Michael Stoute J: Ryan Moore
DNF: RED CADEAUX T: Ed Dunlop J: Gerald Mosse

Melbourne Cup 2015 Preview

Full site: socceroorealm.com

Canada 2015 – Women’s World Cup – Review of Australia / Matildas

Posted on by
Reply

28 June 2015

Disappointing end to a promising campaign

After escaping the so-called “group of death”, and then beating Brazil in the round of 16 to record their first knock-out match win ever, the Matildas succumbed to World Champions Japan 1-0 in the quarter final. Even with 5 days break compared to 3 for Japan, the Matildas seemed lethargic from the start and unable to impose their game. While commentators suggested fatigue was the problem, it seemed more like a combination of Japan being too good and Australia possibly pacing the game in case of extra time. The “hot weather”, which was 26 at the start of the game and forecast to reach 31, should not have been a problem. The artificial pitch, supposedly 50 degrees in such conditions, did not hamper the players’ post match commiseration, as they lay sprawled all over it in sadness. Pacing the knockout games seemed to be a trend at the men’s World Cup in Brazil last year, and maybe it’s crept in here too. It’s a good strategy, as long as you’re not sucker-punched near the end of regulation time.

Other than the early phase of the second half, Australia were shut out of the game, and ultimately hit with a sucker punch. Their only shots were speculative from range or from the very rare Japanese mistakes. While 8 corners to zero and a 60% possession rate are suggestive of the dominance, the reality of the dominance is that Japan’s high-pressing strategy saw Australia’s attempt to play its possession game collapse. It only seemed a matter of time that Japan would capitalise on a mistake or convert a corner, and that proved exactly true when a loose pass out of defence was picked off. After the shot was blocked, the resulting corner on 87 minutes was scrambled into the net. Game over against a Japanese team that all teams have found difficult to crack. Ignoring the bad goal-keeping error in the R16 final against the Netherlands, Japan have only conceded one goal all tournament.

Australia’s best performance of the tournament came against Brazil in the R16 final. They managed to shut down the dangerous Brazil while creating good opportunities for themselves. The winning goal came on the 64th minute by the fabulous Kyah Simon, who scored both goals in the pivotal game against Nigeria that virtually sealed Australia’s place in the second round, to leave the Brazilians shattered. It was marvellous scenes for both the jubilation of the Matildas and tears of the often arrogant and conceited Brazilians.

This World Cup had been expanded to 24 nations from 16, meaning the four best third-place teams from the six groups would also progress and 3 points is quite often to progress. Australia drew 1-1 with Sweden in their final group match to hold second place, while Sweden’s three draws were enough for them to progress in third. USA, which had difficulties against Australia and Sweden, won the group with 7 points. Against the USA, Australia matched them for the first 60 minutes, entering half time at 1-1, before class told in the end and USA ran out 3-1 winners.

Quotes – Norio Sasaki, Japan’s coach

Even if we didn’t get a goal within 90 minutes, I felt we would get it inside 120 minutes. The game-plan was executed very well. We recognise the growth of Australia in this World Cup and my team will take confidence from this and we can build with future success (at the tournament). Also the solutions we came up for this match worked very well, and this also gives us confidence. We will fight hard in the semi-final being mindful of the people supporting us back in Japan.

Quotes – Alen Stajcic, Australia’s coach

Clearly the better team won, even though I thought it evened out a bit after the first 20 minutes. Japan were a lot more composed over the full 90 minutes. We didn’t set out to play any differently, but we just spent a lot of energy in the first 20 minutes chasing the game. Most of our players are young, and it is a heartbreaking moment for them, but sometimes you learn from these experiences. We don’t want to compete with the best, we want to beat the best, so now it is a case of taking further steps. There is a lot of room for growth moving forward.

The Women’s Game

Watching these tournaments since Sweden 1995, when just 12 teams participated and Australia lost all 3 games, the growth in skill has been phenomenal. The key growth area is the goal-keepers, who bordered on embarrassing even until the last World Cup in Germany. So many long shots would be scored as the goalies’ poor athleticism would preclude them from reaching shots that seemed in very simple reach of the men. Even allowing for women being less powerful in the leap and generally shorter, the attempts to save looked terrible, or the women would be left flat-footed. That’s all changed for Canada 2015 with notably far few shots from range being scored, and that’s not from the lack of trying. Australia’s Lydia Williams notably pulled off several world class saves, especially against Brazil, and she’s only 175cm tall. Defending is also tighter in general, especially the lack of one-on-ones. It’s only the African and Latin American teams, who are quite a bit off the pace, that you still see some of this calamity. Also the expansion to 24 teams did bring a few weaker teams in, notably Ivory Coast and Ecuador, both of whom conceded 10 goals in a match.

The general attraction of the women’s game – the more open play and more shots on goal – that’s still there. That should remain a part of the fabric of the game given women’s weakness (or strength!) of being naturally not quite as strong or fast as the men. So, too, should the paucity of diving, cheating and time-wasting that often blights the men’s game. Let’s hope this difference is a result of women having more integrity rather than being “less professional” than the men so that it never enters the women’s game. This overall increase in action and flow meant that the Australia/Japan QF was probably the only match that approached the banality of a stalemate in the men’s game. If the women keep improving, there’s no reason why they cannot provide a product that’s as compelling to watch as the men’s. In tennis and basketball, connoisseurs of those sports (including myself) appreciate the more technical and nuance nature of the female versions. Football, with the rules unchanged for the woman, can certainly reach this level.

Of course, the other attraction of the women’s game is the women themselves. Let’s be realistic and resist accusations of sexism, women have for generations enjoyed watching men play for reasons more than just watching a football match, so why not vice versa? Thankfully the women are not treated as sex objects, as play in the same uniforms as the men, not any stupid bodysuits to artificially “sex up” the game, like Australian basketball did or once Sepp Blatter notoriously suggested that football do. Kyah Simon has the prettiest eyes and a winning smile that’s as lethal as her boot, and is certainly my favourite of the Australian team, while any player with a long ponytail looks so elegant. Japan’s Rumi Utsugi, who was integral in converting the winning corner, is one notable, as too almost the entire starting eleven of the Netherlands. USA still has the glamorous Hope Solo, who’s been a long time favourite.

It’s good to see different teams dominate at world level. In the early days the trio of USA, Norway and China were the most dominant. While Norway and China have slid a little, the USA have reached the semi final of every single World Cup. Japan has taken over as Asia’s most dominant team, while Germany has supplanted Norway. Traditional footballing countries are now improving thanks to their domestic leagues, notably England and France, and this was the first ever World Cup for Spain, Netherlands and Switzerland. Latin America is poor (except for Brazil) and Africa is far behind. Canada is the other strong member in the Americas, while Asia saw Thailand qualify to reinforce the power of the east. New Zealand is competitive for Oceania.

Offsides

Give the female assistant referees a gig at the men’s events! Never before have I see a virtual faultless display off refereeing the offside law. Most particular the “favour the attacker” edict in that, yes, in every line-ball case, the referees favoured the attackers! Maybe only once I’ve seen an obvious offside allowed, and even then we’re still talking reasonably close. More importantly, I don’t recall seeing a wrong offside called. Those are the true bane of the sport, because they deny goals and goal chances. The spirit of the law is being refereed perfectly at this World Cup. Whatever it is, better eyesight, reinforcement of the edict, or females having a better empathy for the game, it’s been wonderful. The outfield refereeing has also been great. If there’s an area that the women have clearly surpassed the men, it’s the referees.

Equality

The big talking point in the media has been the discrepancy of pay between the men and women. While the men get $6000 per match at their World Cup, the women get $500 at theirs. Obviously market forces are involved here, with the men generating far more revenue. They also get a slice of the prize-money, which the women also do. While you could say double the match payment to $1000, there will still be calls of inequality unless it’s even. Just look at Grand Slam tennis where even at less than 5% difference in recent years, the women were still howling until it was equal. That’s even despite the fact their matches are only 60% as long as the men, they attract less crowds and the depth in their fields is much weaker. Given the match payments are a relatively small cost in the overall expense of sending a team to a World Cup, the FFA should probably just make it equal. As for prize-money split, that percentage should also be equal. Unfortunately, until the women’s game generates enough revenue to pay the massive prize-money on offer at a men’s World Cup, that means total dollars from prize-money will remain low compared to the men.

The important thing with any issue of equality is to see it progressing. It was only 20 years ago that the men were striking at their pathetic pay, which was in the realm of a few hundred dollars like the women now. Remember World Series Cricket in the 70s? That was all about pay, particularly revenue coming into the game that wasn’t being spread to the players. Cricket has just recently put their women on contract, something that the FFA has emulated. The advantage with the cricket model is that, yes, you do control your players, so your national team is never compromised. Unfortunately that’s created a problem that the women are then precluded to play overseas, where they could earn much more money than the local W-League. Football is not cricket, with fundamentally different structures at international level. Whereas cricket is a pseudo club team almost permanently on international tour, football is representative and an adjunct to domestic club competitions. For the short-term sacrifice to the improvement of the Matildas that the contract system seems to have made for this World Cup, it would better to disband the contracts, use that money to pay higher wages in the W-League, and be more accommodating to any player that does want to go overseas. After all, if it’s about equality, our female warriors should be treated equally to our male ones.

Full site: socceroorealm.com

Melbourne Cup 2014 – A Double Disappointment

Posted on by
Reply

05 November 2014

Disappointing is the only way that could describe this year’s Melbourne Cup. As someone that loves the race so much and someone that loves the horses, it finished a hollow day.

In chronological order, the first disappointment was Red Cadeaux finishing second yet again. The wagering on horses is only ever side issue for me. It’s the sporting story that means far more. When he burst to the lead down the straight, I couldn’t care less about any bets on other horses, and started cheering him home wildly. Sadly, that moment was barely a few seconds, as Protectionist leaped to the front and ran away with the race. Some minor satisfaction did soon emerge, that second place was a great achievement for “Cads”. To do it now three times in four runs, it puts him in Melbourne Cup folklore.

The second disappointment was obviously the death of the favourite from Japan, Admire Rakti, and then later in the evening learning that Araldo had to be euthanised. Admire Rakti collapsed soon after the race in his stall, dying of acute heart failure. He dropped back very quickly in the race just entering the straight, so immediately something seemed odd. No one expected this. Then Araldo, who finished 7th, was spooked by a flag waved close to him as he walked back from the race, and in recoiling away, awkwardly twisted and planted his leg, smashing a pastern bone in his off rear leg. Both deaths were of such a freak and unavoidable nature, and unfortunately animal activists disgraced themselves by their ghoulish hovering over the carcasses to make their ignorant points.

Admire Rakti - before the 2014 Melbourne Cup

Admire Rakti – before the 2014 Melbourne Cup

First and foremost, the deaths were freakish and could not been prevented. Human athletes die of such heart conditions and no one calls for their sports to be banned. Admire Rakti was never “flogged to death” or forced into the barriers as was disgustingly and ignorantly claimed. Only the final stages of a race are horses asked for their effort, and he was eased up much earlier than that. Before the race, the couple of tickles on the back of his legs were just to encourage a notoriously mischievous horse to enter the barriers. Facts are that a horse cannot be forced to run if they are really stubborn about it.

As for Araldo, who could ever have foreseen such an incident like that? This has never occurred on the race track. In fact, such breaks of legs are more likely to be seen in private paddocks and stables. Is anyone calling for the horse pet industry to be dissolved?

If you want to talk about deaths, the pet industry as a whole is far, far worse. Tens of thousands of cats and dogs are euthanised each year in Australia, and that’s only the ones officially recorded. Unwanted puppies, kittens and birds, especially with regard to show animals, are wantonly destroyed by their breeders. Then there’s the unimaginable torture that exists. Kittens burnt alive, hamsters put into microwave ovens, need I go on? Let’s also not forget the 60 billion animals worldwide bred each year as sources for food and clothing. In comparison, the horse racing industry is the most heavily regulated industry involving animals on the planet and most horses lead pampered lives. If I had a choice of being a cat, a dog, chicken, cow, pig or race horse, I know which one I’d choose. It’s also a sport that involves human fatalities, so the sacrifice is diffuse. A bit of perspective, please.

Horse racing is attacked because it is high profile. Now that the Cup is over, all these big mouths will go away for another year, munching on dead animals for their lunch and dinner, thinking nothing wrong of it, in acts of total hypocrisy. Calls to ban whips and 2yo racing are also irrelevant to the events that occurred on Tuesday. If only activists were so sincere. No, that’s part of the strategy to pick away at the edges – and mostly because activists don’t like “the look” of the whip or “the idea” of a 2yo racing, not that there’s anything genuinely cruel happening. Even if these wishes were heeded, within a few years, the activists would be back again to demand the entire sport be banned.

For what it’s worth, in an ideal world, it would be great if no animals were used for anything. The world is such a long way from that, that to simply say “no animal exploitation” is unrealistic. Food and clothing substitutes need to be developed, and so too life-like robots to replace organic pets. Personally, while I’m no vegetarian, I already prefer vege hot-dogs over standard ones. It’s steps like this that will ultimately start reducing mankind’s reliance on animals, not irrational, militant and disrespectful conduct.

The Race…

Lost in the double disappointment is Protectionist’s amazing win. I was staggered to see a horse bolt away like that, and learning the times of 11.66 seconds for the final 200 metres and 22.75 for the final 400, it was ridiculous, and more typical of closing sectionals in many sprint races. That’s why you needed to be happy for Red Cadeaux as he was beaten by a almost a freak performance. You also could not help marvel at the performance of Protectionist itself.

The mood in the crowd immediately after the race says so much. While there was the isolated excited race-goer here and there, mostly it was subdued. The only post-race atmosphere more subdued in recent times was Green Moon in 2012. In that year, first, second and third were unfancied. In 2014, it’s fair to say most people were hoping for Admire Rakti, while Red Cadeaux and Who Shot Thebarman had their supporters cheering… until Protectionist’s blitzkrieg.

Removing Protectionist from the equation, you do need to wonder about the strength of the field. It was already considered weaker than previous years, and vindicated by Red Cadeaux being a 9yo and not in the form of previous years, and Who Shot Thebarman in third being not much more than a glorified plodder. Even Precedence, in his fourth attempt and also a 9yo, achieved his best result in sixth place. Not that it all matters ultimately. It’s about the drama of the race, and this year we got a memorable winner and runner-up.

Protectionist - winner of 2014 Melbourne Cup

Protectionist – winner of the 2014 Melbourne Cup

The Favourites…

Admire Rakti’s sad demise did rob of us potentially of a monumental finish. He got a nice a drag off tearaway leader My Ambivalent and about to make his run when he faded. If you imagine Delta Blues in 2006, they raced almost identically, and most likely Admire Rakti would have skipped out by a few lengths as Delta Blues did. In 2006, Pop Rock emerged to chasing and just fail to catch Delta Blues. In 2014, Protectionist – who had to come from near the back of the field – would have been that challenger. Sadly we can only imagine.

Fawnker (10th) and Lucia Valentina (13th) didn’t run the distance. It was suspected before the race. In fact, it was proven the year before for Fawkner when finishing sixth. Still so many of us were lured into selecting them by their brilliance over shorter distances. If something is certain in this modern era with the Melbourne Cup, horses that can’t run a strong 3200 metres, avoid, avoid, avoid, avoid. It’s that simple.

Signoff (4th) just lacked that touch of class to strongly run out the race. He loomed up into the straight and seemed destined to race away with it. He may not have been seasoned enough or perhaps didn’t back up after Saturday’s race. That’s always the risk with the approach the connections took with the horse. He’ll be interesting to watch next year. Often, horses don’t back up a year later anyway. Their first shot, especially with such a light weight, is usually their best. Look at Fawkner.

Mutual Regard (14th) couldn’t accelerate. His run ended quickly so possibly he found the ground too firm. He hadn’t a lead up run in Australia so it was always a risk. Normally I follow the rule to ignore internationals that haven’t run in Australia yet. I was seduced by his Ebor win (an inconsistent form reference at best) and his relatively short odds, and Damien Oliver the jockey.

The Others…

Most couldn’t run the distance, lacked the class or were plodders. Seismos (9th) is the classic example of the latter. He’ll run forever; he’ll just do it too slowly. Willing Foe was serviceable in fifth. Araldo (7th) lacked the big acceleration -emphasised by him racing back with Protectionist and finishing lengths behind him. The outside barrier impacted here, forcing to tuck behind the field after the start. Had he been able to race on the speed, he would have battled for a few spots higher. My Ambivalent (17th) was always either a speculative hit or a probable miss. She was a miss; never settled and ran too hard early.

My Results…

Banking on Admire Rakti as I did, obviously the result was a wipeout. I had Protectionist outside my top four. After Admire Rakti, the next three of Fawkner, Signoff and Mutual Regard were tough decisions. In overall betting, Fawkner, Lucia Valentina, Protectionist and Mutual Regard were essentially equal second favourite. In hindsight (yes, it’s wonderful), I should have tossed aside Fawkner (distance doubt) and Mutual Regard (unseen international). Most likely I still go Signoff as second pick. The issue I always had with Protectionist was that Herbert Power run where he was beaten by Signoff and others. His run also seemed to end 50 metres out in this 2400 race. His overall record still suggested he’d run 3200, and his recent form was good, so the Herbert Power should have been seen as an acclimatisation exercise, not so much a form reference, as such races rarely are these days.

Protectionist - relaxing in his stall before 2014 Melbourne Cup

Protectionist – relaxing in his stall before the 2014 Melbourne Cup

Next Year…

As mentioned in the preview, all 5 panellists on Sky Racing’s “Racing Retro” picked Protectionist. Protectionist also emerged as top pick from the racing experts in Melbourne’s Herald Sun. Why do all the form crunching yourself when you can leave it up to others? Of course, if you go against your own hunch and that hunch pops up, you’ll be disgusted. Also, the experts don’t always get it right. Maybe use them as a covering bet, or to validate your own hunch.

More Photos From the Day