...and another thing.
Mar. 19th, 2006 12:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
boodieJust something else carrying on from my previous post about the commonwealth games and this 'list' of which athletes were supposed to win medals, it seems that the media have either gotten a copy of this 'list' or have one of their own, because I have noticed something that is more than a little annoying.
Right, we have this list, say you're on this list, but because you're just this little bit slower, you're only expected to win bronze or maybe silver if you try REALLY hard, however on the day you have a blinder, and everyone else is just that little bit off, and you win Gold, I have noticed something, IF you win gold and you beat a more fancied opponent from another country, it's a 'miracle, a stunning performance, a silencing your critics' etc etc, in short it's treated like almost the second coming by the media.
However if by some chance you happen to beat a more fancied fellow australian athlete, the whole tone changes, now is it not only not a 'miracle, stunning performance etc etc' the whole focus is on the person you beat, how they had a 'off day, didnt swim to their potential, let themselves down' and suddenly your winning performance is now not so much you winning on merit, but the other person losing.
If that was me, and I was one of those athletes that the media treated that way, I would be so pissed off, that my winning wasn't due to the fact that everything clicked for me on that day, and I was good and I performed to the utmost of my talent, ability and strength, but that my winning was simply down to the fact that my opponent 'didnt fulfill potential'.
I'd be giving them a big STFU.
Right, we have this list, say you're on this list, but because you're just this little bit slower, you're only expected to win bronze or maybe silver if you try REALLY hard, however on the day you have a blinder, and everyone else is just that little bit off, and you win Gold, I have noticed something, IF you win gold and you beat a more fancied opponent from another country, it's a 'miracle, a stunning performance, a silencing your critics' etc etc, in short it's treated like almost the second coming by the media.
However if by some chance you happen to beat a more fancied fellow australian athlete, the whole tone changes, now is it not only not a 'miracle, stunning performance etc etc' the whole focus is on the person you beat, how they had a 'off day, didnt swim to their potential, let themselves down' and suddenly your winning performance is now not so much you winning on merit, but the other person losing.
If that was me, and I was one of those athletes that the media treated that way, I would be so pissed off, that my winning wasn't due to the fact that everything clicked for me on that day, and I was good and I performed to the utmost of my talent, ability and strength, but that my winning was simply down to the fact that my opponent 'didnt fulfill potential'.
I'd be giving them a big STFU.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Another thing on another thing
Date: 2006-03-19 11:37 am (UTC)