[Closed] Jess Varnish

Anyone who knows cycling, knows that Sutton is a rough Aussie, so I suspect all kinds of iffy things come out of his mouth. But he is payed to get results. It all does sound like BC is rather leadership less now Dave isn't really involved.

if we don't perform as a cycling team overall funding could be cut potentially dramatically

True, but would that really be a bad thing? Probably only for the athletes not making the grade.

@dragon if he's paid to get results then fine. Why are multiple allegations surfacing of him trying to oppress people getting good results outside the system (Cooke and Copnall recently)?

Sounds like he's one of those people for whom it's not enough for him to win, but you have to lose too. Pretty shameful.

@dragon if he's paid to get results then fine. Why are multiple allegations surfacing of him trying to oppress people getting good results outside the system (Cooke and Copnall recently)?

I'd have thought that was pretty obvious. His team is funded to get results. If people who are not part of his team are getting results and beating his team, how does that make his team and his use of funding look?

Well looks like he's been suspended...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/36147120

TBH from what I've read over the years about Sutton I was surprised they let him take over the show.

Sutton has always come across as a hard faced wee shit, so all of this is not really much of a surprise.

Although I think describing his words about her being a 'wonderful girl and a beautiful person' as sexist is a bit of a stretch.

But Cooke 'worked' under Sutton first with Wales then BC, so a bit odd to say he suppressed her results.

As for Copnall that is a very different case BC didn't think she was good enough.

You can exist outside of BCs control, but I'd suggest you go elsewhere for support, Dan Martin riding for Ireland is a great example.

Although I think describing his words about her being a 'wonderful girl and a beautiful person' as sexist is a bit of a stretch.

'wonderful [s]girl[/s]boy and a beautiful person'

'wonderful [s]girl[/s] boy and a beautiful person'

to describe Chris Hoy/Brad etc.

That just makes him sound like a peado.

I'm 41 and if someone referred to me as the above Mike, I'd really not give it a second thought. Sir Alex used to refer to most footballers as boys frinstance.

I'm not for a minute defending SS btw.

"Although I think describing his words about her being a 'wonderful girl and a beautiful person' as sexist is a bit of a stretch."

But is this because it isn't sexist, or because you don't really fully understand what sexism actually is?

It's an adult man talking about an adult woman. Using the term 'girl' suggests Sutton sees her as inferior and of less status. Why doesn't he use the term 'woman'? She's not his friend, she's a colleague. He is in a professional position, and should act professionally, according to the law and the terms set out in his contract, which I'm sure state that sexism and any other form of discrimination are unacceptable. It may well be that his use of the term 'girl' wasn't meant to be patronising or sexist, but it is more likely that he is a bit of a dinosaur and hasn't caught up with the 21st century yet.

If the claims about his comments re para-athletes are true, then this becomes even worse, and totally undermines anything else he might have to say.

"I'm 41 and if someone referred to me as the above Mike, I'd really not give it a second thought. Sir Alex used to refer to most footballers as boys frinstance."

It's not about you and your own personable sensibilities though, is it?

Sutton is probably finished now no matter what. He can't lead BC with this sort of press but I hope "the management" don't make him the only person to get the blame. He's the head but it sounds like the whole organisation is broken.

It may well be that his use of the term 'girl' wasn't meant to be patronising or sexist, but it is more likely that he is a bit of a dinosaur and hasn't caught up with the 21st century yet.

Is about right I'd say. He's a kick in the baws off 60, and had worked with her since a young age, so probably sees her as a 'girl'.

I imagine Sutton will go, but for me, while his behaviour is unpleasnat, its not the main issue. The main issue is the poor selection process which goes beyond Sutton and the utter failure of BC to support our mtb athletes getting to the olympics. We've currently got great xc riders, both male and female and it's a travesty they are not going to be able to represent their country. I'm pretty sure if we'd had a full contingent at the world championships we'd be sending riders.
I'm mildly concerned the personal problem with Sutton will alow BC to sweep the over-arching problem uder the table

ferrals + 1
back to the usual blame an individual rather than examine the organisational structure

"while his behaviour is unpleasnat, its not the main issue. The main issue is the poor selection process which goes beyond Sutton and the utter failure of BC to support our mtb athletes getting to the olympics. "

TBH I couldn't personally give a shit about the sport side of things. That side of things seems to be more about money than it does about sports anyway. No, the issue of sexism and now disability discrimination is far, far more serious than sports. Because those issues affect our entire society, not just some cycle athletes.

Sutton is probably finished now no matter what. He can't lead BC with this sort of press but I hope "the management" don't make him the only person to get the blame. He's the head but it sounds like the whole organisation is broken.

Just what I was going to say.

Sutton will surely and deservedly get the boot (if allegations against him are substantiated), but hopefully he won't become the scapegoat for all the other issues raised.

No, the issue of sexism and now disability discrimination is far, far more serious than sports

Not quite what I'm saying, the discrimation against women (i've not read about the disability side of things beyond the insults) seems to be part of the selection process beyond Sutton. The issue I have are people are focusisng on what nasty things Sutton has said which allows them to put the highlight on his personal behaviour, not an atitude which may go deeper

I think it's a bit poor that the only success criteria is medals at the Olympics.

What's wrong with being the best in GB and a spirited 5th in the World? I'd be quite pleased with myself for that.

Being forced to watch it at home because someone thinks you won't get at least a bronze is missing the whole point of competitive sport.

ScottChegg - Member

I think it's a bit poor that the only success criteria is medals at the Olympics.

What's wrong with being the best in GB and a spirited 5th in the World? I'd be quite pleased with myself for that.

Being forced to watch it at home because someone thinks you won't get at least a bronze is missing the whole point of competitive sport.

I remember in the last olympics, watching some event- I think it was swimming- and a british athlete got bronze. Before they'd even got their breath back, they were being told by the interviewer how disappointed they must be, to have let people down by only getting bronze. Poor wee dude's face... That said it all, for me.

What's wrong with being the best in GB and a spirited 5th in the World? I'd be quite pleased with myself for that.

Because whether you like it or not GB pay a fortune to athletes, not just directly but also through research, travel etc., so they expect a return on their money. The medal table at the end of the Olympics doesn't list the number of 5ths.

'wonderful boy and a beautiful person'

I would say that this describes Hoy very well.

One of the reasons that BC concentrate on track cycling is medals success (the source of the funding) is easier to gain. MTB (and road to a lesser extent) has to many variables to control so though I don't agree with the lack of MTB support I can understand why track takes priority. With the concentration on track it allows riders to move into road racing having had the good skill that having been a track rider gives.

Can't comment on what Sutton may have done/said but should imagine being a coach athlete at BC is a tough business at times. They need to win and nearly winners have to be moved on. I do remember a stand out phrase from Dave Brailsford "compassionate ruthlessness", perhaps things are not going so well without Brailsford's guidance or the Pete Keen original plan being studied.

But for BC to deny selection to someone who is qualified and is prepared to self fund when there are places available just seems silly.

The describing of women in sport as "girls" is widespread: watch an athletics event and even the women presenters like Denise Lewis will use "girls" rather than "women", e.g. "The girls are lined up for the Women's 100m final". Sharon Davies does it for the swimming events as well. I wouldn't say I'm completely PC but it jars even with me. You'll also hear "the girls/boys did well out there" which suggests that it's partly an age thing with older presenters/commentators talking about athletes who are somewhat younger than them.

But Cooke 'worked' under Sutton first with Wales then BC, so a bit odd to say he suppressed her results.

Semantics I reckon, but I said "oppressed", not "suppressed" though I think I know where you're coming from. It seemed like Cooke flourished despite Sutton and co. Who knows? Perhaps their disgusting attitudes fueled her motivation.

People have repeatedly said BC did their best to exclude non-BC funded athletes from competition at no detriment to themselves. Sounds like saving face is what matters to BC, and not results.

In an ideal world we'd celebrate people's results. I'm yet to hear of privateers in the DH compos get pilloried for their success. People are happy for them. Why do BC feel so insecure about this?

The medal table at the end of the Olympics doesn't list the number of 5ths.

"@dragon if he's paid to get results then fine. Why are multiple allegations surfacing of him trying to oppress people getting good results outside the system (Cooke and Copnall recently)?"

Brailsford was in charge at the time of the Fort William selection/joke.

What we are hearing now only reinforces "things" we have heard before.
I don't think BC is the nicest place in the world to work, there have been a "few" out of court settlements for former employees.

Funny how things change. Wasn't BC held up to be the paradigm for the way sports should be run not so long ago. Now people seem to be lining up to give it a good kicking.

dragon - Member

The medal table at the end of the Olympics doesn't list the number of 5ths.

Sure, but your future winners come from your current 5ths, or 10ths. Very few athletes can [i]expect[/i] medals, many more have a shot at them and anyone who can place 5th is a medal contender, in most sports.

Most athletes competing at the top level fall below this standard; if they didn't, every event would be a single final with 5 people in it.

"The describing of women in sport as "girls" is widespread: watch an athletics event and even the women presenters like Denise Lewis will use "girls" rather than "women", e.g. "The girls are lined up for the Women's 100m final". Sharon Davies does it for the swimming events as well. I wouldn't say I'm completely PC but it jars even with me. You'll also hear "the girls/boys did well out there" which suggests that it's partly an age thing with older presenters/commentators talking about athletes who are somewhat younger than them."

You're missing the point somewhat, which is all about context (see the 'nigga' thing in rap music for more clarity). There isn't necessarily a problem with using particular words/terminology, if within a framework of consensual acceptability. There is a problem if their use falls outside of that framework, which it may well do in Sutton's case.

"The describing of women in sport as "girls" is widespread:"
yes generally it is used the same as boys as a term of affection.
"Our boys over seas"
For a female presenter to use the term as described above is not off the mark, its ok Denis Lewis to describe her peers as girls, isn't it? (genuinely asking)
But for a manager to describe a employee (which is pretty much the BC relationship) us whhhhhhhhhhy off.

I'm sure Sutton can and will get good results but he needs a handler.
And I bet his phone is ringing today.

I was trying to avoid this but what good international results did Copnall have?

We don't know what BCs funding KPI's are, if it is £x per y% of medals, then the'd naturally avoid people racing who were going to drag down their funding criteria.

BC from the outset have always been very clear it is our way or nothing, it is highly successful, but will cast people by the way side. It isn't about being nice, it is highly success driven. As I mentioned Dan Martin is an example of someone who didn't want to fit in, and has become successful his own way and by moving his allegiance to Ireland.

mikewsmith I do agree, but this isn't a privately funded chap we are talking about. We are discussing BC and the Olympics and they get their funding from results alone and as such do everything to maximise it. Is that wrong, possibly, but that is the requirement BC and the other federations are given for getting their Olympic funding. If they had been less successful in the past, then I doubt Jess would have got the chances she has had to date.

Sure, but your future winners come from your current 5ths, or 10ths.

Of course, but the coaching staff need to believe you can progress to medal status. If you are aged 33 and just got 8th, realistically you are unlikely to improve, a 21 year old with the right attitude, however, that is a different story.

There is of course politics involved, for the UK not to put someone in say the road race or 100m athletics is embarrassing, so I suspect they will take someone regardless of results. But in say table tennis then unless you are medal hope forget it.

be nice if BC managed to publish something like this...
[url= http://cycling.org.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=SyGyMsRY82o%3D&portalid=10 ]Oz Cycling Criteria[/url]

A friend of mine is currently chasing XCO for the olympics via being from the Cook Islands, if somebody is willing to fund themselves and makes the criteria then they should be on the team.

The Americans run a very simple Olymlic selection system, they have a trial.

They've only won something like 5 medals on the track since the LA games in 1984 whereas GB winning "only" 5 medals in Rio will be considered a failure now (realistically they'll be doing extremely well to win 5)

I think it's a bit poor that the only success criteria is medals at the Olympics.

What's wrong with being the best in GB and a spirited 5th in the World? I'd be quite pleased with myself for that.

Being forced to watch it at home because someone thinks you won't get at least a bronze is missing the whole point of competitive sport.

The funding model is largely to blame for that. UKSport don't take into account being the best in GB or even being 5th in the world, the thing that matters to them is Olympic medals (and to a lesser extent Olympic finals) and if they do not qualify for the start line in the Olympics then the funding will be at serious risk of being withdrawn - it is harsh and a long way off the 'Olympic ideal' but it's also the reality of elite sport and the performance programme is not run as a charity. It is also what the athletes sign up to in their contracts.

And of course, if you are running 5th, if 2 riders ahead of you fall/get disqualified/get lost you are suddenly in the 'paying' positions.

It's stupid and short-sighted.

the above is slightly wrong IMO...
the thing that matters to [s]them[/s] [i][b]the British Media & therefore the British Public[/b][/i] is Olympic medals (and to a lesser extent Olympic finals)

[quote="imnotverygood"]Funny how things change. Wasn't BC held up to be the paradigm for the way sports should be run not so long ago. Now people seem to be lining up to give it a good kicking. Not really, it was held up as an example of how to organise yourselfs to win at sports and to maximize your return (medals) on investment (cash).

the thing that matters to them the British Media & therefore the British Public is Olympic medals

Yeah, because Eddie Edwards is only regarded to this day because of his medals haul in Calgary 88.

ScottChegg ok self-funded heroic amateurs aside (for a posh winter sport) how much coverage does Rachel Atherton get?

DaRC_L - Member
ScottChegg ok self-funded heroic amateurs aside (for a posh winter sport) how much coverage does Rachel Atherton get?

Is a good point and maybe just maybe this may open up a wider dialogue for all lottery funded sports about whether this focus on medals every 4 years is healthy.

I doubt it will though, the media don't have a lot of stamina when it comes to such things. there will be another story along in a few days.

It's just been on Radio4, with BC refusing a comment.

how much coverage does Rachel Atherton get?

For the Olympics? None, I'd say.

Yet Shanaze Read got lots for the BMX, but I don't recall her getting a medal.

Having checked; it was, serendipitiously, 5th.

Who knew?

Rachel Atherton doesn't compete in an Olympic sport. Still she has featured on a BBC programme and the BBC Sport website.

Sutton has resigned

In light of his Para's comments, there was never a chance he was coming back.

Well that's the end of that then. . . . . . . .

Shame, something good might have come of it.