Main
|
Your club needs you! »
Radcliffe to Run London 2005
January 11, 2005
Paula Radcliffe has confirmed that she will run London (and not Boston) this year. (Guardian, Telegraph.)
The rumour is that she's being paid a record appearance fee just for turning up. Very canny on her part. We know she can start races. It's crossing the line at the end that matters. Not so much if you get a cheque anyway though.
Radcliffe has also said that she intends to put off starting a family until after the 2008 Olympics. She and Gary should do it like they do it on the Discovery Channel where six-times Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong is being coy about 2005.
Posted by Dave at January 11, 2005 11:49 AM
I'm sorry you feel it necessary to put more emphasis on the appearance fee, rather than the participation, Dave. I'm sure the London Marathon thinks it's money well spent or they wouldn't have offered it.
Then again, I must say that I'm even more disappointed with the British press for continuing this angle. We're not exactly flush with world class runners in the UK at the moment. The way the press go on you'd think they begrudge her the money. No wonder she chooses to spend so much of her time abroad. I think the word I'm looking for is "respect".
Well said Mick - she's worth every penny compared to any other British sports "star"! I bet no one (especially that horrible Mr.Weeden) can think of anyone who gives better value. .. and talking of "crossing the line" I hope all Croups members will remember that the Handicap '10' is on 30 Jan. No excuses, you're runners, be there, do it, finish!
Tani Gray? Matthew Pinsent? Kelly Holmes? Ellen MacArthur? I don't think Ms Radcliffe is alone in the superstar stakes and I'm no fan of hero worship. Having said that neither would I deny her the London entrance fee or the immense respect a gifted and hard-nosed athlete deserves. It’s the UK’s showcase distance event and she is the UK’s showcase runner.
As Brits we appear to love bashing those in the public eye and prefer to ridicule rather than support. What a Shame. Pity we're not more like the Aussies, they know how to finance, support and engage fully in sport. Waltzing Matilda anyone?
Had a thought. Using the logic of the British Press, maybe we should not pay boxers who don't last 12 rounds? We could do it on a 'no win, no fee' basis. That would lead to some interesting bouts!
Don't forget AHMID KHAN the 17yo. As Rocky might put it 'yo adrian I did it'.
Notwithstanding the undoubted merits of Paula Radcliffe as an athlete, or the public's ambivalent view of her (at least since Athens) as a sporting heroine, one thing I can confidently say is that she has not been well served by her ghost writer when it comes to her recent autobiography. I saved myself eight pounds (it was reduced to half-price) and a marathon of turgid reading by flicking through it during a spare forty minutes (10K?) at W H Smith on Birmingham New Street Station. Most of it is bland in the extreme and the hastily tacked-on chapter at the end, covering the Athens debacle, reads like a litany of excuses (maybe it is an honest account but that is not the perception it conveys). Even at half-price, it is not good value for money - in fact I felt as though I should be paid to finish it!
Dave, thanks for the book review, I've still yet to pick it up after receiving it as a Christmas present, perhaps you should have bought it to read in bed as it might help you drop off at a Godly hour instead of surfing the Interweb at 1:30 in the morning!
I'll recommend 'Feet in the Clouds' a rare fell running bio-book.
She'll never achieve my success! Even Dana (my wife got a Gold!
Good luck to Paula.
Good luck to all taking part as well !!
To David Lloyd - so you weren't impressed by Paula's ghost writer? With a name of David Walsh, what did you expect?
Is that THE Dave Walsh or a Dave Walsh? Presumably the latter, as there weren't that many ******* expletives in the book.
On daves comment about Paula not having a family until after the olimpics and using Lance armstrong in the same sentance i cant see the relivance. All Lance has to do is hump his misses for two minuets and he has done his bitwher as Paula would be off for at least 2 years. (starting say from 3 months after conception until the baby is 18 months old)
Alan - may I complement you on your inspired choice of vocabulary. I'm sure Sheryl Crow would be absolutely thrilled to know that you are considering her potential maternal status in such unambiguous terms. Better still, why don't you write a song for her to sing?
Alan, I'm sorry, but you missed the joke. I took off the link to the lyrics by 'The Bloodhound Gang' because Simon complained that it opened lots of popups. (I miss these things, my computer is immune.) It was just a riff on "Do it like they do it on the Discovery Channel" the sponsors of Armstrong's team.
Paula as a healthy 31 year old who has been running competitively for more than half her lifetime would not be off for anything like 2 years. Here's a very sweet picture of Athens Triathlon bronze medallist
Susan Williams and daughter Sydney.
Liz McColgan exercised right through her pregnancies with no harm done to either her racing or her children.
Sonia O'Sullivan had her baby between Olympics. I'm convinced that Svetlana Masterkova had babies at the top of her racing career, though I can't find any links.
Anyway, you can't train to the same standard week in, week out, year in, year out. If Paula aims for world records every race for the next three years, she'll be stale by 2008. I'm convinced that having some kind of championship every summer (Olympics in leap years; European and Commonwealths on the alternate even years; and Worlds on the odd years) shortens the careers of top athletes. She should take a lower profile this year and next or she'll go to Beijing injured, just as she went to Athens.
Dave Lloyd - I can see him reading a book in 40 minutes, but running 10k - surely fiction.
