I don’t know anything about the other candidates but going on what is written there (as an employer myself) Collins looks like he has leadership potential and he is organised. Steve Backley thinks he is great and he is educated and will take no prisoners (marine style!). The others are ex athletes and just because you are good as an athlete doesn’t mean you are good as a leader.
What will probably happen is that he will make the necessary changes get sacked and the next person will come along in a better position and take over and things will go right.
I really am in no position to make a good assumption of what needs to happen to change the situation. I don’t get why the UK doesn’t do so well given the amount of resources, facilities and tallent we have. All i can think is the obvious and that because the sport is not thought of as “professional” it is hard to get athletes to train like professionals and the coaches lack education. But people like MLF now have good coaches and good backup. If they don’t do well in the next year or so there must be something they are missing - which is the administrators fault.
As for Collins, at least he didn’t waste UKA money by going to the CWGs, when it wouldn’t make a difference anyway.
Without knowing details and understanding that the numbers are different there, perhaps they could learn a lesson or two from the track cycling team?
Anyone knows the hows of their progress the last few years?
Interesting that there were complaints about Collins not going to the CGs, but the main reason for going is contacts for future meets and exchanges and that was available in greater variety in Moscow at the WICs
Only the chief with the decision making capacity can get the dual meets etc that are necessary to re-build a team when individuals don’t have the results to get in enough meets on their own.
Enough of all this Christie this and Christie that. The guy is plain selfish to start with.
As an athlete he is god. Yes he does have a group that he claims to train but he only see them once a week when he wants to train himself on the sand dunes. Please don’t lets get carried away but Darren was a guy that ran 10.32 way back in 1992 behind Bolden. So should I really be giving Christie the cred for making him run 10.04 some 10 years later NO is the answer to that.
Collins have come in to a big mess, a mess where the big athletes and their coaches have not being accountable. You know have a bunch of young kids coming through and the they needs the discipline and the guidance to progress and improve.
If Daley and Linford wanted to do something for the sport then they would have done it, Linford would have made sure Daren was not turning to up to the Commonwealth running 20.9 (after running 21.1 and 10.5 last season)- The question is what has Linford the coach doing for the last 6 months not preparing his charge.
Being a fan of track of the last 40 years I have to say that Collins should invest in the young coaches in the sport that seems to know what the hell they are doing like Favier, King(sprints), Fuzz ahmed (high jump)
The main issue is in life you can never satisfy everyone. Dalton has been working with Ben for a while now so does than fact that he is a UKA staff make Ben jump higher…?
I haven’t made reference to Christie in my contributions to this thread? It seems that we are in agreement, to give the new kids on the block greater opportunities to develop and refine their coaching skills.
I’ve been impressed with Fuzz and have spoken to Afilika in the past but wasn’t so impressed with him. What makes him special in your eyes, that i have overlooked?
The coaches lack education, in this respect I know. Someone with Charlie’s knowledge and methodical approach would be seen as some kind of abberation something to fear, thats the mentality of these coaches, most are w*****s. The culture in british athletics is based on training for pain, if the athlete does not feel pain, then its not working kind of mentality. Speed work Charlie Francis style is seen as too easy. The coaches can not be bothered to educate themseleves. There are a few I have been told who are willing to learn such as Mike Afilika (hope he does not mind me referencing him) and others like Malcolm Arnold who are world class coaches. The rest are usually PE teachers who coach part-time and believe that endurance is more important than speed. I have nothing against them coaching cause without them you would not have youngsters coming through, but they have got to raise their game.
Who IS Dave Collins so what if one ex elite athlete thinks he’s good?
Totally agree with this bit. MA is definitly on the right road. His results recently have been impressive, if only JK could stay fit long enough to break through into the world scene. My question was what makes him the “best” of the bunch?
As for Dave Collins, I still am on the fence. I don’t know what to think, right now. I’ve been impressed but at the same time think he is unrealistic in his expectations. I assume he knows the game but if he doesn’t the UK is in real trouble.
Whilst what you say is no doubt true, it highlights the major fault of the system, looking after their own, thinking they know it all, protecting their own backs.
Sounds like the LTA where the highest ranking british male tennis players are there in spite of the system NOT because of it!
I totally agree with these sentiments…being a top athlete doesnt necessarily qualify you as a great coach. CF himself has stated that he had to go through a long learning process to become one of the top coaches on the planet.
I reckon ex-athletes like colin jackson and steve cram have the talent and mental faculties to become great coaches.
I reserve judgement on Dave Collins…bringing in someone with no real understanding of T&F is risky…why not bring in some managemnet ‘Guru’ from Harvard instead :eek: .
Very true! I’ve met Collins on a couple of occassions when he worked in Manchester. He is a great ‘salesman’ but I wonder if he is out of his depth in his new arena. Sport psychology and athletics are too different kettles of fish.
A recent survey compared the organisation of British athletics with USA, Sweden and France.
USA system is based on the university system.
French and Swedish systems put most of their money into the clubs and essentially subsidise athletic development in a de centralised way.
British system targets funding and support via centralised UKA funding and paid appointments. If you want to be a professional coach you need to get employed by UKA rather than a club.
Lottery and other funding has had little impact on British performances. Controversial. In some events (esp endurance) performances have deteriorated in both absolute and relative terms. For example in marathon running we know that UK men are up against Africans that were not around a few years ago in such numbers. However absolute performances have declined to a level where the guys are running slower and most are beaten by Paula Radcliffe.
The other thing to consider is the possibility of a shrinking pool of talent coming into athletics. A few examples, Wayne Rooney was the fastest sprinter at his school. Theo Walcott is like greased lightning. Phil Neville was considered a better junior cricketer than Freddie Flintoff… I realise this is cricket versus football but you get the point.
If the talent is not coming in how do you coach it…
So if we look relative to what we were capable of say 10 years about despite better resources we are worse in general in comparison to ourselves… Thats very intersting. I wonder if you took a look at the stats (times) for the top 20 performers in each event now and then. What would it show. That way you get an idea from the top guys down to the lesser mortals.
Would there be a bigger gap at the top? Or would it be essentially the same but with a lower level of ability in general! Or is it the same and the rest of the world has moved on?!!!
