Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was just thinking about Carl Froch the boxer, he was a candidate for the award but hasn't got a particularly effervescent 'personality'. No reason why he should have though, he punches people's faces in for a living - I just think the award is mistitled, better would be 'sportsperson of the year' or something like that which implies it's down to your achievements as opposed to your ability to captivate an audience with your witicisms, at your leisure.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/52481-spoty-2014/#findComment-807050
Share on other sites

It's either ridiculous that it's still got 'personality' in the title, or ridiculous that people complain when it's given to someone with no discernible personality.


Surely it's never been and never should have been about personality; it's completely about sporting achievement.


It's also faintly ridiculous that Hamilton got it. I love F1 but as Ian Poulter has pointed out, Hamilton has only had one opponent to beat all season- the person that has the other best car. McLaren should have won the team award, McIlroy should without question have won the individual award.


The general bleedin' public eh?!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/52481-spoty-2014/#findComment-807059
Share on other sites

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> KidKruger Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > As if there's some natural correlation between sports and having a personality.

>

> Just ask Andy Murray ;)


Actually, the year they gave to Nigel Mansell was the year the realised the 'personality' bit was optional.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/52481-spoty-2014/#findComment-807072
Share on other sites

It's weird - some years it seems to be given to people who actually haven't achieved much (plucky British losers etc).


So you assume the "personality" element is there to compensate for that.


Then again, Damon Hill won when he lost in F1 so god know what the criteria is/was.


Shocking that Ronnie O'Sullivan, the greatest player to ever pick up a cue has never even been nominated, let alone won.


I think it's the same for Phil Taylor.


Both have "personality" and have dominated their sports - what gives?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/52481-spoty-2014/#findComment-807105
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I see a gap in the market and a stall in North Cross Road...
    • The lack of affordable housing is down to Thatcher's promoting sale of council properties. When I was working, I had to deal with many families/older folk/ disabled folk in inferior housing. The worst ones were ex council properties purchased by their tenants  with a very high discount who then sold on for a profit. The new owners frequently rented out at exorbitant prices and failed to maintain the properties. I remember a gentleman who needed to be visited by a district nurse daily becoming very upset as he rented a room in an ex council flat and shared kitchen and bathroom with 6 other people  (it was a 3 bed flat) the landlord did not allow visitors to the flat and this gut was frightened he would be evicted if the nurse visited daily. Unfortunately, the guy was re admitted to hospital and ended up in a care home as he could not receive medical help at home.   Private developers  are not keen on providing a larger percentage of 'social housing' as it dents their profits. Also a social rent is still around £200 plus a week
    • Hello, I was wondering if others have had experience of roof repairs and guarantees. A while back, we had a water leak come through in our top floor room.  A roofer came and went out on the roof to take a look - they said it was to do with a leak near the chimney.   They did some rendering around the chimney and this cost £1800 plus £750 for scaffolding (so £2,550 total).  They said the work came with a 10 year guarantee. About a year later, there was another leak on the same wall, which looked exactly the same size and colour as the previous leak. But it was about 2 metres away from it, on the other side of a window.  I contacted the roofer about this new leak, thinking it would be covered by the guarantee. However, he said the new leak was due to a different and unrelated problem, and so was not covered by the guarantee. This new leak, he said, was due to holes in the felt underneath the tiles. He said there are holes in the felt all over the roof (so if this was the cause, I expect the first leak may have been caused by that too - but he didn't mention the holes in the felt for the first repair). It feels like the 10-year guarantee doesn't mean much at all.  I realise that the guarantee couldn't cover all future problems with the roof, but where do you draw the line with what's reasonable?  Is it that a leak is only covered if an identical leak happens in exactly the same place?  There were no terms and conditions with the guarantee, which I didn't question at the time.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...