I have just done a very quick and very unscientific poll* of the effect of Scotland gaining independence and the impact this would have on Great Britain on the Olympic medal table, as it currently stands.
The good news is the United Kingdom (without any Scottish athletes) would still be in third place in the table, with 11 gold medals. However, this is only 1 more than Korea.
Scotland on the other hand would definitely have 1 gold medal (Andy Murray), placing them joint 31 with Croatia and Switzerland because they also achieved 1 silver (Michael Jamieson)
There are of course a number of other factors that need to be taken into account. As a majority of the money comes from the National Lottery would Scotland be able to support their athletes to the same standard as the rest of the UK? Also would the the rest of the UK be able to replace the Scottish members in the team golds with equally as good athletes meaning they would rack up the same amount of medals.
So taking this all to account it looks highly unlikely that the rest of the UK isn't really going to be effected by Scotland becoming an Independent Country.
*For this very unscientific post I have awarded all the gold medals won by a Scottish individual to Scotland and made the assumption that the teams with a Scottish member in would not have achieved gold if they were replaced with an athlete from one of the UK's three other countries.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
The most ridiculous post I have ever read!
Chris Hoy isn't just Scotlands greatest olympian he is Britains. If you think its that easy to replace a top quality athlete your an idiot which I suspect you are.
Heather stanning(Also Scottish) made up 50% of her team that won gold, why can Scotland not replace the 'other' athlete and claim that gold? Same for Katherine Grainger who made up 50% of her gold winning team.
Can Timothy Baille or David Florence be easily replaced in their gold and silver winning teams?
Its nice of you to give Scotland Andy Murrays individual gold but as known by anyone who knows anything about mixed doubles tennis the male works alot harder so do you think Team GB would.still have won silver if he was replaced from another athlete from one of the other 3 countries. Do you think Daniel Purvis' team mates would be so quick to right off his contribution as you are?
Scottish athletes have made up 13% of Team GB winners. Do you honestly believe you can replace the 13% that easily?
You obviously haven't read my blog. The UK, without Scottish athletes, would still be in third place in the table. That lead over Korea would been extended more after the Men's Sprint.
I was looking at it from the prospective of an Englishman. I left the question unanswered whether we could replace the Scots.
The medals by all our British Olympians have been amazing and lifted the whole country. They all deserve the vast media attention and praise heaped on them.
It's rather ironic though that our many of our athletes (more so the football players) wanted to be part of Team GB and take part in a home games, but don't sing the British National Anthem. I can understand it is emotional for the medallists.
I wonder if the English athletes would sing a british national anthem if it contained a line about hammering the english in it. I think not
Can you tell me the last time that verse was sung?
The third verse, commonly sang as the second verse (starting Thy choices gift...) is very rarely sang. In fact the Olympic organisers quickly removed that verse after no-one sang it at the opening football match.
So it's only the first verse that is sang. No mention of bashing the Scots or any other nation there. You ask anyone and I bet they can't even recite the verse yo are talking about.
I think us scots for the population, facilities and weather we have, our athletes have been amazing! And team
GB would not be performing nearly as well! Saying that all our medal winners have done fantastically well and again comparing the british population, facilities and weather in comparison to say American or Australia we have done superbly!
Lewis
I agree. I have behind the games from the word go and have loved it and promoted it since we have won. I was just curious to see what effect independence may have, if any if they were an independent country.
Oh dear neil its your attitude That make scots want independance ;-(
Might I suggest that rather than wasting your time doing unscientific polls such as this, you use your summer holiday (I see your a head teacher) to get an English lesson from a local college or even one of your own teachers.
In your first paragraph it should be affect not effect.
In the second paragraph you can’t even spell United.
Paragraph three, I would love to know in what way Scotland having a gold medal would be described as defiant? I presume you mean 'definitely'.
Paragraph four - 'highly unlike that the rest...' again i must presume you mean unlikely.
Then in your last comment you state 'I have behind...'
You state at the top of your blog that this is a half intelligent ramble, does this mean that you appreciate that the rest of it is anything but intelligent?
I feel really sorry for the children of the school that you are the head teacher. Not only do they have a teacher that has no apparent grasp or knowledge of the English language, but also has one of the most narrow minded opinions I have had the misfortune to read.
Corrections made in post..
Are you sure about affect and effect in the first paragraph? Think you may have this wrong.
All well and good changing the mistakes afterwords, are you not slightly ashamed that as a head treacher that these had to be pointed out to you?
effect or affect who knows im not a teacher of any level, i got 2 c's in my english gcse's, id have thought someone who is the head of a school would be able to tell if they mean it as a verb or a noun as thats where the difference comes from.
Also having read it again i can see mistakes if i wanted to be that specific about it.
Also would the the rest of the UK...does it really need the second the? and golds should be gold's.
Also the first line is grammatically poor to say the least. Currently I have just done… Exactly how can you currently be doing something you have done? Your either currently doing it, or you have just done it, you can’t do both.
The final question I have is you say where would Scotland be without the National Lottery funding…do you really think that once you go into Scotland you can’t buy a lottery ticket? Scottish people still contribute to the lottery, as a result if they had independence, they would have had their own lottery and thus funded their own athletes the same. Also add in the fact that in some sports the UK was only allowed to enter one athlete. Take the cycling for example, Sir Chris Hoy (who won another medal today) was not allowed to retain his title that was won by Jason Kenny as the UK cycling board decided to spread the races around to avoid racers having to many races, do you really think that had they competed that Hoy would not have been able to win?
As someone says above, it’s no wonder Scottish people take such offence with the narrow minded idiots like yourself who have the ‘were English were the best attitude’. As Craig Bellamy said at the football when he was asked if Team GB could win gold, he said that’s where the English go wrong, you get too far ahead of yourselves and he was completely right.
In the Commonwealth games GB competes separately, and yet England finished behind Australia and India (both of whom Team GB is well above at the Olympics) yes England finished above Scotland, but 39 gold's for a population of around 57million people as opposed to Scotland 9 gold for just over 5 million, I know which is the better ratio.
Again I must say just how sorry I feel for your students and even your staff to have you in charge. Your entire blog here is riddled with issues and if I was someone in your position I would be ashamed to have written it.
Interesting that you find it acceptable to use figures to demonstrate that Scottish athletes do well when they compete as a nation, but it is wrong of me to illustrate the point that the United Kingdom without Scotland would still be in third place of the medal table.
I would avoid commenting on my use of language when your posts are riddled with mistakes and the mistakes you point out in my posts are incorrect.
It is also interesting that I am willing to put my name to posts with my views, yet you post anonymously and have to result in using personal insults.
Throughout the independence debate I am sure people across the country will have a look at many different aspects of policy and public life; comparing Scotland in the United Kingdom and Scotland as an independent country. This blog entry was just meant to be one small part of this debate.
I have always been willing to post comments that disagree with me, but if you continue to insult me and withhold your name, I am not willing to post your comments.
Neil, you may have my name - it's Viv. Now may I instruct you on the usage of sUng vs sAng? You score an abysmal 40%. FAIL!!
"Can you tell me the last time that verse was sung? <>
The third verse, commonly sang <> as the second verse (starting Thy choices[t] gift[s]...) is very rarely sang <>. In fact the Olympic organisers quickly removed that verse after no-one sang <> it at the opening football match. So it's only the first verse that is sang <>"
Head teacher? You jest, surely?
What an utterly bigotted and narrow minded post.
I feel sorry for anyone who has you to look to as a role model.
Why bigoted? If I was Scottish and looked at the position of the Scottish athletes would you call me a bigot?
Is the BBC bigoted for suggested that those living in Yorkshire are riding high and beating other countries?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19153924
Have you taken anything from the replies you've had?
I'm pretty bewildered amongst all how Chris Hoy has been completely left out of your thinking...? :S
As for singing GSTQ. Maybe if it was only used when a united british team was competing more people would feel a bond with it.
I like many others can just see England Teams singing it as we see that more and then an assumption that Welsh, Scottish or Irish people will then be happy to sing it. It's part of the usual English assumption that Britian is England and a disregard for other nations identities.
I've never in my life sung the song, I think I seen it written down a few times and seen england rugby and football teams singing it. It is also associated in Scotland with a section of Rangers fans and anti irish catholic sentiment.
But of course that's culturaly irrelevant to you.... Well so is the stupid song to most of us. Get over it.
Chris Hoy is a fantastic athlete. He had not won an individual gold when I complied the table and did not count his team gold in either of the counts as it was a mixed nationality team.
I totally agree with you regarding the National Anthem. I think that England does need it's own one. Ten years ago in the Manchester Commonwealth games they used Land of Hope and Glory.
You can have my name its Lee, and I agree completely with those that have posted anonymously.
The whole comments section is full of people who call you biggoted and narrow minded, get defensive all you like but surely you dont think everyone is against you or something. I agree with those who state that they find it hard to believe your a teacher, let alone a head teacher, and as someone who lives near Loughton, i pray to god my children never have anything to do with your school.
You seem to miss the enitre point that others are trying to make, and that is there would be no UK without Scotland. If Scotland competed seperate from England, Wales and N.Ireland, then the UK would not be third, as there would be no UK! You seem to completely miss that point, just like those who state that Welsh and N.Irish athletes should sing GSTQ. The fact that England has adopted this as their own anthem highlights why every other home nation has an issue with the sheer arrogance of the English mentality.
Im shocked that you would say you will not post that persons comments should they continue to remain anonymous. To make it clear, you dont send someone an insult by offering an opinion, but they can take offence to what they hear, as you seem to on here. Your view is biggoted, so narrow minded and the sad thing is you seem so arrogant with your thoughts that you cant see that everyone who has bothered to send you a message says the same thing.
I think you are showing ignorance here. If Scotland become independent, there would still be 3 other countries making up the United Kingdom. The sports men and women from these countries would still compete under that banner in the Olympic games and based on their performance this year, would still be third in the medal table.
I do agree that England should have their own national anthem but that shouldn't be an excuse for sportsman representing the United Kingdom not to sing the British national anthem.
Your comment is ignorant in itself.
The UK is England, Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland competing under one banner, remove any of these nations and there is no UK! If Wales went independent, it would not be the UK without them, just as it wouldnt be without Scotland.
Nobody has to sing a national anthem. The English football team dont sing it (bar one or two), so why should we suddenly expect every Scot, Welsh or N.Ire Olympian to sing it? Nobody is critical of say Hamilton or Button not singing when they win an F1 race, yet we suddenly expect it of athletes? Does singing a national anthem make someone a better person? Of course not, it makes no difference, and the fact you seem to think it is some travesty that its not being sung is laughable.
The sad truth of the matter is that most people who would call thbemselves British are English, most Welsh and Scots call themselves Welsh or Scottish. The reason for this is the sheer English arrogance and narrow view of thought shown by individuals like yourself.
As a head teacher, if you had a Welsh or Scottish pupil would you tell them they were in the wrong if they didnt want to sing the GSTQ?
As a teacher you are invested in the process of learning. To learn about something you have no personal knowledge of you have to listen to those who do without trying to fit their views into your own narrative. My main problem is not with your post (which is flawed in the extreme), but with your response to the comments it invoked. You are discussing scottish nationalist issues with commenters who have personal knowledge of those issues. Instead of getting defensive why don't you use this as an opportunity to listen to differing points of view? To ponder why your post has been considered so offensive? To engage with a view to gaining more insight? To educate yourself?
Firstly:
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a precise term. It refers to the unification of the Kingdoms of England and Scotland to make Great Britain, and the later unification with the Kingdom of Ireland (later modified after the partitioning of Ireland in 1922).
Secondly:
By your own admission, this was "a very quick and very unscientific poll" but some of your readers have taken the time to indicate why your method is not only unscientific but completely illogical (more about this in a moment). In response you have been particularly defensive and, at times, antagonistic. I'm sure you did not mean to cause offence but you are no doubt aware that, as the larger nation, England has over the years trod on some toes vis-a-vis assumed "national identity". The Scots, Welsh and Irish (including Northern Irish) are proud people with distinct cultures and histories. Time and again, they have found their culture and history challenged and repressed by their larger neighbour. Therefore, these nations can be a little sensitive when an individual suggests that they assimilate or, in your case, demeans their national achievements (even though this was unintentional).
Thirdly:
Putting the perceived personal insults to one side, your anonymous poster introduced an interesting aside regarding the 2010 Commonwealth Games. On studying the medal table we can produce figures which intensify national pride. England came 3rd overall, Scotland 10th. But what happens when we delve into the statistics a little further?
England won 37(g) 60(s) 46(b). (Population 51,456,400)
Wales 2(g) 7(s) 10(b). (Pop. 3,006,400)
Northern Ireland 3(g) 3(s) 4(b). (Pop. 1,789,000)
Combined total:42(g) 70(s) 60(b).
Combined population 57,418,900.
Combined Ratio 1,367,116 people per gold, or 333,830 people per medal
Scotland managed 9(g) 10(s) and 7(b). Population 5,222,100. (580233 people per gold, or 200,850 people per medal). The Scots, even more so than the Welsh and Northern Irish, punch above their weight on a 'per capita' basis when compared to England or the UK as a whole and so your detractors would be forgiven for being affronted by your slashing of the Scottish medal haul in the current Olympics.
Bonus information: In 2010 Australia won 74(g) 55(s) and 48(b). Population 22,620,600. Noted, Australia are having a comparatively poor Olympics by comparison.
However, these figures count for little. Why? If neither Scotland nor Team GB was to win the medals won by "the teams with a Scottish member", who would have? This simple mathematical element was missing from your conclusion. It is not enough to simply scratch-off those medals from the Team GB totals, they must be added elsewhere. In which case stong nations such as Australia, New Zealand, Russia, South Korea, Germany or indeed any other country, could see their medal tally climb by as much as 4 golds, 3 silvers and 2 bronze. If Russia, South Korea or even Germany were to win these they would bypass a depleted Team GB. Furthermore, the weakened GB sides would be less likely to compete in a meaningful way with seeded teams let alone knock them out of competitions such as football, hockey, gymnastics etc which could further impact on Team GB's standing in the medal table.
Finally, I would like to share some advice with you. Should you write a similar blog post in future, avoid trying to make it a political discussion, especially when you have only a limited knowledge of the subject. That way you'll be less likely to offend any readers through misinformation or incomplete knowledge and even less likely to find yourself being torn to shreds publicly.
P.S. You correctly used the word "effect", roughly meaning "the result". Affect would be used, for example, in the question "How would Scotland's independence affect (influence) the medal table?" Affect is usually treated as a verb in this way, while effect is regularly used as a noun. (NB "To effect change [in a regime]" is a common use of effect as a verb, while psychologists often talk about affects as nouns when describing perceived behaviours). I hope this helps clarify things for everyone.
The parliament select commitee dated 3rd feb 2011. Articles discussed 4684246 "Scottish independence"
Stated. The possibility of the Uk changing her name if the scots got independence would be remote. Constitutionally the Union flag would have to be change. This too was discussed abd decided to be remote.
As an Englishman and a Brit. I would much prefer the scots in than out for political reasons as well as economic and of course Olympic.
Posted on a Monday in August surely? Not a monday in the month of august. Need I say more?
As an enforced Brit and a Scot I would rather be just Scottish - sorry neighbors
Post a Comment