Very good showing from both of our young professional sportswomen, with both going a round further than their ranking predicted in singles, with Heather also winning in both doubles and mixed.
In the harsh regime of central sports funding, though, this will count as a failure for British tennis, with the gold and silver medals from London replaced by just one gold in Rio. Some funding may go astray as a result, as far as I know.
Very good showing from both of our young professional sportswomen, with both going a round further than their ranking predicted in singles, with Heather also winning in both doubles and mixed.
In the harsh regime of central sports funding, though, this will count as a failure for British tennis, with the gold and silver medals from London replaced by just one gold in Rio. Some funding may go astray as a result, as far as I know.
Funding for each sport is much more about setting a medal target and whether that is achieved or not rather than medals against previous medals ( which is fair, especially if some previous medals were unexpected or folk have moved on ).
Not sure what the tennis one was ( there will be a general list somewhere ). I would have said one, but maybe was two ( set well in advance ). The total target was evidently 48, which has already been exceeded
I know that rowing's target was 6 medals and they 'only' got five so a little concern and they are saying 'feel the quality' - 3 golds and 2 silvers - and there have been some injury issues for some, although of course that always can happen.
Tennis anyway is probably less reliant on such central funding than many sports ( I imagine that Wimbledon generates more than Henley! ) and maybe more of an issue is what is done with what they have.
-- Edited by indiana on Wednesday 17th of August 2016 03:06:37 PM