That's what I think of the following show jumping teams who objected to the inclusion on the British team of a 53 year old man:
Netherlands,
Switzerland,
U.S.A,
Canada,
Australia,
Norway,
Sweden.
Obviously, the Brit in question must have commited some henious crime for those 7 to object so strongly, taking their protest the the Equestrian governing body, the FEI, you say.
Well, no. The 53 year old is John Whitaker. His crime? His horse, Peppermill, was sidelined from the first day of the team competition with a stiff back. The horse was passed fit for the second day and the competition officials agreed to the British team request for John to compete. Strangely enough, the German team, Britian's closest rivals, had absolutely no problem with this. But the 7 teams above did. They lodged a protest, which was upheld.
Congratulations on your Gold medal U.S.A. Congratulations for getting Silver, Canada. Congratulations to Norway on your Bronze medal. But, remember, in the minds of a lot of showjumping fans, this one included, your achievements will be forever tainted with an asterisk - John Whitaker did not start for Britain. Where was the fairness that the Olympics is supposed to be about in your protest? Britain reduced to 3 riders, when their fourth was fit and his horse was fit, but deemed inelligible on your say so. Reduced to 3 riders, albeit 3 very good riders, you left Britain with no chance of a medal, having to count all 3 scores, no chance to drop their worst score, without the world's best team rider, John Whitaker to fall back on. Was that fair? The answer is NO. But why should that matter to you? You have your medals and your riders can look forwards to the individual competition without fear of being beaten by one of the World's most experienced championship riders.
You were so brave to make that stand against John Whitaker weren't you?
Actually, your actions reek of cowardice. I for one, don't think of you as brave any more. I used to marvel at how good you were, not any more. Every one of you that protested aginst John's inclusion in the British team for the second day of competition are cowards. I don't respect you or think you are great any more.
To Germany. The most sincere congratulations for overcoming a horrendous first day score of 20 faults to finish joint fifth. I hope that your riders can put their disappointment at not winning a team medal behind them and secure at least one individual medal.
And finally, to our brave, brilliant British riders. I can understand your disappointment at finishing seventh in the team competition. Forget what those cowards did to our chances, and set about proving to them that, the team result was wrong and that Britain was truely the best showjumping team at the Olympics. Then, look to London 2012. With good luck, those 4 horses that started our medals dreams in Beijing will still be competing and winning, and we can put the record straight, winning the team gold.
To those cowards, I hope you enjoy your ill-deserved sucess, it won't last. Whitaker and Peppermill have a point to prove and you still all have to face them again this year. I won't wish you luck when that time comes.
Hi Linzi, i just wanted to respond to a youtube video you posted about what was there before the big bang. The assumption you made was that "Everything comes from something" and therefore the matter which was at the big bang must have come from somewhere. There is nothing in the human experience to show that something comes from another thing.We found everything here and all we are doing is just rearranging matter in different styles and giving them different names.We say sugar comes from sugarcane,and that paper comes trees, but the reality is that sugar ,sugarcane,paper,trees,humans and all other matter are made up of the same protons,electrons and neutrons and therefore nothing new is being made,just rearrangement of these elementary particles.Paper is not something "NEW",the particles making it existed in the tree before we rearranging it.We have therefore never seen something new come from something that already existed. This is a common misconception. For you to get something new you need nothing first, and for you to get nothing you need something first. Nothingness and "somethingness" go together like light and darkness. Therefore nothingness was a prerequisite for getting the first matter before the big bang,and if there is going to be nothing in the future it is because there is something now. Philosophers from the east understood this concept for thousands of years.You cant have a front without the back,although they are opposite, they go together.You need the front in order to have the back,and you need the back in order to have the front. And that's how the universe is,opposites go together.