|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2012 22:09:33 GMT
so the london 2012 aim was inspiring a generation and creating a legacy but how will this be acheived?
For me i certainly dont want the legacy to wear off in two weeks so imo one big step to take is to employ a qualified P.E teacher in ALL primary schools. Kids should be taught a wide range of sports such as sprinting etc not just football, then told exactly where they can do this sport out of school.
The standard of primary school P.E is shocking, and when i was speaking to a secondary school P.E teacher i was shocked to hear that some kids cant even catch and throw a ball at the age of 11!
anyone else got any other thoughts/ideas on the legacy of the games?
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Aug 11, 2012 22:17:37 GMT
The Government are looking to increase the amount of PE kids do, and making stuff like Indian Dancing which has been considered to be PE, not PE. It's a start. At the low end, we all need to get fitter, so more PE for kids is good.
If anyone is serious, then PE needs to be given respect, resources and allowed to be competitive. No more medals for turning up, proper professional training for kids and no more school fields sold off for housing.
The legacy should be that football isn't the be all and end all for sports people, and with sufficient finance and training, you can win on the biggest stage.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on Aug 12, 2012 8:22:43 GMT
Have primary schools ever had P.E. teachers? My school and none of my kids schools ever had. My school had a school yard and that was it,we had an under 11s football team,we played at the local park on a cinder pitch. While i,and my youngest son are sport mad,(he plays football,cricket and tennis) all this is done in his leisure time.While sport in school is good,it is not the most important thing. I wouldnt want my,or anybody elses kids,going to secondary school being able to throw/catch a ball,but not being able to read and write. If any parent relies on school to teach their kids to throw/catch or play any sports,then they are a sad excuse for parents.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Aug 12, 2012 9:11:39 GMT
Boris Johnson has suggested two hours of PE a day, which is abosolutely ridiculous! Considering kids do five hours of lessons a day, that equates to 40% of the curriculum, so core subjects such as Maths, English, Sciences are going to have take a bit of a back seat just so we can find our next set of Olympians. But let's face it out of every 1000 kids, probably only 1 will make it as a professional sportsperson, so his suggestion is preposterous.
I think would be better to make sports clubs more accessable, and with proper qualified trainers who can improve the children's game rather than just volunteers or parents, who with the greatest respect don't always have full knowledge of the skills required.
|
|
|
Post by scotchegg on Aug 12, 2012 9:20:06 GMT
Sad excuse for parents? You're right that the basic fundamentals of sport such as throwing and catching a ball should be developed before school, but then so should basic literacy along with a sense of right and wrong etc.
But that has nothing to do with the legacy that has been spoken about, or what is beneficial to children for the future. There are 2 reasons why PE in schools is important and needs to change.
Firstly, childhood obesity and conditions such as diabeties, have rocketed in recent years. Not only does this lead to massive future health risks (and a financial cost), it is also creating a lost generation with thousands unable to contribute meaningfully to society.
Secondly, sport has a way of teaching lifeskills that are needed away from the classroom. Team work, healthy competition, respect, dedication, sacrifices etc can be invaluable for future life.
I would like to see more structured and varied PE programmes in school, along with after school clubs. Coaching qualifications should be encouraged with sponsorship from professional organisations. An example of this would be that if you took the fees paid to agents away in football for one season you could fund the training of every volunteer coach at grass roots level.
And support shouldn't stop when someone levels school. Inactivity in adults is literally killing people. Council running gyms should be subsidised, and more sporting clubs in place for adults. Help adults become coaches and volunteers, which will in turn provide greater opportunities for our children.
But ultimately, we need to do this ourselves. The best legacy will be if each of us who has at on our arses over the last couple of weeks actually gets up and starts doing something!!! A previous thread showed how much is available for children out there, so why not join a club or offer your services to help out!
|
|
|
Post by chuckbert on Aug 12, 2012 9:27:23 GMT
I think there are a lot of testosterone filled young lads who would do better in the remaining 3 hours if they had 2 hours of PE.
|
|
|
Post by Contact eaststandboy on Aug 12, 2012 9:29:04 GMT
They need to make sport more affordable, i pay £40odd quid a month to use the Council run leisure centres, lots of people have said to me they would probably use the facilities if it was cheaper.
I do think these games will inspire younger people, as the BBC said earlier, we need to build on the momentum and not let this die.
Sent from my HTC One X using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Chris1986 on Aug 12, 2012 10:04:53 GMT
I'd like to see more done to help sporting clubs get facilities they need to grow. As an example I play for Caithness cricket team, we are really struggling to raise a team this season due to lack of players. There are plenty of people who would play cricket up here if there was a decent pitch to play on but the only ground we are able to use in Caithness over the summer is the rugby clubs pitches. The ground just isnt flat enough for a cricket pitch and we have no resources to improve it. We play in a league under a combined team with Orkney cricket club, Orkney cricket is doing well and they have two pitches and get funding support and even get a lot of travel expenses paid for them from the Orkney sports council but Caithness gets nothing from the highland council. Because we have no pitch most of our matches are all played around the Inverness area and we have to travel up to 150 miles for a game, most people can't afford to travel every weekend so we are just spiralling out of existence.
Long story short if we got some land and some finances for a pitch like the Orcadians we would be able to grow as a club and attract new people into the game. As cricket is something you can play into your 50's it would encourage people to stay playing sports when they get too old for football and rugby etc and a big health boost.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2012 10:42:41 GMT
I'd like to see more done to help sporting clubs get facilities they need to grow. As an example I play for Caithness cricket team, we are really struggling to raise a team this season due to lack of players. There are plenty of people who would play cricket up here if there was a decent pitch to play on but the only ground we are able to use in Caithness over the summer is the rugby clubs pitches. The ground just isnt flat enough for a cricket pitch and we have no resources to improve it. We play in a league under a combined team with Orkney cricket club, Orkney cricket is doing well and they have two pitches and get funding support and even get a lot of travel expenses paid for them from the Orkney sports council but Caithness gets nothing from the highland council. Because we have no pitch most of our matches are all played around the Inverness area and we have to travel up to 150 miles for a game, most people can't afford to travel every weekend so we are just spiralling out of existence. Long story short if we got some land and some finances for a pitch like the Orcadians we would be able to grow as a club and attract new people into the game. As cricket is something you can play into your 50's it would encourage people to stay playing sports when they get too old for football and rugby etc and a big health boost. A few years ago we holidayed in Scotland. We were in a curry house in Fort William chatting to one of the waiters, a Bangladeshi lad from London who'd been recruited via a London Indian restaurant agency. He said the worst thing about his new life was he could no longer play cricket as there were no clubs nearby!
|
|
|
Post by Chris1986 on Aug 12, 2012 11:18:18 GMT
I'd like to see more done to help sporting clubs get facilities they need to grow. As an example I play for Caithness cricket team, we are really struggling to raise a team this season due to lack of players. There are plenty of people who would play cricket up here if there was a decent pitch to play on but the only ground we are able to use in Caithness over the summer is the rugby clubs pitches. The ground just isnt flat enough for a cricket pitch and we have no resources to improve it. We play in a league under a combined team with Orkney cricket club, Orkney cricket is doing well and they have two pitches and get funding support and even get a lot of travel expenses paid for them from the Orkney sports council but Caithness gets nothing from the highland council. Because we have no pitch most of our matches are all played around the Inverness area and we have to travel up to 150 miles for a game, most people can't afford to travel every weekend so we are just spiralling out of existence. Long story short if we got some land and some finances for a pitch like the Orcadians we would be able to grow as a club and attract new people into the game. As cricket is something you can play into your 50's it would encourage people to stay playing sports when they get too old for football and rugby etc and a big health boost. A few years ago we holidayed in Scotland. We were in a curry house in Fort William chatting to one of the waiters, a Bangladeshi lad from London who'd been recruited via a London Indian restaurant agency. He said the worst thing about his new life was he could no longer play cricket as there were no clubs nearby! We beat Fort William reserves last weekend at Fort Augustus in a 30 over league game so there is definitely ones around if you look for them! It was a 320 mile round trip for me though. We had a 20/20 cup this weekend in Forres which is a 260 mile round trip today but I couldn't make it for 2 weekends in a row. It's not cheap to do the travelling!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2012 12:00:29 GMT
A few years ago we holidayed in Scotland. We were in a curry house in Fort William chatting to one of the waiters, a Bangladeshi lad from London who'd been recruited via a London Indian restaurant agency. He said the worst thing about his new life was he could no longer play cricket as there were no clubs nearby! We beat Fort William reserves last weekend at Fort Augustus in a 30 over league game so there is definitely ones around if you look for them! It was a 320 mile round trip for me though. We had a 20/20 cup this weekend in Forres which is a 260 mile round trip today but I couldn't make it for 2 weekends in a row. It's not cheap to do the travelling! But the upside is you get to play cricket in lovely places like Fort Augustus!
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Aug 12, 2012 14:02:10 GMT
They need to make sport more affordable, i pay £40odd quid a month to use the Council run leisure centres, lots of people have said to me they would probably use the facilities if it was cheaper. I do think these games will inspire younger people, as the BBC said earlier, we need to build on the momentum and not let this die. Sent from my HTC One X using proboards That's a good point. £40 per month is a lot of money to some people. Yes, it would cost the councils and later on the government money when the cost of subsidies are passed on to central governement. But look at the bigger picture - you have healthier people, taking less days off sick from work and less health problems like heart disease and diabetes. This can't be a bad thing at all.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Aug 12, 2012 14:17:03 GMT
Who's going to pay for the subsidies though? Its all going to come down to tax in the end and that's before we work out how much we've lost on the Olympics, a figure which i imagine will be pretty impressive with the media taking full advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Aug 12, 2012 14:33:45 GMT
Who's going to pay for the subsidies though? Its all going to come down to tax in the end and that's before we work out how much we've lost on the Olympics, a figure which i imagine will be pretty impressive with the media taking full advantage. I thought I made that clear in my last post? I'm not suggesting making sport free. Just make it a little a bit more affordable - that's all.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Aug 12, 2012 14:38:37 GMT
Who's going to pay for the subsidies though? Its all going to come down to tax in the end and that's before we work out how much we've lost on the Olympics, a figure which i imagine will be pretty impressive with the media taking full advantage. I thought I made that clear in my last post? I'm not suggesting making sport free. Just make it a little a bit more affordable - that's all. You said central govt would eventually pay for it, but last time I checked they didn't have a money tree growing in the garden of no.11 so ultimately it comes down to who or what is going to get taxed to pay for subsidies.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2012 15:07:16 GMT
what i was thinking is the P.E teachers should be able to introduce the kids to sports such as sprinting, long jump, throwing events etc and then tell them exactly where they can continue this out of school.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Aug 12, 2012 16:54:09 GMT
I thought I made that clear in my last post? I'm not suggesting making sport free. Just make it a little a bit more affordable - that's all. You said central govt would eventually pay for it, but last time I checked they didn't have a money tree growing in the garden of no.11 so ultimately it comes down to who or what is going to get taxed to pay for subsidies. Cost of looking after the morbidly obese, people with diabetes, heart disease, liver disease etc etc etc and various other ailments of apathy and eating fast food is costing this country loads. I think it would be a great idea to encourage people to persue a healthy lifestyle, and it doesn't help when you are charging people £45 a month to use a a gym for example. Sport is pretty much free (through PE) until you are 16 (or 21 if you go onto further education), but after that it can be pretty expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Chris1986 on Aug 12, 2012 17:14:02 GMT
You said central govt would eventually pay for it, but last time I checked they didn't have a money tree growing in the garden of no.11 so ultimately it comes down to who or what is going to get taxed to pay for subsidies. Cost of looking after the morbidly obese, people with diabetes, heart disease, liver disease etc etc etc and various other ailments of apathy and eating fast food is costing this country loads. I think it would be a great idea to encourage people to persue a healthy lifestyle, and it doesn't help when you are charging people £45 a month to use a a gym for example. Sport is pretty much free (through PE) until you are 16 (or 21 if you go onto further education), but after that it can be pretty expensive. To be honest I imagine for most of the people who are morbidly obese the cost of joining a Gym is not the reason they don't exercise enough. Personally I'd rather see money go to clubs and youth sport initiatives than on Gyms. Gyms are all well and good for keeping people fit but sports clubs breed team work and other life skills as well as fitness which I think is more valuable.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Aug 12, 2012 17:14:50 GMT
You said central govt would eventually pay for it, but last time I checked they didn't have a money tree growing in the garden of no.11 so ultimately it comes down to who or what is going to get taxed to pay for subsidies. Cost of looking after the morbidly obese, people with diabetes, heart disease, liver disease etc etc etc and various other ailments of apathy and eating fast food is costing this country loads. I think it would be a great idea to encourage people to persue a healthy lifestyle, and it doesn't help when you are charging people £45 a month to use a a gym for example. Sport is pretty much free (through PE) until you are 16 (or 21 if you go onto further education), but after that it can be pretty expensive. Agree to a point but better sports access isn't going to help the people suffering from those complaints now (and thus costing the economy) and in this age of short-termism, and given the huge splurge on the Olympics, you wonder whether the government isn't going to try and shift some of the burden of sports funding away from themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2012 17:47:43 GMT
if the gym is to expensive for you to go to and you want to exercise it is free to go on a run/walk.
|
|
|
Post by Contact eaststandboy on Aug 12, 2012 18:14:21 GMT
if the gym is to expensive for you to go to and you want to exercise it is free to go on a run/walk. But for some people they don't feel confident enough to run in public... Sent from my HTC One X using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2012 18:31:04 GMT
if the gym is to expensive for you to go to and you want to exercise it is free to go on a run/walk. But for some people they don't feel confident enough to run in public... Sent from my HTC One X using proboards fair point, didnt think about that.
|
|
|
Post by Chris1986 on Aug 12, 2012 18:39:47 GMT
But for some people they don't feel confident enough to run in public... Sent from my HTC One X using proboards fair point, didnt think about that. How does going to a Gym where a load of vain super fit people go make that any better?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2012 18:49:48 GMT
fair point, didnt think about that. How does going to a Gym where a load of vain super fit people go make that any better? another fair point but its likely to be people you dont know, which may make a difference.
|
|
|
Post by Contact eaststandboy on Aug 12, 2012 18:57:16 GMT
fair point, didnt think about that. How does going to a Gym where a load of vain super fit people go make that any better? That's a misconception... In a gym you don't get idiots staring and kids laughing. I'm not a slim jim, but when i see people wayyyy bigger than me, i think fair play to them for trying to lose weight. I have witnessed a group of kids laughing when a big person was speed walking. That's why i can see their point. Sent from my HTC One X using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Aug 12, 2012 19:13:57 GMT
Also a lot of people are into 'fair-weather' fitness. Let's face it the weather ain't great here most of the time, and least in a gym, you're not gonna get cold and wet. It's usually nice temperature, or air conditioned if it's a hot summer's day.
Quite a lot of people in my gym just roll on in, do a session on the treadmill then go home - probably for that very reason.
|
|
|
Post by outofthegloom on Aug 13, 2012 11:49:05 GMT
An area for a sea change is the link between school, all schools, and local clubs. From the nearby professional club, e.g. OUFC; with their own community officers to go into schools, to volunteers from the athletics, cycling, hockey, rowing, swimming and every other sports club, they should seize this opportunity, be in schools and get the children out to join their clubs.
Why not a university style Fresher’s Fair at each school in the first few weeks of term?
There are some good examples, but they the exception and not the norm. It is a change in attitude. Some schools are hostile to parents at Sports Days. Allowing other adults in is just a no. PE teachers and the clubs should have a relationship, learning from each other and connecting children to sport.
|
|
|
Post by foghornleghorn on Aug 31, 2012 9:37:47 GMT
How does going to a Gym where a load of vain super fit people go make that any better? That's a misconception... In a gym you don't get idiots staring and kids laughing. I'm not a slim jim, but when i see people wayyyy bigger than me, i think fair play to them for trying to lose weight. I have witnessed a group of kids laughing when a big person was speed walking. That's why i can see their point. Sent from my HTC One X using proboards The main reason for not joining a gym is that its mind numbingly boring! There's zero social interaction.
|
|
|
Post by foghornleghorn on Aug 31, 2012 9:39:22 GMT
Have primary schools ever had P.E. teachers? My school and none of my kids schools ever had. My school had a school yard and that was it,we had an under 11s football team,we played at the local park on a cinder pitch. While i,and my youngest son are sport mad,(he plays football,cricket and tennis) all this is done in his leisure time.While sport in school is good,it is not the most important thing. I wouldnt want my,or anybody elses kids,going to secondary school being able to throw/catch a ball,but not being able to read and write. If any parent relies on school to teach their kids to throw/catch or play any sports,then they are a sad excuse for parents. Says the person who couldn't be bothered to look into local tennis clubs on his own doorstep. I thought you dismissed tennis as too elitist for your kids?
|
|
|
Post by foghornleghorn on Aug 31, 2012 9:50:06 GMT
Boris Johnson has suggested two hours of PE a day, which is abosolutely ridiculous! Considering kids do five hours of lessons a day, that equates to 40% of the curriculum, so core subjects such as Maths, English, Sciences are going to have take a bit of a back seat just so we can find our next set of Olympians. 5 hours is in the maintained sector, the question is the school day so short? Independent schools have core hours 6-7 hours. Why cant sport be done from 3-5pm? Its not like it has associated homework that needs to be marked. My daughters school has a novel approach, they have 1.5 hours for lunch but they are expected to do a club in that that time. The clubs are anything from athletics, tennis, hockey, science, art, music, etc. Plus they have after school clubs.
|
|