Surprised no one's mentioned this.
Sir Roger Bannister, the first person to run a mile in under four minutes, has died at the age of 88. He set the sub-four-minute mile record in May 1954.
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/43273249
|
I was 7.5 yrs old & can remember seeing the record breaking run on TV- not so much Black & White TV, more shades of grey.
I have read quite a number of tributes to the man who gave up running & concentrated on his distinguished medical career. There were no celebrity appearances / pundit on TV for this man he just got on with helping others in need of his expertise - his work & research was recognised all over the world. It was sad that his final years were blighted by Parkinsons.
I am not a fan of Knighthoods or other awards as they are often given to people who were just doing their job such as a Civil servant, senior policeman etc etc. I do agree that the likes of Roger Bannister receive recognition for his achievements for his life's work - on the track, in the NHS & for his extensive commitments to medical advances.
|
Without denigrating the person, who was clearly someone of great worth, his actual achievement has been diminished by history and circumstances.
No-one runs "a mile" anymore, to the metric generation - this one - its meaningless.
|
>> Without denigrating the person, who was clearly someone of great worth, his actual achievement has
>> been diminished by history and circumstances.
I think that a bit harsh.
Obits suggest that before Bannister's run there were those who thought the sub four minute mile to be beyond the capacity of the human body. Furthermore he ran that time on cinders in spiked shoes; very different to today's tracks and kit.
Records being there to be broken it's no surprise later folks beat his time. Indeed his record stood for only a few weeks.
Is the 'metric mile' 1500m? In which case about 150m shorter.
|
|
It's not at all "meaningless"
|
>> It's not at all "meaningless"
You are not the metric athletics generation.
|
The question was "I am surprised no-one has mentioned it" .
To the younger generation , up to 35 say, his name is meaningless. His achievement is now historically meaningless. You can say its harsh, it is, you can say the person was special - he probably was, but at the end of the day "running the mile" means nothing in 2018, doing it in under 4 minutes is now not a special achievement,
The question was posed, the answer is obvious.
|
>> To the younger generation , up to 35 say, his name is meaningless.
Except probably to those who pursue an interest in athletics, running, or any other kind of physical activity.
Plus, are there many under 35 yr old members here, or those who have never heard of him?
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 6 Mar 18 at 10:06
|
>> Plus, are there many under 35 yr old members here, or those who have never
>> heard of him?
Not now, he has just been all over the news.
|
"Not now, he has just been all over the news."
Groped an actress, has he?
|
I asjed while we were on the school run.
The 16yr old knew exactly who he was and what he'd done. The 13yr old did not.
I listened to the one explaining to the other why it was significant.
Thus my exhaustive enquiries lead me to believe that 50% of today's teenagers know all about him.
|
>> Thus my exhaustive enquiries lead me to believe that 50% of today's teenagers know all
>> about him.
Well now one has blabbed to the other, they all know.
|
Top sportsman and I believe a surgeon to boot.
What a change to hear about Bradley Wiggins with this alleged scandal about taking substances.
Going back many years I used to follow the British cyclist Simpson he was always up against it when the likes of Eddy Merckx set the bar.He was the tops.Simpson died of a drug overdose.
Is there any sport now if we can call it sport where people don't cheat?
|
So are you suggesting Zero that when anyone famous dies, the media should first establish how many people may have heard of that person before deciding to publicise it based upon the demographic which is most likely to remember?
|
|
I don't see where he said that. What I understood him to say is that his achievement would no longer seem significant to many of the younger generation since the running of a mile is no longer a mainstream event attracting widespread publicity.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Tue 6 Mar 18 at 13:51
|
>> So are you suggesting Zero that when anyone famous dies, the media should first establish
>> how many people may have heard of that person before deciding to publicise it based
>> upon the demographic which is most likely to remember?
No.
|
>> So are you suggesting Zero that when anyone famous dies, the media should first establish
>> how many people may have heard of that person before deciding to publicise it based
>> upon the demographic which is most likely to remember?
>>
>>
Everything else in the media is driven by the readership numbers/interest so why not?
|
Often it's more interesting to read obituaries of remarkable people one has never heard of.
One I still remember from years back -
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1481852/Dame-Miriam-Rothschild.html
"Firmly rejecting all forms of cruelty to animals, Miriam Rothschild spoke out vigorously for their better treatment on the farm and in the laboratory. She became a vegetarian, eschewed make-up, and elected to wear leather-free shoes and boots - moon-boots in the winter, tennis shoes in the summer and, perhaps most notably, white Wellington boots in the evening."
|
|
"leather free shoes"...good god.
|
Sir Roger Bannister - RIP - Falkirk Bairn
