A filter like this is obviously biased against nations with large populations, especially China, but what's telling is the scale of difference between Australia and the much larger democracies of Western Europe. Australia has not only outperformed them in absolute terms in Athens, but outperformed them five-fold in per capita terms.
What is striking about Australia's Olympics success is its longevity, now extended by Athens. Australia's teams have finished in the top 10 nations in 11 of the 14 Olympics of the modern era, which began at Helsinki in 1952. The remarkable performance in Athens is not the first time it has been the most successful nation, per capita, among the Olympic top 10. Australia also finished No.1 in 1956 (Melbourne), 1960 (Rome), 1996 (Atlanta) and 2000 (Sydney). Also remarkable has been the breadth of Australia's success, not just the depth. In Sydney, Australian athletes won medals in 20 sports, matched only by the US. In Athens, Australia's 49 medals (to Sunday) were across 14 sporting disciplines. Only the super-heavyweights - the US, Russia, China - exceed this breadth.
It doesn't come cheap. I estimate the cost per Olympic medal at about $5million in direct government spending, which does not include corporate sponsorship, which is not measurable. The Australian Sports Commission says the amount spent on "high performance funding" for Olympic sports for the past four years was: 2001-02, $45,668,670; 2002-03, $46,092,396; 2003-04, $48,476,032;
RE:Per capital Aussies win more Olympic medals than any other country
by sudhir dhar on Oct 10, 2007 01:37 PM
Surag, puttar, australia chotey country hain.India kaa size pata hai?
Phir bhee iss desh may primary and secondary aur h secondary education absolutely free hain dude.
I find it too overtly high-moral thinking by the people who question those decisions:
1) The LBW against Sachin..it was clipping the top of the leg stump..and umpire is in his rights to give benefit of doubt. If he is doing it regularly to the batsmen of one team and against the other, then that can be questioned. There have been occassions in first couple of one dayers when the same umpire gave the decision in favour of australians when hawk-eye suggested otherwise (i.e. clipping leg stump). We have to understand that until we use the tech. to judge those decisions, such human judgements have to be acceptable.
2) Caught behind.. again this was revealed by sniko..the use of which is not taken to make actual decisions. It happend in england when such decision went against sachin..where snicko revealed no edge.
This is irrespective of the fact that Sachin played a very shabby innings to start with..but full marks to him to make it count towards india's cause in the end. So if you look from teams prospective it helped in the end, so we should just try not to stand on those fake high moral grounds and lets appreciate this win.
And questining if the match was fixed when nothing suggests to that effect only shows the loser mentality.
Of course Sachin and Dravid need (and can) play lot better.. there is no denying that we need there class and experience as much as we need the young exubernce.
RE:India won by its own performance..
by Prasad Manokaran on Oct 10, 2007 11:41 AM
your statement above will be accepted since dhoni and uthappa took over the aussies in ending overs. what would have happened if both got out scoring 20 runs each. the seniors always levae a lot for the person following them to finish. tendulkar has wasted 40 balls, i think thats more when it comes to oneday cricket. this type of innings should not be hyped. it is not a surprise why the media make something great out of ordinary when tendulkar fires.
RE:India won by its own performance..
by sudhir dhar on Oct 10, 2007 01:39 PM
Prasad,that was the plan to play till the 35 over, and then play a 20-20 match.
Bhai ronay kaa nahee,India is jeeting, and you are weeping! Agar ronnay ko mangtaa, apnay khar may ronnay kaa, yahaa pay nahee dude!
This is the latest controversy in the 6 0'clock news in Headlines Today. Vengsarkar and manager of the team Lalchand Rajput were given warning by the BCCI to show restraint when talking to the media. Vengsarkar was taken by the board for making comments on the seniors in the media. The board told him that instead of talking to the media, he should either talk to the seniors or drop them if they don't perform.The manager was also warned for his statement to the media. God only knows when our board and the selectors are going to stop washing their dirty linen in the public. This is also unwarrented in the middle of a series. During every series this sort of things are happening. May be they want to entertain the opposition team in between the matches. The board and the selectors should behave in a dignified and decent manner which their posts demand and diccuss whatever they want to in private, behind closed doors.
RE:Washing dirty linen in public
by Surag Singh on Oct 09, 2007 07:42 PM
With people like Sharad Pawar and Laloo Prasad Yadav managing the BCCI, what dignity is left?
RE:Washing dirty linen in public
by sudhir dhar on Oct 10, 2007 01:40 PM
lalchand sahee bolaa, vengy out of turn bola. salaa mouth kholnay kaa aadut gaya nahee colonel kaa!
Its always seen people including media praise senior players only. So what Sachin and Ganguly added few runs. Are they doing any favour to India having played for donkeys years and earned crores of rupees for self. Fine to Dhoni as captain he has played good knocks. Finally what made difference is adding last 20 runs by blasting from Uthappa and quick wickets at the end by R P Singh. Kudos to him, he has done great job in Engalnd tour and 20-20. High time people and media talk and encourage our upcoming youngsters than praising always these selfish seniors. Am sure true patriotic people agree to this.
RE:India was lucky to have R P S & R U
by anand kumar on Oct 10, 2007 11:07 AM
absolutely wrong. if the wickets fell at regular intervals, then there would be no one to play those shots in the end. remember that last lost match when only yuvi was there n no one was supporting him at the other end. a strong foundation is necessary in 50-50 games unlike 20-20 bash bash games.
RE:India was lucky to have R P S & R U
by Prasad Manokaran on Oct 10, 2007 11:46 AM
nope, india got away bcos of some extroadinary hitting by dhoni and uthappa. the extras bowled by austarlians was something unusual. and finally the 2 run over by murali karthick was the reason why india won the match. i think australia was most likely to win the match by 96 overs of the match. india won it on last 4 overs.
RE:India was lucky to have R P S & R U
by sudhir dhar on Oct 10, 2007 01:43 PM
Mohan, you are lucky that you are alive,I am lucky that I am alive, But how long can you stretch luck.
India won,Australia lost. Winners dont need alibis! Losers always have excuses! baat khataum,paisa hazam!
Dhoni should not be burdened with captainship of all the three versions of cricket. Infact, India should ideally have 3 separate teams and captains for each version of cricket. Given the talent pool that has emerged from 20-20 and India 'A' matches, it will be in best interest of the country to have 3 professional teams, each one focussed on one type of game only. Given the amount of International cricket being played these days, 3 separate professional teams should be the order of the day. Sachin and Dravid should be included in the Test team.
