Robin128 Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Why on earth spend £30m on an Olympic standard shooting ground, only for it to be demolished after the end of the games? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulos Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Good question. I can't believe nobody has asked it before...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huffhuff Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Good question. I can't believe nobody has asked it before...... ...haaaaaaang on a minute... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webber Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Good question. I can't believe nobody has asked it before...... They did repeatedly, but no one was listening. THey didn't want the public to have to travel outside London to watch the shooting. Its OK for them to travel to Weymouth to watch sailing; some lake or other for rowing, Cardif, Manchester etc. for football; but a purpose built facility, sadly in need of investment just 30 odd miles outside London was dismissed. It stinks. Britain is in breach of the Olympic charter on a number of counts, and therefore should not have qualified to hold the games. Shooting lost its funding and was denied any "lasting legacy". Yet the powers that be will be happy to count the shooting medals towards the team GB total. They should hang their heads in shame, and look for ways to make reparations to shooting; whats the betting that they don't. I note that the silver medalist was shooting Fiocchi cartridges; out of interest does anyone know what cartridges our man was shooting with? webber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulos Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 He uses RC4s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 I think it's pretty obvious, as soon as the Olympics are over the competitors would be back shooting up chip-shops and discos in the Old Kent Road. Best to demolish the facilities and prevent this type of behaviour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matone Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 They did repeatedly, but no one was listening. THey didn't want the public to have to travel outside London to watch the shooting. Its OK for them to travel to Weymouth to watch sailing; some lake or other for rowing, Cardif, Manchester etc. for football; but a purpose built facility, sadly in need of investment just 30 odd miles outside London was dismissed. It stinks. Britain is in breach of the Olympic charter on a number of counts, and therefore should not have qualified to hold the games. Shooting lost its funding and was denied any "lasting legacy". Yet the powers that be will be happy to count the shooting medals towards the team GB total. They should hang their heads in shame, and look for ways to make reparations to shooting; whats the betting that they don't. I note that the silver medalist was shooting Fiocchi cartridges; out of interest does anyone know what cartridges our man was shooting with? webber They won`t be `hanging their heads in shame`,they`ll be jumping for joy at they jolly good time they`re all having off the back of the Olympics,noses in the trough just like little piggies,grab what you can! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 They won`t be `hanging their heads in shame`,they`ll be jumping for joy at they jolly good time they`re all having off the back of the Olympics,noses in the trough just like little piggies,grab what you can! That's about the size of it. Might be worth lobbying Boris Johnson on the subject. He will be the next proper Prime Minister after a short-lived and unpleasent Milliband-led coalition in 2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 They did repeatedly, but no one was listening. THey didn't want the public to have to travel outside London to watch the shooting. Its OK for them to travel to Weymouth to watch sailing; some lake or other for rowing, Cardif, Manchester etc. for football; but a purpose built facility, sadly in need of investment just 30 odd miles outside London was dismissed. It stinks. Britain is in breach of the Olympic charter on a number of counts, and therefore should not have qualified to hold the games. Shooting lost its funding and was denied any "lasting legacy". Yet the powers that be will be happy to count the shooting medals towards the team GB total. They should hang their heads in shame, and look for ways to make reparations to shooting; whats the betting that they don't. webber I agree with the above entirely;it does indeed stink.But when it was first mooted that the facility would be dismantled following the games,what did we do?Grumbled a bit,and there were noises from some of the shooting organisations,and then nothing.We could have all gone to London and protested if we felt that strongly about it...but we didn't,and we wont,so there's your answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 They did repeatedly, but no one was listening. I think that was a joke I thought Greenwich looked better than that dump Bisley anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyD Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 Robin128 I'm not sure that they are members here . It might be worth emailing their respective offices Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 I think that was a joke I thought Greenwich looked better than that dump Bisley anyway Your right, tragedy is Bisley could have looked great and left an excellent legacy with Circa £30,000,000 being spent on it. But we have been here many times...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin128 Posted August 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 None of the reasons put forward over the last few months by the Olympic management or Government make the slightest bit of sense to me. Every penny of tax payers money...and by God I've paid some in my time,all that was due...should be spent wisely, for the benefit of the population and not wasted. This is going to cost Cameron votes. Where the heck is our Sports minister and Home Sec on this? Even the disabled would benefit...Jeeeze, I was beaten in trap shooting yesterday by some gentleman shooting one handed, having suffered a terrible stroke when he was younger. What the heck is wrong with this country? They will be going in with chain saws and diggers in a week or two...where the heck is our press and TV? Can't see the likes of Schofield et al picking up on this. Gutted, just gutted! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 The story I've heard is that the pistol shooting bit is going to be dismantled and shipped to Glasgow for the Commonwealth Games in two years time. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 Bisley or Dartford would have made sense. Quite shocking to the point of being senseless really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 It got answered quite well on here a while back on one of the many times the question got asked. Here is the response that got posted and though i'm sure it won't stop it being asked another dozen times or so OK, let's put a few truths into this thread and I will declare my interests straight away. My name is Bob Meadows and I am an ISSF Rifle, Pistol and Electronic Targets International 'B' Judge, CPSA Referee, CPSA Safety Officer, NSRA Range Officer, CPSA Life Member and Northants CPSA Chairman. I am involved with the Olympics as a National Technical Officer (NTO) on the clay and 10m/50m ranges. I spent two weeks at the Test Event in April 2012, where 808 competitors from 95 countries shot the Olympic disciplines. 390 competitors will shoot at the Olympic Games. Let me start on the Bisley issue and why it could never be there. As already stated, Bisley ranges (clay and smallbore rifle/pistol) are all pointing in the wrong direction and have no facility to house large quantities of spectators. A great example is stand 1 on the skeet ranges, which, in the morning make it impossible to see the clays due to the sun being in your eyes! They would definately need rebuilding. The current ranges were built for the Commonwealth Games and I know for a fact, the NSRA Rifle/Pistol range has struggled to cover its running costs since then and only now can do it with weddings, roller hockey and other non-shooting events held in the shooting ranges. There is no suitable accomodation on site and the NSRA proposal to build a hotel on the triangle of land they bought where the Trench Experience was, has never been undertaken. In addition to all this, the LOCOG restriction of 10% of sports close to the Olympic village has already been exceeded due to the requirement to attract International visitors to football grounds such as Old Trafford. So, bottom line, Bisley was never going to be acceptable. Other proposals were made by numerous people, including Dartford and Southern Counties, but by then the decisions had already been made with LOCOG. Its also important to understand that the shooting is a small piece of the whole Olympic Games Jigsaw. Moving somthing from Woolwich to another location was not going to be possible once agreed, due to the impact on other schedules and services. On the cost front, the cost has actually reduced from its peak about a year ago, through cost cutting and careful scrutiny of expenditure. All the NTO/Referees are doubled up in hotel rooms with other NTOs and their only 'payment' is the cost of dinner in the evenings and mileage for one return trip from their home to Woolwich. NTOs have to take some two weeks time off and the ones coming early to allow the shooters to undertake unofficial training at the ranges, have to be on-site from another 10 days earlier. When comment is made about the pictures of the location, I can understand the image that is presented. What needs to be remembered is that the pictures came from the Test Event, that LOCOG undertook to test the operation of the actual shooting ranges and not the bits in-between. LOCOG did not really want spectators, but they agreed about 200 tickets a day for 'friends and family' of the shooters. What did happen at the Test Event was just what LOCOG wanted, the ISSF World Cup was run VERY successfully and we found a number of issues that will be addressed before the start of the events at the end of July. I personally provided a 'snagging' list of items that need to be changed/addressed and will make sure the operation of the ranges is effective. Already, the groundworks are being addressed and we will see something that looks and feels like a professional event and something we will be proud of. On the subject of legacy, there is definately going to be a legacy. At the end of the games, the equipment is being containerised and I have been told will end up at Glasgow in 2014 for the upcoming Commonwealth Games. The rumour is that after that event, it will be distributed to enhance facilities around the country. (That part has not been confirmed yet, but it would be absolutely great if we created a northern Bisley!) I have personally suggested one legacy proposal, by taking the 10m/50m artificial turf and laying it on the 50m range at Bisley. That would improve that range immeasurably. There was also a comment on wastage at Woolwich and 'inappropriate spending'. From my knowledge of the people actually undertaking the management of the development, I cannot see that being true. Seeing the quality of the marine grade plyboard being used to construct and protect the superstructure on the ranges, I can see a lot of funding being sucked into that sort of construction. I would suspect a large quantity of the funding has been spent on the construction of the buildings, the landscaping, the fencing, the netting, the construction contracts, the logistics contracts etc. So, it is not a pretty picture, but 1000s of people have been involved in the event building and although I am biased, I think we will put on a World Class event and it would be great to think we might break even. I will be mainly on the shotgun range and if you see someone in a dark green official's vest with Bob Meadows on the name tag, do say hello and mention PW. If you see me on the 10m/50m range in a light green vest do the same. Cheer with the rest of the crowd and think of all the effort that not only the athletes have invested, but the NTOs are all Judges in their own right and have probably invested between £2,000 and £5,000 in cash to get where there are. I am a volunteer Rifle/Pistol official (generally only receive mileage, but have to pay my own food, accomodation and wear and tear) and shotgun referee whenever I can. Between now and the Olympic Games I will referee the Jack Pyke for two days, English Open and British Open All Round, British Open Side-by-Side and put on the Beds Police 100 Sporting at Northampton Shooting Ground on Saturday 7th July. I hope this helps and provides a little insight into what goes on behind the scenes. Best wishes to all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 What I want to know is how it cost £30 million.......... 3 temp grand stands some posh ports loos and a couple of big tents oh and a big green curtain...... Anyone done an FOI yet? Tbh I can see why they didn't choose bisley what do the archers think about using lords? Are they up in arms? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salopian Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 This has been raised many times and debated. Originally it was costed out at £19M to build the facility and approximately £11M to dismantle. Why was Bisley not chosen? The real reason was that Gordon Brown's government promised Mother's Against Guns that there would be no lasting legacy to celebrate the use of guns after the Olympic Games, Labour actually stated on many occasions we must remove guns from the public domain. They see no reason for civilians to have guns. The equipment will be dismantled and shipped to Glasgow at a Military workshops and then used for the next Commonwealth Games. So will we be using the Ballistic screening to erect a shooting range that contravenes Health & Safety guidelines on the distance that spent shot can travel once again? Did that netting, metal supports, astro turf, wooden trap houses, portable grandstands and Labour costs really cost £30 Million? Of course it didn't, but unless we kick up a fuss and expose this corruption it will continue to go on. Maybe we should also ask why none of our UK Sport funded shooters qualified for any finals despite being funded from the taxpayer for up to 8 years, the only shooting medal we won was by a self funded shooter and our best lady trap shooter, also self funded was not selected. Perhaps we should ask is British Shooting capable of running our sport? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaserF3 Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 Re; your last three sentences, How much money per year is given to each of our UK Sport shooters? Is this the best way to "select" our best hope for results, I think not and I still think it's a disgrace that Abbey Burton was not chosen too shoot for England. I don't think that British Shooting is fit for anything, it's very clique group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin128 Posted August 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 We are where we are...forget sunk cost ... its there. What matters is the significant cost of moving it around the countryside and losing its use between major games. Simple question...how is that efficient? Throwing good money after bad? :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.