Strict medal targets for British athletes at this summer’s Tokyo Olympics are under review.
Team GB finished second on the medal table five years ago winning 67 medals, including 27 gold, and UK Sport had been equally bullish in their 2020 demands.
Initially a range of 51-92 podium places was set with then culture secretary Matt Hancock insisting he expected British athletes to remain an ‘Olympic powerhouse’.
The British Olympic Association steadfastly refuse to put a target on their team, who have benefited from nearly one billion pounds of funding to finish second, third and fourth on the medal table at the last three Games.
“We don't have a target and I really don’t think UK Sport will either,” said team chef de mission Mark England.
“It has been very obvious that any competition data in terms of where we stand against our main competitors across the world really just isn’t there.
"We have snatches of data from limited competitions and that only builds so much of a picture."
UK Sport - which is funded by government and National Lottery money - traditionally provides sports with strict performance targets, with failure to deliver often leading to savage cuts for the following Games. Badminton was given £5.7m in the build-up to Rio and initially awarded nothing for Tokyo.
However, the uncertainties caused by the pandemic means UK Sport are now willing to show latitude when they announce their Tokyo 2020 ambitions early next month – with normally bold ambitions expected to be dramatically diluted.
“The big discussion is what we do around the targets because we have always based them in the past on the performances in the lead up to the Games,” said UK Sport chair Dame Katherine Grainger.
“We are discussing it with the sports and the sports themselves have targets in mind. But how far we go to publishing them, we are still in discussion. It might be an unhealthy distraction to a lot of the sports at this point.
“There are a lot of very grown up conversations we have had throughout the pandemic. Where are the sports up to? What are realistic expectations?
“For some, they cannot meet those expectations yet because they haven’t had the international competition. In the sports I have had close contact with, there is still an ambition there.
"It is not a sense of not wanting to see targets or dampening down expectations. There is still a huge amount of ambition. It is just the lack of information means we cannot set numbers right now.”
Many of Britain's proven performers are struggling for these Games. Four-time gold medallist Mo Farah has yet to run his qualifying time, while double triathlon champion Alistair Brownlee admitted his ambitions were over after a disappointing display in Leeds last weekend.
In addition, hosts Japan are predicted to be podium regulars with China and Australia also expected to improve on their Rio performances.
"What’s been very obvious over the past 12 months is the delay to the Games has given an opportunity for young athletes to be stronger and put themselves in contention, put their hand up and demonstrate the desire and attitude to be selected," added England, whose Team GB athletes’ exploits in Tokyo will be broadcast live on Eurosport and discovery+.
"You will see a top, top competitive team represent Great Britain and we are excited to see what they can do.”
Data company Gracenote are pessimistic in their predictions, claiming they expect British athletes to win 11 golds in Japan and 36 medals in total - just over half of the total won in Brazil.
However, they were well off the mark five years ago and Covid-19 makes the normal metrics for their predictions a precarious business in already uncertain times.
Stream every unmissable moment from Tokyo 2020 live on discovery+
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here