Lottery funding for Equestrian teams?

cptrayes

cptrayes

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 March 2008
Messages
14,748
Visit site
I was shocked to read in an article in the Times magazine today that British Equestrian teams receive £13.4 million in funding from UK Sport for 2009-2013, most of it from lottery funding.

Surely we have better things for that £13.4 million to be spent on than three elite equestrian teams riding multi million pound horses?

Would Britain really be worse off if we didn't enter team competitions? Or entered a less well funded team and got worse results than we do now?
 
I don't think the big money just gets spent on equestrians does it? Sounds about the price of a couple of premier league footballers for just one season and have we actually won anything at football since 1966? ;)

There might be better things for the money to be spent on but I reckon there could be a lot worse too judging by some of the stuff the lottery money goes on!
 
But premier league footballers are bought by publicly quoted companies, not with Charity funding. And it's possible for any kid from a slum to end up as a premier league footballer but no kid without at least enough family money to buy them a horse and travel and compete it will ever end up in a British Team.

To be honest I'd rather the "differently abled, minority ethnic, transgender support network" got it than a bunch of people who ride horses valued at several million pounds and who can earn up to £100 for 45 minutes training other people to ride.

It doesn't feel at all right to me :(
 
I'm simply commenting that obscene amounts of money change hands in football and no one turns a hair - the money that buys them has started out in public hands just the same as the lottery money, it's just gone down a different route. I don't believe that it's just the privileged few that end up on equestrian teams - there are a number of people from humble backgrounds riding at a high level because they've got the grit and determination to work and make sacrifices - and they've got talent. If it was all about buying your way in then our local dressage diva up the lane would be there at the top with the amount of money she's spent on horses over the years expecting to sit on them and not have to put any effort in herself!
 
I completely agree you need talent, money is not enough by itself, but surely money is also a pre-requisite?

Is there really anyone from a humble background riding at elite level? That is, has anyone from a background which didn't include the purchase of a horse for them and the payment of its keep, entry fees to an affiliated level of competition, trainer fees and transport costs, made it into a British training squad in the last ten years? I doubt it, so that would preclude anyone from a humble background who simply wouldn't have the money to have done it.

Unlike a kid who runs fast, who needs only a pair of decent-ish trainers and the family car filled with fuel or a decent seven year old school footballer who will be picked up and trained by the most local Premier League junior training squad.

I guess no-one else thinks it's an issue but me though, since no-one else is commenting.
 
I did a magazine interview with Daniel Neilson who started off from humble beginnings and worked his way up the ladder, so it is possible.
what I dont understand though is that with elite athletes the lottery funding is allocated to the athletes themselves and paid as a living wage. It is determined by their likelyhood to win medals. i am told though that with equestrianism this money is paid for the upkeep of the top horses likely to be taking part in the olympics and other prestigous events..so as far as I can see the tax payer is paying for the up keep and well being of the horses which is fine... but when they reach a certain level can be sold off by the owner with the tax payer being left with nothing to show from the funding that has assisted in the horse reaching that level...something seems wrong there to me, if this is 100% true! Surely the commitment is to keep the top horses at the dispersal of the GB team as long as required, otherwise the funding should never be available in the first place
 
I agree that it sounds a huge sum of money for something that isn't necessarily essential.

But there would rightly be an outcry if one of GB's top horses was sold abroad and we couldn't stop it. I hope that the money is going towards ensuring that good horses stay with GB riders and don't get sold on. Many riders can't afford to turn down good offers for their top horses and that prevents the rider reaching the top of their potential.

Also I would imagine that the money isn't just going to the top riders, in dressage, show jumping and eventing. It will be going to members of junior teams and those of the world class developments squads etc. Then there is the funding of the paradressage squad, who need additional investment and often aren't able to make money through sponsorship and training in the same way that Mary King/Carl Hester/John Whittaker etc can.
 
Ooh, hadn't even thought of the horses increasing in value and the owner being able to sell them. That's an interesting one.

Kat I'm not sure how wide the outcry would be. Some riders but not all, and practically no-one else in the country is what I reckon. It wouldn't both me a jot if we didn't field teams at the Olympics or WEG, especially not if they could decrease the fee for BE80/90/100, which they could.

I'm happy with the Paralympic money, they are a different kettle of fish, but not the elite riders.

Anyone else read the article? I was intrigued to read also that "elite horses wear the same shoes as other horses but are shod completely differently". What nonsense :D
 
Could you link to the article? Would be interested to read it.

I seem to remember that Anna R-D started with lessons at a riding school, not exactly slumming it, but a more 'normal' start than most?

I think an astonishing amount of money is wasted (having just spent the weekend trying to stop our delightful adult neighbours bashing their football at cars along the street - funding non working/irritating 24/7 thanks to the tax payers out there!), not just misdirected. With it being lottery money I don't mind as much where it goes as it isn't coming out of peoples pockets as directly as money straight from tax revenue.

I agree though that I would like to see more money being directed at helping those from a background that would usually preclude them from top class competition. I would include para riders in those I would like to see more money going towards. Many of them have disabilities that prevent them from working or prevent them from working in well paid jobs due to a disability coming on later in life. Para sport doesn't have the exposure other top class sport does which I think can restrict earnings from lessons, sponsorship and ownership opportunities. Not to mention that alot of riders make some of their living bringing on horses, the nature of alot of para riders disabilities makes that a much less likely source of income.
 
Don't have anything constructive to add really, but the lottery money is also spent on a lot of other athletes too I'd imagine.
In regards to charging £100 for 45 mins, nobody is exactly forced to do that. If they charged say £30 by comparison the average instructor, breaking & schooling yard etc would have to charge about £10 which is hardly fair for the years of hardwork & low wages to get that experience.
 
I wonder how many people really give a thought to how Lottery money is spent anyway - or even care!? You buy your ticket for a chance to win a million quid not to be a philanthropist! I give direct to any charities that I want to support not take a chance that they might get a handout of Lottery cash.
 
So I'm going to way in here and probably start a big debate but here goes.

Do any of you know how much it does actually cost to be at the top level and stay there? Most athletes could not do this without help such as the lottery funding programmes. I'm currently a member of the British Snowboard Cross Team. I have to pay approximately £12000 a year and I'm not even near the World cup/olympic standard yet and I'll be honest, I'll never get to that standard if I don't get any help such as lottery funding (I know that might not be that much money to some of you but I'm also a part time student and I can't get a job that would let me earn enough, train and compete as much as I need to and to also complete my degree). Equestrian sports are one of the most expensive sports to compete in and yes most of these riders probably do have plenty of money but most of them wouldn't have been able to get there without the help.

Many people assume that having sponsors means that you'd be sorted but the reality is that it is really hard surviving just on sponsorship alone, plus at a lot of major competitions like the olympics competitors are not actually allowed to advertise sponsors.

Yes equestrian sports do get a major amount of funding which is certainly a lot more than other sports get, but tbh i'd look at that as a good thing. Your taking part in a sport which the British Government has decided it is worth investing in and that there are high possibilities of Britian being successful in. All sports get funding depending on how much the government thinks we can be successful in. It is something that the government has decided is worth investing in, and tbh myself, like all athletes are thankful on it.

(Just going to put a saftey in and say I'm basing the sponsorship thing off my sport, may be different for equestrian in the olympics. Also I'm dyslexic so if you don't understand my phrasing please ask me to clarify and don't attack me)
 
Last edited:
Am I the only person who read the article and thought "is that all?"

13.4m is not that much money since it was over a four year period and covering a number of different disciplines and presumably also looking to the next Olympics/ Worlds so not just London.
I assume they are funding some of the show jumpers to be in Florida etc etc.
 
Fuzz I understand completely your passion about your sport, but there are people dying because they aren't getting the drugs that would keep them alive and there are kids on sink estates without a playground to run around in, and personally I would put them and many, many other causes like them way above giving you money to fulfill your sporting dream. Good luck though, I hope you get there.

I am intrigued at people's definitions of humble backgrounds. My understanding of one quoted was that she married a multi-millionaire and was suddenly able to afford top horses. I don't know about the guy, but at some point he must have had someone buy him, or come into the money to buy for himself, some very expensive horses. I don't count either as "humble backgrounds" they have just been lucky enough to come into money, albeit later than people born into it.

I had a wry smile at the lottery ticket buyer's motivation Ollie's Mum, you're right of course :)

I can't get my head round equestrian teams. I was told by someone who should know what they were talking about that it cost over £400,000 to send a three day event team to Kentucky a few years back. I wonder how many BE90 competitors paying those enormous entry fees that BE demand really wanted to have to contribute to that, and whether it was worth it for the grass roots rider. Perhaps I'm uncommon, but I don't give a fig about British Equestrian teams being sent abroad, and I think the Olympics is a joke now that it's gone Pro. Especially the showjumping and 3 day eventing which have to be kept below World Championship levels in order to give more countries the opportunity to compete (otherwise they will be discontinued as Olympic events).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top