Current Most Read

The End of the Safety Net: Why Slashing Farm Subsidies Could Threaten the UK’s Food Future

The Rising Crime Rate in the UK: A Crisis in the Criminal Justice System

How to prepare for concert ticket presales and sales on Ticketmaster

The Unforgettable and Unusual Moments in Olympic History: From "Eddie the Eagle" to the "Blood in the Water" Match

Connor Banks
Jul 25, 2024
4 min read

The Olympics have always been a stage for extraordinary athletic feats, but some moments stand out not just for the records set, but for the stories that captured the world's imagination. Here are some of the weirdest and most memorable moments in Olympic history.

Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards: The Unlikely Hero of 1988

Michael "Eddie the Eagle" Edwards was not your typical Olympian. With thick glasses that fogged up during jumps and a lack of sponsorship that left him training on second-hand equipment, Edwards seemed an unlikely candidate for Olympic fame. Despite these challenges, Eddie qualified for the 1988 Calgary Winter Olympics in ski jumping after only two years in the sport. Arriving in Calgary, he quickly became a media darling due to his underdog status and charming personality. Competing against seasoned athletes, Eddie's jumps of 55m and 71m placed him last. But it wasn’t his score that made headlines—it was his sheer determination and joy in the face of overwhelming odds. The crowd cheered him on, celebrating his perseverance and spirit. Eddie’s story epitomises the Olympic spirit, leading to the introduction of the "Eddie the Eagle Rule," ensuring higher qualification standards. His tale was immortalised in the 2016 film "Eddie the Eagle," capturing the essence of his underdog story.

Eric "The Eel" Moussambani: The Spirit of the 2000 Sydney Olympics

Eric Moussambani from Equatorial Guinea had only learned to swim a few months before the Sydney Olympics and had never swum in an Olympic-sized pool. Competing in the 100m freestyle, Eric's race was a display of pure willpower. As the only competitor in his heat after the other two swimmers were disqualified for false starts, he swam at a painfully slow pace compared to world standards, finishing with a time of 1:52.72, over a minute slower than his competitors. Struggling visibly through the last meters, Eric’s determination was palpable. The crowd, realising they were witnessing something special, began to cheer him on. He finished the race to a standing ovation, earning the nickname "Eric the Eel." Eric’s story highlighted the inclusivity and spirit of the Olympics, showing that participation and effort are as celebrated as winning.

The Marathon Mix-Up: Chaos at the 1904 St. Louis Olympics

The 1904 marathon in St. Louis was a chaotic event marked by extreme heat, poor course conditions, and bizarre occurrences. From the start, the race was plagued with problems. Temperatures soared to 90°F, and the course, which was open to traffic, was a mix of dusty roads and steep hills. Fred Lorz initially crossed the finish line first, but it was soon revealed he had ridden in a car for 11 miles after suffering cramps. The real winner, Thomas Hicks, staggered across the finish line in a state of near-collapse, having been sustained by a mixture of strychnine and brandy administered by his handlers. Another runner, Andarín Carvajal, took a nap mid-race and was chased off course by wild dogs, adding to the race's absurdity. The marathon is remembered for its chaos and the lessons it imparted about organising and managing marathon events.

Nadia Comăneci’s Perfect 10: A Gymnastics Revelation in 1976

At the 1976 Montreal Olympics, 14-year-old Nadia Comăneci of Romania achieved the unthinkable. During her routine on the uneven bars, Nadia executed her moves with such precision and grace that the judges awarded her a perfect 10.0—an unprecedented score at the time. The scoreboard, not designed to display a 10.0, showed 1.00, causing confusion until it was clarified. Nadia went on to score six more perfect 10s during the Games, dominating the gymnastics events and winning three gold medals. Her performances revolutionised gymnastics, setting new standards of excellence and making her an instant icon.

The Duel in the Pool: The "Blood in the Water" Match of 1956

The 1956 water polo semifinal between Hungary and the Soviet Union, held amidst the Hungarian Revolution, was fraught with political tension. From the outset, the match was intensely physical. Hungarian player Ervin Zádor was targeted by Soviet players and emerged from the pool with a bloody gash under his eye after being punched by Valentin Prokopov. The sight of Zádor’s blood incited the Hungarian supporters in the stands, nearly causing a riot. Despite the violence, Hungary won the match 4-0 and went on to win the gold medal, symbolising a moral victory over Soviet oppression. The "Blood in the Water" match remains a powerful symbol of political struggle and athletic rivalry.

Hans-Gunnar Liljenwall’s Disqualification: The "Horse Meat Scandal" of 1968

Swedish pentathlete Hans-Gunnar Liljenwall drank two beers before the pistol shooting event at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics. His urine test showed alcohol levels above the allowable limit, leading to his disqualification. This disqualification cost the Swedish team their bronze medal, marking the first Olympic disqualification for doping. The incident highlighted the need for clearer doping regulations and stricter enforcement, leading to more rigorous anti-doping measures in future Games. Despite the nickname "horse meat scandal" often being associated with his case, the true issue was alcohol consumption and the early stages of Olympic doping control.

Kusuo Kitamura: The Youngest Male Swimming Champion of 1932

At the age of 14, Japanese swimmer Kusuo Kitamura competed in the 1500m freestyle at the 1932 Los Angeles Olympics. Competing against older and more experienced swimmers, Kitamura maintained a strong pace throughout the grueling event. He finished with a time of 19:12.4, setting a new Olympic record. Kitamura’s victory made him the youngest male swimmer to win an Olympic gold medal, showcasing the incredible potential of young athletes. His triumph inspired many in Japan and contributed to the growth of swimming as a sport in his home country.

These stories from the annals of Olympic history remind us that the Games are not just about winning medals but about the human spirit, perseverance, and sometimes, the unexpected moments that captivate the world. From the determination of Eddie the Eagle to the political drama of the "Blood in the Water" match, these moments continue to resonate, illustrating the timeless and universal appeal of the Olympics.

The End of the Safety Net: Why Slashing Farm Subsidies Could Threaten the UK’s Food Future

All Articles

16 April 2025

Paul Francis

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Not only do UK farmers now face the looming threat of inheritance tax reforms that could force centuries-old family farms to be sold off - but they’re also contending with a policy shift that dismantles the very foundation of their economic stability: the withdrawal of direct farm subsidies.

A black-and-white cow grazes on a lush, green field with a dense forest in the background. The scene is peaceful and natural.

In a time of global instability - wars in Europe and the Middle East, disrupted trade routes, volatile commodity markets - the UK government is removing financial safeguards that have underpinned British agriculture for decades. And it’s doing so faster than many in the industry can adapt.

The Basic Payment Scheme (BPS), a direct subsidy paid to farmers under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), is in its final years. By 2027, it will be completely gone. In its place: a complex, tiered system of environmental schemes under the umbrella of the Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS). Worthy in theory, but in practice? A mess of bureaucracy, delays, and shortfalls.

And the timing couldn’t be worse.

A Lifeline Cut-Off Before the Bridge Was Built

The BPS wasn’t perfect, but it provided one essential function - it kept farms afloat. Payments were calculated based on the amount of land farmed, offering predictability and a cashflow buffer that allowed British farms to invest in new equipment, manage seasonal fluctuations, and ride out the weather, both literal and economic.

Now, payments have been rapidly reduced. By 2024, many farmers had already lost 35%–50% of their BPS income. In 2025, a new cap of £7,200 per farm will apply. That’s a fraction of the £20,000 to £50,000 mid-size farms previously received.

The replacement - ELMS - promises payments for "public goods": improving soil health, reducing carbon emissions, boosting biodiversity. Laudable aims. But ask most farmers, and they’ll tell you: they don’t object to sustainability. What they object to is the speed and scale of the transition, and the fact that the new payments often don’t come close to replacing what’s being lost.

Environmental Schemes: Aspirations Without Infrastructure

At the core of ELMS are three tiers:

Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI): Encourages low-level changes such as herbal leys, no-till farming, and reducing fertiliser use.
Local Nature Recovery: Pays for habitat restoration and targeted environmental actions.
Landscape Recovery: Funds large-scale, long-term ecosystem restoration, often in collaboration with multiple landowners.

But uptake has been patchy at best. As of late 2024, fewer than half of eligible farms had enrolled in any ELMS scheme. Why?

The schemes are confusing. Farmers must navigate different options, overlapping rules, and constant revisions.
The application process is time-consuming and opaque.
Payments under SFI are often insufficient, especially for mixed or livestock farms in upland areas where land-use change is more difficult.
Crucially, many tenanted farmers - nearly a third of all farms in England - face legal and logistical barriers to taking part.

DEFRA has promised streamlining. But meanwhile, farmers are left in limbo - without clear income streams, but still expected to feed the nation.

The Cost of Poor Policy Timing

Agricultural experts, rural economists, and even major retailers have raised alarm bells. In a scathing 2023 report, the National Audit Office warned that DEFRA had failed to communicate the changes effectively, leaving many in the dark about what the new schemes offer.

The NFU (National Farmers’ Union) has repeatedly called on the government to pause BPS cuts until ELMS is fully functioning, but those calls have largely been ignored. In late 2024, a coalition of MPs from all parties demanded a review, warning that this abrupt withdrawal of support could lead to an exodus from the industry.

And that’s not just a theoretical risk. A nationwide NFU survey found that 11% of farmers were considering leaving farming altogether due to the combined impact of reduced subsidies, labour shortages, and rising costs.

Food Security in an Uncertain World

This isn’t just a farming problem - it’s a national one.

The UK is already heavily reliant on imports for key food items. And with international trade routes threatened by conflict in Ukraine, instability in the Middle East, and shipping disruptions in the Red Sea, supply chains are becoming more fragile by the month.

Should we really be cutting back our domestic food production capacity now?

Government ambitions to rewild 10% of farmland, promote biodiversity, and shift toward carbon sequestration may look good on a whiteboard in Whitehall. But on the ground, it’s leading to reduced livestock numbers, lower domestic output, and a growing dependence on foreign markets that may not be as reliable as once assumed.

A Dangerous Gamble

To many farmers, this feels like an ideological experiment being conducted in real-time -with their livelihoods and our food supply on the line. And as supermarket CEOs and farming groups increasingly speak out, it’s clear this isn’t just grumbling from the shires. It’s a cry of alarm from the foundation of the UK’s food system.

Environmental ambition is important. Climate change is real. But so is hunger.

We can pursue sustainability - but not by pulling the rug out from under those who feed us. The government’s subsidy reform may have noble aims, but its execution is flawed, its timeline reckless, and its consequences potentially devastating.

If we want a resilient, secure food future, we must support the people who make it possible - not push them to the brink.