[Drewski]

(Original post by Fusion)
I think Ennis is a good bet as I'm sure they'll want more female winners and the current holder is another cyclist which may dampen Wiggin's chance.

It's a public vote though, so what the BBC want doesn't come into it. She'll be in the top10, but will the public vote for her in big enough numbers? Especially seeing as she's come second before.

[Fusion]

(Original post by Drewski)
It's a public vote though, so what the BBC want doesn't come into it. She'll be in the top10, but will the public vote for her in big enough numbers? Especially seeing as she's come second before.

In that case it will almost certaintly be Wiggins. As if The Tour de france win wasn't enough to then win a gold...

[Drewski]

(Original post by Fusion)
In that case it will almost certaintly be Wiggins. As if The Tour de france win wasn't enough to then win a gold...

I think the poll here shows that readily enough, yep! I expect everyone named to be in the top10, plus a few others, Murray for example, but still, it's Wiggins'.


Or, Sir Brad's [as he's also surely about to becmoe].

[manchesterunited15]

(Original post by stefl14)
I think Federer is the best but it's easy to come up with arguments against him: he dominated a **** era and a young Nadal apart from on Clay and ever since he has been dominated by Nadal on all surfaces apart from indoor hard courts. He only won the recent wimby with Nadal out. It's easy to look at achievements from a different perspective - that's all I'm trying to illustrate. And as for you stating that I don't know tennis - I GUARANTEE I know more than you about it. Besides what did I say that makes you think I don't know tennis - answer me that please.

Your statements really show that you don't really understand cycling. If teams with potential winners don't work for one guy and more than one fights for a win then in all likelihood neither will win.

Federer dominated a **** era? From 2003-2006 it wasn't great but Roddick was a very good player who was stopped in the final 4 times by federer. Ever since 2008 it's been anything but a **** era- probably the hardest ever. Djok, nadal, murray, del potro. Murray is probably the best player never to have won a grand slam, and why's that? because federer's beaten him 4 times in finals, only dropping 1 set.

And nadal's dominated him on every surface except indoor hard courts? umm.. wimbledon? nadal first won it in 2008 and since then they've won 2 each (including 2008)

he only won the recent one with nadal out

umm what? nadal went out, federer didn't, all that does is help prove my point.

That's why you don't know tennis- stupid points like that.

[amirlad]

they all would be deserved winners, such a tough decision

[kingsholmmad]

I have every faith that by December the short-sighted British ignorance will have forgotten the Olympics and will end up voting for another footballer. Probably Beckham. I'm so depressed.

[Tapner]

It really should be Wiggins. Not taking anything away from the others because each achievement is fantastic, but being the first British winner of the Tour De France, as well as winning an Olympic gold medal in the same year is absolutely amazing. Especially if you add that to his previous 3 gold, 2 silver and 2 bronze medals.

[I got pooled!!!!]

Wiggins EASILY!!!

The only thing that i think could have competed with him would have been Murray...IF he had won wimbledon. That would have been interesting.

[Olie]

Can't say I'm a fan of cycling, but even I can see what a massive achievement it was to win the Tour de France and with a gold medal to top it off I think like most it will be Wiggins, though the other poll options and for me Murray would all be very deserving winners as well, but its going to be a list of the highest standard.

[yunghamz]

If i was being biased i would say Farah.

Wiggins for sure though, a lot of people did not care about the Tour De France and Cycling in general before he won it.

[manchesterunited15]

(Original post by I got pooled!!!!)
Wiggins EASILY!!!

The only thing that i think could have competed with him would have been Murray...IF he had won wimbledon. That would have been interesting.

if murray won wimbledon it wouldn't have even been a competition.

[yunghamz]

(Original post by wildrover)
Sports personality of the year - Wiggins
Overseas Sports personality - Phelps
Team of the Year - Chelsea
Life time achievment - Lord Coe

Made me lol, nice one.

[Morgsie]

Tough one but there are 4 in contention: Wiggio, Ennis, Muuray and Kenny

Give Wiggio and Ainslie a Knighthood, Olympians will feature in the New Year's Honour List

[Drewski]

(Original post by manchesterunited15)
if murray won wimbledon it wouldn't have even been a competition.

I'll agree with that. But Wiggins would have been a close second.

[Drewski]

(Original post by Morgsie)
Tough one but there are 4 in contention: Wiggio, Ennis, Muuray and Kenny

Give Wiggio and Ainslie a Knighthood, Olympians will feature in the New Year's Honour List

Kenny? No offence to him, but he doesn't stand a chance.

[cammoo8]

As it stands probably Wiggins. If Murray wins the US open though, and I like his chances, he will take it.

[Olie]

(Original post by kingsholmmad)
I have every faith that by December the short-sighted British ignorance will have forgotten the Olympics and will end up voting for another footballer. Probably Beckham. I'm so depressed.

Another footballer? Only 1 footballer has won SPOTY in the last 10 years.

And Beckham hasn't had any sporting achievement as such this year, he's just been an ambassador for the olympics and however short-sighted and ignorant you think the British public are, they really aren't going to be stupid to vote for a footballer in the year of Olympic glory, so don't worry

[JamesNeedHelp2]

(Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
You're funny.

Wiggins won the Tour de France and an Olympic Gold.

It wont be so funny when he wins the 5k race

[Olie]

(Original post by yunghamz)
Made me lol, nice one.

Er, as much as I don't like them, they won the champions league ffs, how they won it is ultimately irrelevant, its the results that count, not the performances.

[Drewski]

(Original post by Olie)
Er, as much as I don't like them, they won the champions league ffs, how they won it is ultimately irrelevant, its the results that count, not the performances.

Yeah, but there's still no way they'll win the Team of the Year, though.