Competitors are given a personal daily allowance of £90 to spend on food and drink in various dedicated restaurants, and one coach per player is allocated about half that much.
The system – integrated with accreditation tags – is intended to make sure that those preparing for big matches do not need to worry about bringing their own nutrition to the south west London grounds.
However, it has emerged that numerous competitors have been treating the allowance as more of a target than a cap, with restaurants at times running low on certain products as a result.
One of the things that makes creating targets – whether for salesmen or for the economy more generally when planning and all types in between – difficult. Human nature can be, well, odd.
I watched a discussion between Jordan Peterson and some woman psychotherapist a few days ago. A couple of times Peterson said everyone should have ‘equality of opportunity’ but whenever he said it, she kept saying ‘no, equality of outcome’. I shouted at the screen “define outcome, you thick ***ch”.
I wonder if these ‘experts’ have ever had any dealings with real people and if they have, why have they ignored everything they have experienced or is their whole understanding of the human race derived from theory?
“OK, I was eliminated on day one. But still, 20 Double Quarter Pounders with Cheese…”
A DAY??!!??!! That’s four times what I spend A WEEK on food.
@jgh: They’re athletes eating in restaurants while staying/working in an expensive area of a foreign country.
It still sounds high, but it’s not quite as crazy as it initially appears. In my experience it’s double a typical expenses allowance – and those aren’t designed for athlete intake or the Wimbledon area.
“£90 to spend on food and drink in various dedicated restaurants”: that wouldn’t buy a bottle of decent Burgundy. Shame!
I bet if they went up to the Fox and Grapes on the common, 90 quid would only get them a mediumish session + crisps + kebab + cab home