In reply to timjones:
> What leads you to the assumption that I don't understand
The text you have typed clearly demonstrates that you have not understood.
> Best in the country but not British champion?
Maybe they were injured, maybe they were competing in a more high profile competition, maybe it is a sport where you progress from national level to global level competition and don't do both at the same stage in your career.
> Do our best sportspeople always get to compete at a world level?
Depends if they are good enough.
> >Which is the greater achievement generally.
> That depends on the quality of the opponents on the day, it really doesn't matter where the opponents come from.
Sometimes we are lucky as a nation, the competition comes from the home nation (Coe & Ovett or Brownlee & Brownlee), but usually there will be stronger competition abroad. Mo Farah beating Kenyans and Ethiopians is a much bigger deal than him beating Chris Thompson (great athlete that Thompson is).
> When trying to pick the best sportsperson out of many different sports it will always be subjective. Saying that they should compete in a global sport or that the person should compete internationally isn't necessarily going to make it easier to find a clear winner.
Of course it is subjective, it is a public vote and will be based on a whole raft of prejudices, but it is about being much more than the best in Britain. Every one of the nominees on Sunday was world class, not just the best in Britain.