Yep, thank you Michael

The Commonwealth Games has developed its own traditions over the years. One of those traditions has been for someone to tell us how insignificant they are: "They're not the Olympics, people".

Michael Johnson has now had his turn at reminding us that the Commonwealth Games are not the Olympic Games. And a very important reminder it was, too. Now, I do understand that Johnson was not having a go at the Games. He was not referring to them in a negative way in his online column for BBC Sport. But really, why does it happen every time?

The Commonwealth Games are a sporting event involving the nations of the Commonwealth. I personally would have to disagree with Johnson's description for them:

The Games serve their own purpose and that is to give athletes who would not have a chance to qualify for the World Championships or the Olympics the experience of competing in a major event.

When a British - or Australian for that matter - athlete does well, people want to make it fit like an Olympic or World medal but it is just not the same level.

Does it matter? Does every sporting event need to be massive in order to achieve significance and relevance and importance? And that is certainly not to say that the Commonwealth Games are small. I would have thought any event involving India, Canada, the UK and ourselves would carry some sort of significance.

Here's the column. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/commonwealth_games/4844870.stm