Olympic mascots raise an eye...

OLYMPIC mascots Wenlock and Mandeville

THE London 2012 mascots have caused quite a stir since the alien-like, one-eyed creatures were unveiled.

Like ‘em or loathe ‘em, everyone it seems has an opinion on Wenlock and Mandeville, who will act as ambassadors to the Olympics and Paralympics.

A story surrounding their creation has been penned by former Children’s Laureate Michael Morpurgo.

Which is where the problem lies: they were made to appeal to children, and to encourage them to take up sport. But many adults are struggling to find any appeal at all, and the mascots have been given some uncharitable names.

Reporter Marina Berry went into Oldham to find out how Wenlock - named after the Shropshire site of the world’s first modern Olympics, predating the ones we hold today, and Mandeville - named after the spinal injuries unit where the Paralympics movement began, were being received locally.

Agnes Fitzgerald from Holts said: “I think they are ok, they are not cuddly mascots, but you have to move with the times.”

She was shopping with her great grandson Ethan Cheetham (14 months), who she said would be too young to appreciate them when the Olympics were staged.

But she said she would be watching the opening ceremony, and having a mascot was a good idea to encourage children to take an interest.

“What else is there for them to do?” she asked. “Sport is a good way to keep them occupied.”

Claire Louise and Paul Jones got an enthusiastic nod from their son Bailey (3), when they showed him the picture and asked him if he liked them.

Paul said: “It’s a good idea to have a mascot and Bailey said he liked them.”

Chadderton’s Pauline Wild gave a rather noncommittal: “They’re ok.” She said: “They are better when you see them on screen doing what they do.

“They are something different, nothing like we have seen before as mascots.”

Neil Kelsall, from Coldhurst, and his partner Lisa Keevil said the money spent creating Wenlock and Mandeville could have been put to better use in a country with a £160 billion deficit.

Neil said: “It’s a waste of money.”

Lisa added: “I don’t know why they don’t use a mascot we have already got.”

Neil agreed, suggesting a competition between sporting clubs across the country to find a winning mascot to use for the games.

“It would be good for the country and good for the club the mascot came from,” he said.

Derek Townson of Royton said: “They don’t interest me, but I can see children will love them.

“Mascots add a bit of interest and personality to an event, it’s a bit of hype and it gets things moving.”

He added: We had World Cup Willie in 1966, and he brought some luck with him. Let’s hope these do the same.”

Chantelle Boreland (17) of Derker said the mascots were “cool,” and said she would be happy to get a full body costume and wear it for the fun of it.

“It’s better to have something unusual instead of the same old stuff.

“Kids will love them, I have a little sister who is four who will probably be scared at first, but then she’ll love them and walk round with one attached to her leg all the time,” she said.

Sarah Bennett (25) of Derker said they were “well cool,” and was looking forward to following their antics in the run-up to and during the Olympics.

She said she had a five-year-old niece, added: “She would love one.”