5 replies to this topic

[LuigiVercotti]

Quote

Eruedan Posted on April 11 2005,21:36
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was recently thinking what if Sydney beat Melbourne for the 1996 Australian canditure - in the book "Australia and the Olympics", Harry Gordon wrote that the organising commitees of Toronto, Athens and Atlants threw parties to celebrate Sydney not winning. So from that one can infer that Sydney would have been viewed as stiff competition and a probable winner in Tokyo in 1990. Do you think this would have been the case....and if it was, what would the hosting list look like today?

Interesting point/question Eruedan, and I too have read Harry Gordon's writings on the Sydney/Melbourne/Brisbane 96 run off. I have to admit I don't think Sydney would have been a probable host for 1996, mostly because I can't see how the bid team for Sydney could have been stronger/more experienced/better credentialled than Melbourne's. The Atlanta bid was very clever, very strong and ultimately very much in tune with the then IOC membership. The proof for this can be seen in how much was taken on board and then adapted/implemented by the Sydney bid team for the 1993 election. Also, considering the sentiment that Athens still carried even in its failed bid, and Toronto's technically strong bid, could Sydney have split the Tokyo vote enough to leverage enough 2nd and 3rd choices? Finally, even the two Australian IOC members were arguably split, hence all those delicious rumours and innuendo about the way that Phil Coles undermined Melbourne's bid to spite the Victorian lobby group within the AOC, voting for Atlanta.
Melbourne's bid was right for the time in so far as it made much of what Rod McGeoch and crew put in place for Sydney's bid far more relevant/realistic. And thankfully the AOC recognised when it looked at the fall out of the failed 96 bid and didn't give Melbourne the chance for 2000. Perhaps Beijing may have faced Melbourne instead if Sydney ran and lost for 96.
Then again, what about the aborted Sydney 1988 bid? Harry Gordon's book refers to the failed scheme to get a Sydney entry into the race for the 88 games, considering that only Nagoya and Seoul had entered the race. Perhaps that would have been a more probable opportunity, hence....

1988: Sydney
1992: Barcelona
1996: Athens
2000: Beijing
2004: Atlanta
2008: Seoul

Gotta love these 'what ifs...'

[thatsnotmypuppy]

Almost correct.  The original 1988 plan included some sports at Homebush - they were planning to clean it up for the Bicentennial - but the main stadium was Moore Park - what is now Aussie Stadium (Football Park).

The 1996 submission was most venues at Homebush - but a venue cluster also around Moore Park.  I cannot find a link unfortunantly.

[Rols O'Bertilsson]

thatsnotmypuppy, on April 12 2005,13:37, said:

Almost correct.  The original 1988 plan included some sports at Homebush - they were planning to clean it up for the Bicentennial - but the main stadium was Moore Park - what is now Aussie Stadium (Football Park).

The 1996 submission was most venues at Homebush - but a venue cluster also around Moore Park.  I cannot find a link unfortunantly.

That's right, it's Aussie Stadium, formerly Sydney Football Stadium.
Curse moving house! I used to have an old brochure that Sydney put out with its 1996 plans in the run up to the AOC's 1996 bidder decision _ I've looked everywhere but I can't find it. It's either been thrown away or sitting in the bottom of a box somewhere.

[Eruedan]

I was recently thinking what if Sydney beat Melbourne for the 1996 Australian canditure - in the book "Australia and the Olympics", Harry Gordon wrote that the organising commitees of Toronto, Athens and Atlants threw parties to celebrate Sydney not winning. So from that one can infer that Sydney would have been viewed as stiff competition and a probable winner in Tokyo in 1990. Do you think this would have been the case....and if it was, what would the hosting list look like today?

This is my idea.....

1996 - Sydney
1998 - Salt Lake City beats Nagano - IOC can now award the games to SLC as Atlanta wouldn't have hosted 2 years previously.
2000 - Beijing wins easily....Winter Olympics two years previously rules out a strong American challenge from failed bid Atlanta.
2002 - Ostersund - Nagano which lost to SLC, again losses as it is too close to Beijing hosting two years ago....I don't think the IOC would award two games in a row to Asia.
2004 - Athens - even though the Americans could win after the six year gap like in real life, I don't think they would deny Athens any longer.
2006 - ???? Would Japan still be interested in bidding after two losses and would the IOC award a 3rd games in a row to Europe via Turin or Sion.
2008 - American City versus TORONTO...who would win? It's really hard to say....with Beijing out of the way.....Toronto would be a very strong candidate....or maybe the lure to go back to America after ten years would be too strong for the IOC.
2010 - I don't think Vancouver would win either way as Toronto or an American city would have hosted two years earlier....maybe it would have been Japan versus South Korea for these Winter Olympics plus it has been ten years since Asia hosted.

:oops:

[Rols O'Bertilsson]

I remember a few months ago, Baron, I think, started a "What If" thread preedicated on what would have happened if Athens had got 1996. They're often fun to do, because one can always come up with arguments to support various streams of alternative history.
I agree with eusebius in that I think Sydney may have had an easier time snaring 1988 than 1996 _ I think 1996 was a bit too soon after Seoul to get another Asia-Pacific hosting. And Sydney surely did benefit from the experience of two previous Australian bids. I do think, though, that Coates and Coles were right in that Sydney was always going to have a better chance than Melbourne to get Australia's next games _ as strong a contender that melbourne was (and is), it's always going to be an advantage to be a first time host, and fairly or unfairly, Sydney has the stronger international profile.
One interesting thing about an earlier Sydney hosting would have been where in Sydney it would have been accomodated. I seem to remember that in the 1988 and 1996 plans, the Moore Park area was envisaged as the main Olympic area. Can anyone confirm this? While it would have made for a more "inner city" Olympics, I wonder how congested it would have made the games.

[LA84]

Interesting topic -

I don't think Australia would have won even if Sydney was the candidate in 1996, although I think the vote would have been very tight at the end between Sydney and Atlanta.  Up until the final vote it was pretty much assumed that Athens would get it so I think a lot of the bids in 1990 were pretty much "test runs" to get ready for the 2000 games.  

Now if Sydney had gone all the way and had a solid bid for 1988 then I think the story could have been different. Keep in mind that in 1982, when the decision was made, the Games were essentially dying and L.A. hadn't happened yet so it was a great unknown whether '84, with their whole new way of paying for them, would help or harm the future of the Games. I'm sure the IOC wanted a "sure bet" in the event the L.A. experiment was a failure.  As Sapporo had only been 10 years earlier at the time and Tokyo less than 20 years prior they probably would have preferred the games not go back to Asia so soon, so I would give Sydney the edge had it happened - all things being equal to it's 2000 bid.  

So the dynamic changes to:

Sydney 1988

Albertville 1992

Barcelona 1992 (old Juan Antonio would still have gotton his way on that one)  

Nagano 1994 - the Asian nations would still be bidding after their disappointing 1988 SOG loss so they get their consolation prize)

Atlanta 1996 - Taking Melbourne out of the equation doesn't really change much.  Athens was the sentimental favorite - they rested on their laurels - and Atlanta's cleaver bid still could not have been beaten

Lillehammer 1998 - Norway wanted the WOG's again bad so they would have tried again

Athens 2000 - With Sydney out of the equation for 2000 I think Athens might have bid for the millenium games. Even though Juan wanted Bejing I think the IOC would have waited after Nagano's 1994 games

SLC 2002 - Nothing would have changed in the process

Bejing 2004 - Two back-to-back games in the '90's for Europe and North America out of the running so soon after SLC - no brainer that they would have gone to Bejing

Turin 2006 - No change in the process

Toronto 2008 - Superior technical bid and the IOC would have wanted to go back to North America after the financial successes of Calgary, L.A., Atlanta and SLC.

Ostersund 2010 - I don't think the IOC was ever crazy about Peyong Chang's bid - it might have been Ostersund's time

London 2012 - and here we are again with the same four European cities and one extra