Mainad

Never mind that lot.... WHERE'S SHANIA???

The woman who sang the Olympic hymn must have had the biggest hair of any opera singer I've ever seen whilst the lighting of the cauldron was a little bit too complicated for my liking with first an inside and then an outside lighting but it all looked impressive in the end. I enjoyed the whole thing.Most of the effects were fantastic,especially the blowing whales and the boy running across the prairie sequences.Well done,Vancouver! Saddest part was the entry of the Georgia team.They looked devastated and I wanted to rush out and hug them.I'm sure the rest of the audience felt the same. Now on with the Games,but first,I must try and grab a few hours kip!!

Loved the whales!

My earliest memories of a Winter Games were Sapporo '72 but Sarajevo '84 were chiefly memorable for me because of Torvill and Dean!

Am flitting between BBC and British Eurosport.

It's just occurred to me that it's 22 years to the day since the opening of the Calgary Games! How many of us remember watching that,I wonder?

This is an awful tragedy and my heart goes out to his family,friends,the Georgian team and also to the VANOC organizers.This is about the worst possible thing to happen on the eve of the opening of the Games. Will modifications be made to the luge track in the light of this tragedy and will there be sufficient time to make them or will luge events now have to be postponed? Expect that some sort of tribute will be made at the Opening Ceremony later!

So why are the Russians being allowed to use the facilities then?

In the past,we have had various French people take over the English throne,eg.Duke Guillaume of Normandy became King William I (William the Conqueror) after the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and Count Henri of Anjou became King Henry II,first of the Plantagenet line in 1154.However it would not be possible for a person of foreign birth and upbringing to succeed to the British throne today.In theory yes,but in practice...no! In 1714,a German prince,Elector Georg Ludwig of Hannover became King George I of Great Britain! However,he had already been granted British nationality by the Sophia Naturalisation Act of 1705.This gave his mother,Sophia of Bohemia (who became heir to the British throne in 1701) and all her Protestant descendants automatic British nationality.As this act was only formally repealed in 1949,all Protestant descendants of Sophia born before this year can claim British citizenship!

As this quote from one of those newspapers says: "By convention, the Queen and Charles, respectively head of state and next-in-line, can set foot in the country only officially and by invitation." So Stephen Harper must have invited her and she accepted as she won't go where she's not wanted.Would he have invited her to come if it was not politically popular with Canadians? I couldn't agree more.It's a mystery to me and to most Britons why on earth big,powerful,independent countries like Canada,Australia and New Zealand seem to want to cling on to the British monarchy???

The Queen acts only on the advice of the Prime minister who exercises her prerogatives on her behalf.The Privy Council has no power or authority to subvert the will of Parliament.It could only possibly act if Parliament somehow failed to function (eg.it was being controlled by a bunch of terrorists).If the Queen ever attempted to act without the consent of Parliament,other than in the case mentioned,she would be mounting a form of coup d'etat and she would be removed in a trice and the monarchy almost certainly abolished.It would be a non-starter.So long as Parliament is functioning and the Prime minister is free to act,she must abide by their will.Her right to occupy the throne is governed by Act of Parliament (the 1701 Act of Succession).If Parliament ever chose to repeal that Act,she and her family would be without a job.There is no balance of power.Parliament rules and makes the laws and the Queen acts as ceremonial Head of State according to the prerogatives Parliament allows her.

Hmmm.if they don't like the historical associations of the name Charles,why did his parents give him the name in the first place? Sounds like typical newspaper gossip to me! We all know him as Charles and I think people expect him to reign as King Charles III (if he ever makes it that far).I think it would be too bizarre and confusing if he suddenly decided to call himself 'George'!

Okay okay.But that's what he meant presumably otherwise I guess he's off talking gibberish again! By the way,what makes you think he will reign as 'King George VII'? I've never heard him declare any intention other than to reign under his own name!

She doesn't exactly 'leave the country to democratically govern itself'.You make it sound like she has a choice in the matter! The Queen reigns solely by will of Parliament.It is Parliament who leaves her to fulfil her ceremonial duties as Head of State while it gets on with the business of running the country,not the other way round!

The Queen always opens each of the three UK parliaments but only the Westminster opening is done with the full panoply of ceremony.The opening of the Scottish and Welsh assemblies are much simpler affairs with the Queen dressed in ordinary hat and skirt.At the Scottish parliament,the Scottish crown is laid on a table in front of her but she doesn't wear it unlike at Westminster.

It makes for a colourful spectacle but it doesn't really have much relevance or interest for most people,well not for most of those in my acquaintance anyway.I never hear anyone talking about or expressing any interest in the monarchy but most would continue to support it simply because they despise most politicians even more and are wary of transferring any of QEII's traditional responsibilities to some ambitious,grubby little power-seeker.This is especially the view of younger people. Much of the pomp and tradition will go when QEII dies as she is definitely the last traditional monarch of the old school. Charles talks a bit too much and has a lot of cranky ideas.He is still seen as a bit of a joke but he does have a few modernising tendencies and wants to simplify the coronation procedure and become Defender of ALL Faiths rather than just Defender of Faith (ie.the Church of England).A lot of people already think he's too old and are looking past him to William although God knows how William will handle it all.Suspect a lot of changes by the time HE comes around but,as I say,most people take them for granted,see them as rather boring and don't express much interest in their activities!

To be perfectly honest..I'm not sure why there should be a minimum age for the gymnasts.There isn't for most of the other Olympic disciplines. I understand about past abuses involving puberty-suppressing drugs etc.but surely the younger gynmasts could be tested for these before being allowed to take part!

I don't speak Korean,but according to the translation (unless I'm not reading it right): It says 44 parachutists landed in the circle on the stadium field,broken down as 22 from Korea and 22 from the CIP. 22 + 22 = 44. Of these,just 30 parachutists performed the ring jump,broken down as 23 from the USA,4 from France,2 from Canada and 1 from Switzerland. 23 + 4 + 2 + 1 = 30. If not,maybe we could get Kim Jong Il to razz in and translate for us!

Probably about the same as athletes from the UK team!

My overall impression is of efficient and well-organized Games with splendid and glittering ceremonial.Very impressive to watch and witness.Undoubtedly China doing what it does best which is what we had all expected! I was even more impressed by what Beijing has done for the Paralympics.I think there was much more of a relaxed and festive atmosphere present where the heavy security measures put in place for the Olympics were relaxed somewhat and ordinary people could meet and stroll on the Olympic Green and soak up the atmosphere.I was impressed by the care and attention which BOCOG lavished on them.They were not treated as a sideshow at all and they managed to raise public awareness and enjoyment of them to a level not seen before (certainly in my case)! I wonder what the athletes themselves thought? I think they could not complain about the standard of the facilities and venues which Beijing created for them.I suspect they will rate these as one of the best Olympics they have ever competed in! So congratulations and well done Beijing.You have set a standard which future Olympic hosts like London will have to measure up to which I'm sure they will..in their own unique and different ways!!

I take your point but on the other hand I suspect that that the IOC and host cities would be reluctant to allow the elaborate opening ceremonies and associated fanfare for the Paralympics to be shown ahead of the main Olympics ceremonies for fear they would steal the thunder away from the Olympics ceremonies to some extent.And the Olympics are always going to be the main event and attraction for both hosts and spectators!! Maybe they could allow a greater amount of time to elapse between Olympics and Paralympics so that one will not necessarily overshadow or be treated as a sideshow to the other?

Indeed.South Africans may be disappointed with the performance of their Olympic team but their Paralympians have more than made up for it with a truly superb display (especially from Natalie du Toit and Oscar Pistorius)! Well done SA!!

I share your puzzlement.I did not expect there to be anything like the attention we give to the Olympics but I too am a bit baffled by the complete lack of interest shown here! (I guess I could have started a thread instead of waiting for others to do so)! I have been following the coverage whenever I can but it is usually recorded highlights as there has been very little live coverage.It seems strange to me that the BBC (for instance) covered the entire Opening Ceremony live and then restricted itself to edited highlights of the actual events in the evening on BBC2! They are not alone.I read somewhere that NBC had over 2,500 reporters covering the Olympics but left only 5 to cover the Paralympics!! Speaks volumes.I guess there are still too many people about who just don't like looking at disabled athletes performing amazing feats on the track and in the pool!!! And they are truly remarkable people.It's been a real eye-opener for me to see what paralympic sportsmen and women are capable of.I've seen swimmers and riders with no arms and runners with no legs.It really puts into perspective the magnitude of their accomplishments compared to their able-bodied colleagues!! I will say that the Chinese seem to have done the Parlympics proud (just like the Olympics) and have probably helped raise them in the public consciousness more than ever before.But there is clearly still a long way to go. Hopefully London 2012 will build on this and finally get them the coverage they deserve! It seems fitting therefore that the Chinese paralympians have been overwhelmingly dominant (far more so than even in the Olympics).They have racked up almost as many medals as the rest of the world combined! Yet another impressive demonstration of China's arrival as a true superpower on the sporting scene.Who is going to be able to challenge their dominance in years to come??

That's Aussie and Brit humour at its best! The kind of good-humoured and friendly rivalry we look forward to seeing! I wonder if there's been a similar bet for the Paralympics? Currently second according to the BBC's website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_spor...ble/default.stm

It's interesting that the US,whilst increasing its overall share of the medals, has finished up with the same number of golds (36) as in Athens and Sydney.I guess you'll be looking to move up out of that particular groove come 2012?