Jump to content


Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by TheOtherRob

  1. Sofi can and has hosted soccer. It's hosting the CONCACAF Gold Cup final this year, for example. The issue is, if you build a small platform for the pitch it ends up being a bit of a squash, and if you build a big platform to give it more space you obviously lose capacity. For a world cup final neither of those compromises are acceptable. It may be that the stadium is fine for soccer all the way up to the World Cup semi-final stage. Which isn't too bad going for a stadium for which it's barely even a secondary sport.
  2. Today's Formula E race (starts in two hours) is a nice opportunity for the city to show off its credentials. Looking sexy...
  3. Sun direction and how it affects both athletes (sun in their eyes) and broadcasters (shadows on the field). Same with football stadiums. The pitch itself in cricket is also n-s to avoid problems with setting sun for the bowlers/batters.
  4. One point I'd overlooked about this is that the track will run east-west, which is different from the IAAF recommended north-south. Of course, it's the perfect orientation for its main sport of cricket. But all these little things which are now compromised on in the name of sustainability, reuse etc are interesting. (On the flipside, London Stadium being built as a narrow-ovalled athletics stadium means it can't host cricket as the outfield isn't large enough E-W)
  5. I don't have a horse in this race, but it does seem like there are a couple of things going on here... 1. Even with these new expenditures, Brisbane is low cost compared with almost everything that has gone before. LA28 was always going to remain exceptional in this regard (which is why its supporters were always wrong in saying their Games would be transformative for host cities going forward...quite simply only they can pull off what they're pulling off, and why their most ardent supporters never saw this as a compliment I'll never know). So I think Brisbane overpromised in this regard, perhaps aware of the host city immediately before them, and also aware they are the first "New Norm" Games. But even so, Brisbane is still a cheaper, more sustainable, less-risky (some would say more bland) model than almost everything that went before it. I don't think that should be lost in all this. 2. The less transparent process implemented by the IOC, the new-norm, was always going to lead to situations like this. Not that they were uncommon before the new-norm, but the new process seems almost designed to create such situations. Horse-trading between a chosen city and the IOC, a city being given the Games with no competition, then work out the details later.
  6. Sure, but I'm not sure you'll get much of a main stadium for a quarter of a billion pounds in 2023.
  7. An important read: https://metro.co.uk/2023/02/13/inquiry-blames-uefa-for-paris-final-fiasco-nd-credits-liverpool-fans-for-saving-lives-18276158/
  8. I particularly like the Art Competition pictogram from London 1948: https://www.olympic-museum.de/pictograms/symbols1948.php And on reflection, it looks like Paris 2024 has just chored Berlin's concept: https://www.olympic-museum.de/pictograms/symbols1936.php
  9. The boomerang legs and Grecian Urn depictions mean Sydney and Athens stand out when it comes to recent Games. When laid out like that there really is a 25 year period of much of muchness isn't there? I'll just add that with London we had two sets of pictograms; the dull ones shown on the diagram (generally used in signage), and the dynamic ones which were much more interesting and much more ubiquitous in and around the venues (and which I've got on a t-shirt). I think they were meant to reference the original Harry Beck tube maps, but I might've misremebered... https://someoneinlondon.com/projects/london-2012s-brandworld
  10. Ah sorry. It's the tweet pinned at the top of Paris 24's feed so I guessed most here would've already seen it.
  11. Why should sport be an exception? Why, when much of the world is isolating Russia until it is out of Ukraine and until it halts its genocide, do Russian athletes get an opt-out? What's so special about them compared with Russians in other sectors who are also affected by sanctions? If every sector acted like the IOC is acting, the sanctions would be meaningless. There'd be so many holes they'd be pointless. I know this is unfair on some innocent athletes, but it's by far and away the lesser of two evils. And that's before we even start thinking about how much Russia has disrespected sport over the past decade with their state-sponsored cheating. Why the hell do they deserve respect and even handedness? Who the hell are they to lecture anyone on innocent athletes losing medals, earnings etc? I'm bored with taking Russian feelings into account at this point in time...they can go **** themselves. I honestly find it hard to believe how lacking in awareness the IOC is when it comes to their recent statements. I know it's the IOC, but still.
  12. Well, I've just read my 'favourite' take on these pictograms. They're part of an ongoing woke conspiracy to erase gender apparently. Removing the (apparently clearly male) human figures of previous Games, having a football representing a football, a canoe representing a canoe is gender activists in overdrive! (Paris 2024 thread on skyscrapercity in case anyone is wondering)
  13. Don't forget the real victims in all this... In a letter from Bach to Guttsait, which has been seen by the BBC, the IOC president says comments from Ukrainian officials suggesting allowing Russian and Belarusian athletes would promote the war are "defamatory". https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/64579619
  14. Defunding your own competitors is taking things to extremes isn't it? Not sure who that's meant to hurt...hmmmm.... Oh well, they'll have to find some other funding source for their anal beads.
  15. Yep, hardly worth commenting on placeholder images. It's the capacity that's an issue at the moment (if it even is an issue). Speaking of Manchester 2002, Sydney 2000 etc...I don't suppose it would be possible to do what they did here to create a temporarily higher capacity? I'm guessing the cramped nature of the site means that's unlikely, but...maybe something worth exploring?
  16. Firstly, I think "redeveloped" is a bit of a euphemism here. They're basically talking about knocking it down and rebuilding it. Secondly, the Gabba looks to be in a cramped urban area, so I would assume capacity is limited by its surroundings, not by cost factors. Looking at Optus Stadium, it looks to be on a nice big piece of open flat land which means the build would be less complex and capacity not constrained. Lastly, Optus Stadium in Perth broke ground in 2014. A decade's worth of inflation needs to be taken into account when comparing the two. If you're saying a new stadium should've been built elsewhere because all these factors mean a Gabba redevelopment is going to be limited, you might have a point. But I don't know anywhere enough about the city or the stadium to argue for or against on that.
  17. I don't quite understand how a $1bn redevelopment of a state owned stadium can be cost neutral to the state - at least in terms of getting the thing rebuilt. Sure, you can get naming rights sponsors and those kind of things, but not on this scale. Or perhaps you can get some contribution from the tenants but wouldn't they expect some ownership of the stadium in return for that? The state bid for these 2032 Games, it's ultimately going to have to step up and pay for this isn't it? Wouldn't it be better to simply say that it'll cost this amount, but the profits from the Games plus the long-term profits from a better stadium will more than cover it. Or would that argument be false?
  18. And yet... https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-athletes-likely-to-be-barred-from-female-classifications-jv7h7s5rq?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1674764054 Probably least-worst option for balancing fairness and inclusion?
  • Create New...