Jump to content

Quaker2001

Members
  • Content Count

    7263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    172

Quaker2001 last won the day on April 12

Quaker2001 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1273 Excellent

2 Followers

About Quaker2001

  • Rank
    Flag Bearer Level 7
  • Birthday November 25

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    NYC

Recent Profile Visitors

35410 profile views
  1. It's not that cut and dry. Because if it wasn't for those complications, SLC probably would have bid for 2026 and potentially scared off the competition in the process. We've had discussions here for years about how the USOPC would strategize their approach to bidding. The fundamental question here was often whether or not the USOPC wanted to prioritize a Summer bid or a Winter bid in the event they couldn't do both at the same time as they did in the 90s. Well, we have our answer to that question. No doubt the Winter Olympics require a more specialized bid plan that fewer cities can
  2. SLC would bid tomorrow if they could, but the LA 2028 issue gets in the way which is why the USOPC is suggesting 2034 instead to give them some separation. So that's the "want" on their side. The IOC doesn't have the luxury of thinking about 2034 before they figure out 2030. They can't play the long game like they have so many times in the past. A lot of times they could count on cities to persist until they got the Olympics they were seeking. Think about Paris and Tokyo and PyeongChang and Rio and Beijing (Summer) and Athens among others that put in multiple bids before they had a w
  3. We know Salt Lake is happy to bid. The more pressing question concerns the USOPC. Are they equally happy to bid for another Olympics so soon after LA 2028. They might not be
  4. Google is a wonderful thing (I didn't know this either, but it's an interesting story)... Post-war, the Olympic rings got new meaning. And it’s probably not what you’ve been told.
  5. For awhile, I thought Qatar was worse, but given how a lot of the Western world feels about China these days, the IOC is going to catch a lot more flak for agreeing to hold an event in China than FIFA will for choosing Qatar. Not to minimize the very direct effects the World Cup has had on migrant workers, but at the end of the day, it's Qatar. It's not a world superpower looking to put on a show for the world (for the 2nd time in less than 15 years) and hoping to whitewash everything that's going on there. As for the 2022 World Cup, there's no more pressure now on them to make a change
  6. Salt Lake City would love to bid for 2030, but that might not work out so well for the USOPC which has LA 2028 just 18 months prior. Better strategy for them is to have Salt Lake bid for the 2034 Olympics. But we'll see what happens with the IOC and if they need to beg for bid cities consider a general lack of interest and the prospect that Sapporo is probably going to take a hard pass depending on what happens with Tokyo this summer.
  7. Couple of things here. Did you forget there was another city in it til the end for 2026? Italy wasn't the only option. No question they won it over Stockholm due to Sweden's lack of support, but that's who they would have been left with. Panic mode would have meant both of those cities dropping out. To call Almaty "safe" is still a stretch. It's in a country that has never hosted an Olympics before that doesn't exactly present itself well to the world (unless it's through the lens of Sascha Baron Cohen). Salt Lake is safe. Vancouver is safe. You can say it's too soon since 2010, b
  8. It has been more than 10 years since Qatar was awarded this World Cup. And from that moment, there was virtually zero chance that FIFA was going to pull a reversal. Not after the false promises and air conditioned stadiums. Not after moving the World Cup away from its usual calendar. Not after reports of bribery. Not after we heard that migrant workers are literally dying to build the stadiums. Even if FIFA was willing to strip Qatar of the World Cup (which we know they're not going to do after all this time), would England even want this? To host a World Cup on a little over a year
  9. You say you're making it happen.. but does Almaty have any interest at all in making it happen? Otherwise this is purely one man's fantasy. Yes, in hindsight the IOC would have and should have picked Almaty (let's not forget how close the vote was.. a few IOC members have a change of heart and we're not having this discussion), but let's not pretend that "perfect" belongs in a description of Almaty. From the standpoint of a winter sports host location, they'd be great. But it's still a country with a less than stellar reputation. If they were interested in 2030, they'd get a long look
  10. I think you mean "full stop" not "period" So I'm told that's a thing in Great Britain.
  11. Yes, and that's a wonderful straw man for them to create. Fair certain that the BOA isn't going to pay much attention to how Muslim and Jewish groups will label them. You're right that the issue of sponsors will be more of a factor now than it was in 1980. But like we've said before, the fact there's another Olympics between now and Beijing 2022 will make the anti-China folks jobs tougher to make that argument because they can't really do much until August.
  12. China won't want to skip the 2028 Olympics. They'll want to come here and dominate the medal table and prove their superiority. The fear won't be an anti-IOC position, but rather the continuing anti-China sentiment in the United States. Their athletes and dignitaries may feel less than welcome coming here and they'll undoubtedly spin it as the United States refusing to be hospitable to them. 7 years is a long time for the state of the world to evolve, but I'm fairly certain at this point, LA 2028 isn't losing sleep over what might happen with China. Let alone from any position of an anti-
  13. Really? How'd that work out in 2008 when China last hosted the Olympics? Their human rights record has been progressively worse in the last 13 years, but there were no boycotts in 2008. And there were no boycotts in 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea. Ukraine still showed up at the Paralympics that year. Your statement couldn't be further from the first. National *Olympics* Committees exist to send athletes to the Olympics. If they can't do that, what's the point? They want absolutely nothing to do with political causes and as organizations (as opposed to the individuals that make the
  14. Doesn't mean that pressure will necessarily result in a boycott, particularly on the part of the NOCs.
×
×
  • Create New...