Sir Rols

From that story, THIS: “There was also a view that other organisations needed to step up, engage and front-up some cash in the debate about stadiums – especially the AFL“ It’s all very well that the AFL leads the call for a better legacy stadium from the games, but it’s getting a bit disingenous to expect (or in the case of Tasmania, demands) that governments pay for the stadiums that support their future ambitions. It’s not like the AFL’s some minor, financially struggling code. And it’s the club owners who mostly finance such venue projects overseas like in he US and UK. The AFL’s fast becoming a bight and a curse for the countries near national hosting opportunities. They’re the best obstacle to logical plans for a future FIFA World Cup, for example.

I don’t like posting such huge slabs of test, but here’s the continuation, and I’ll put it in quotes so it sorta has a spoiler tag and doesn’t take up too much space. 8 - The historical disgrace of the Sochi Doping Games. The Sun King, once an athlete himself, always claims that his business is all about sport and only about the athletes. Well, here too his record is rather disastrous. Because the Sun King is responsible for the Winter Olympics, which can only correctly be called Doping Games. The Sun King himself did not guarantee the integrity of the competition in Sochi in 2014, which was his most important task. Instead, the Sun King allowed himself to be celebrated with Vladimir Putin and made a decisive contribution to his propaganda games, which ended with the annexation of Crimea, the beginning of Putin's planned destruction of Ukraine. This is one of the undeniable historical truths. The Sun King has never taken responsibility for any of this. Such greatness and self-criticism are alien to him. The Sun King and his propagandists like to present it as if nobody could have guessed who Putin really was back then ... but all that is nonsense. Even back then and in the many years before, it was possible to know almost everything. But the Sun King didn't care. He continued to meet with Putin long afterwards. But, as outlined at the beginning, the Sun King is now presenting himself as the supposed victim of Russian verbal attacks and scam campaigns in a blatant distortion of the facts and total exaggeration. Because he is at the centre of his Olympic universe. His latest declaration talks about a violation of the Olympic Charter and UN resolutions as well as "disrespect for the athletes and for the integrity of sports competitions" by Russia. Well, this also applies to the IOC. However, the IOC has accepted crimes on the Olympic Charter for many years, not just in Sochi in 2014, and even helped to fuel it – sometimes actively, sometimes by looking the other way, negating and failing to act. In Russia, China and elsewhere. 9 - Controls, rules and sanctions only exist consistently for athletes, but not for officials and federations. The athletes, who are supposedly at the centre of IOC business, are the only members of the so-called Olympic family who consistently face competition – and therefore also rules, controls and sanctions. However, there is no open and regulated competition between sports federations and sports, non-Olympic and Olympic. There are not even clear and verifiable rules on how and when sports and its federations can become Olympic and why, when and how sports and federations lose their Olympic status. And this has become much worse under the supposed reformer Bach since 2013. Rogge tried and despaired. The Sun King did what Sun Kings do: he had things decided, non-transparently, in small commissions appointed by him, without a verifiable framework. The situation is similar with top officials in the movement. Nothing is consistently regulated, there are always loopholes between the so-called ethics committees of the federations, associations and institutions. The system is designed to create such loopholes. And one of the worst roles is played by the IOC's so-called ethics commission. 10 - Destroying the balance between the pillars of the Olympic Movement. In Olympic history, even in the most difficult times, there have always been internal forces that have balanced the relationship between the IOC, sports federations and National Olympic Committees to some extent – the relationship between the so-called pillars of the movement. Historically, this balance and the associated power struggles and debates were important. The Sun King, who always claimed that the IOC was not a world government of sport and that it was only responsible for the Olympic Games, left a huge mark here. The General Assembly of all International Sports Federations (GAISF) was dissolved. The General Assembly of the NOCs (ANOC) faces a similar threat. What remains is the IOC with the Sun King as the most powerful authority, which claims to speak for the whole of sport or not, depending on its interests. What remains are federations that don't know what rules apply, what they have to do to move up in the system and possibly become Olympic, I mean: what they really have to do in terms of content, apart from satisfying the changing wishes of the IOC administration. And because this is the case, because the Sun King has also promoted the politicisation of sport like no other, because he has usurped all power and is striving for total control in his Olympic mania, the system is extremely vulnerable and is imploding. The system is totally customised for him. His aides and propagandists constantly whisper to the sports family that only the Sun King can manoeuvre the rocking ship through difficult waters and must therefore remain in office for a few more years. As is the case in totalitarian systems. The system becomes weaker and weaker. At some point – in this decade, the next or the one after that – the Sun King will have to abdicate, even if only for biological reasons. That will be the day when – name it – Putin, Xi Jinping, MBS, Tamim or their successors take over without any problems. That could be the end of the so-called Olympic movement. Because there is no longer anyone of calibre in world sport who could stand up with convincing principles and an independent policy – and survive to tell the tale. That and nothing else is the legacy of the autocratic Sun King. A mess. Like a lot of Andrew Jennings’ work (Jens was actually a collaborator of Jennngs’), It is certainly a grey area between journalism and activism. But it’s important such activism journalism still exists to scrutinise the Olympics and its players, especially now so many previously respected Olympic observers, like Inside The Games, have been neutered (The Inquisitor has a good piece on that as well). If I have one criticism of Jens, it’s that he tends to waffle on with polemics at the start of his articles, and only gets to the meat of it later on. I think what this latest article articulates well is how compared to the past autocratic presidents like Brundage and Samaranch, they at least operated within and had to adhere to some stabilised safeguards to their power (they often didn’t always get things their way). Whereas Bach has really upended everything and concentrated power in himself - really very much like Putin - and many of his “reforms” are proving to be backward steps for the Olympics.

Okay, here goes: https://archive.md/PdrPf Still reckon it’s worth subscribing. It’s free, and it’s not like it’s constantly updated - maybe one or two articles a week. But it’s the successor to Andrew Jennings’ Olympic investigative reporting.

That was GBMod’s GamesBids article. It’s what made me ponder Ahmedabad. And, yeah, supposedly they’ve already got, or are working on, most of the stuff to make them games-ready/no-new-buids under “New Norm” rules. Plus, the 2026-27 hosting window would likely fit in well for when the IOC might make their 2036 award.

I didn’t know where else to post this, it’s a long article that addresses so many Olympic issues… Russia, the “New Norm”, Coates, Nice, Brisbane and more. But it’s a highly recommended read. Such and entertaining and enlightening… character assassination. Enjoy! Ten reasons why IOC's Sun King Thomas Bach is causing irreparable damage to the Olympic movement (if the site, The Inquisitor, is blocked for you, just sign up - it’s free. And it has lots of great Olympic muck-raking)

I thought this put it in context: Khairy Jamaluddin, a former youth and sports minister, rubbished the idea and called it "reckless" because the Games are coming up fast, leaving little time for planning. Any host would need at least four years to upgrade venues, plan sponsorship and set up infrastructure, he told AFP. "The Commonwealth Games is not a significant, marquee sporting event," he added. "As far as multi-sports Games are concerned, it is nowhere near the Olympics or even the Asian Games in terms of participation, exposure and returns," Khairy said. News.com i was thinking, about the only place I could see that might actually get something out of the commies and ave a reason to bid could be Ahmedabad. If India really is serious about going for the Olympics, what better way to prove their capabilities and wash the stain of Delhi than to pull these off with two year’s notice.

Exactly. When I started out in journalism, a Vox Pop was being told by the chief of staff to go with a photographer down to Central Station and buttonhole six people about their opinion on some issue. These days it’s turning on the comments section for a story, posting loaded polls and Gen Y “reporters” scrolling through Instagram and Twitter/X to find some exchanges they can turn into a “Storm Erupts Over ….!” story.

I vehemently agree there’s huge problems in the host and venue plan vetting processes. But what’s exacerbating that is the shouty, adversarial world we find ourselves in now, where everything from public health and hygiene measures to pictures of Michelangelo’s David become huge frenzied culture wars - much less public spending on sports facilities. Sydney 2000 would have been a hot political sh!t fight in these times, whereas Brisbane would have come across as unremarkable, even bland, in the 1990s. Today, yeah, Brisbane’s now demonstrating a masterclass in keystone cops ineptitude, but a lot of that is fed by polarised politicisation and a media actively encouraging and amplifying outrage and manufacturing crisis.

Which is where I think Brisbane is a textbook example of that. There’s little doubt that either of the more expensive options would represent better legacy and long term value for the city. I certainly do give the IOC some credit for taking concrete steps to pushing hosts towards more sensible plans. And yeah, much of the heat, this week especially, is more the doing of the local politicians than the IOC (though Coates played his part). But there’s no one size fits all formula for hosting plans, and much of the marketing of the “New Norm” was how it would introduce greater flexibility and work with the cities to produce what’s best for them. In some cases, however, a blanket “we want the cheapest plan” is exactly NOT what’s best for the host.

That was one of your really good articles Rob! I’ve been waiting for you to mention the Brisbane follies all this week. Can we expect a particularly juicy BidWeek on the way?

I know it’s early. But I’ve had requests (looking at you, @Scotguy II). I was going to wait till Macron took his dip in the Seine before I started this, but Manu forced my hand when he decided to release his latest photo op to promote the games and fitness. I didn’t want to see this buried in the general Paris 2024 thread. Photos of Macron boxing raise eyebrows in France after he comes out swinging against Putin Ooh La La! For those new to this, the Hot Bods thread is a tradition we have here at every games where we post pics of the Hommes and Femmes who’ve caught our eyes and stir our loins. Hopefully this is a vintage year - let’s see that eye cand everone!

And the LNP… finally… has come out with their position on the issue. They’re NOT backing any new stadium. Queensland opposition rules out new Olympic stadium if elected The Queensland LNP leader, David Crisafulli, has ruled out building any new stadium for the Brisbane Olympics at the Gabba, in Victoria Park, or anywhere else. That leaves just two options to host athletics. Plan A: upgrading the Queensland Sport and Athletics Centre, which was used for the 1982 Commonwealth Games, and later by the Brisbane Broncos until the early 2000s. That’s the Labor government’s plan, and it has been heavily criticised by the LNP opposition because it’s nowhere near public transport. Or plan B: they could hold it on the Gold Coast at Carrara Stadium. It hosted the opening and closing ceremonies at the 2018 Commonwealth Games, and the athletics. Just one problem: it’s on the Gold Coast, which is an odd place to hold the Brisbane Olympics. (It was also scheduled to host cricket). They might also hold it at the Gabba, but the ground has been criticised by all parties as unsuitable without major upgrades. The idea of a multibillion-dollar new stadium at Victoria Park was recommended by an independent review led by former Brisbane lord mayor and long-time Olympics booster Graham Quirk on Monday. It is now dead. The opposition leader told media he would set up an independent infrastructure authority immediately if elected at the state poll in October, and the body would come out with an answer by February 2025. Crisafulli said this afternoon:

The Senate Inquiry is going to be re-convened. And Coates and Quirk have been asked t appear: John Coates and Graham Quirk have been requested to appear before a Senate Inquiry into Brisbane’s Olympics “circus”

Okay. Thanks. the interesting thing about the Hobart AFL stadium is how it’s very much mirrored the Brisbane saga in terms of the public outrage it generated over costs.

I must admit, I’m not entirely sure of the current state of play, but I don’t think Bellerive’s in danger of being replaced for cricket, at least internationals. Proposed Hobart stadium couldn't host Test, ODI cricket

Of course they can - but the tentative state of Brisbane’s “bid” sharply exacerbated the situation, and the public were only given rather vague details when they were surveyed on their “support”.

Hmmm. I always thought the offer Tower so how would be an obvious location, but this looks pretty sweet as well.

That’s the only problem well, and cost. Not to the IOC, but to the Government at a time when the public’s wary of big spending on anything that’s not “cost-of-living” related and just about everything can goes toxically politicised.

The irony is though, under IOC accounting, a world class stadium at the Gabba or Victoria Park WOULDN’T go on the IOC books (it would get attributed to AFL and ACB use), but the QSAC does. He’s actually inflated the Olympic-attributed spend by $1.6 billion. Yeah, but if there’d been a thorough and complete bid plan, laying out a stadium, before the vote and with time for the public to consider the fine details (rather than just getting asked a generic “are you in favour of a Brisbane Olympics” - like asking “Are you in favour of Christmas?”) much of the current malaise could have been avoided. With the old comprehensive Bid Books, everyone knew what the situation was and what you were signing up for.

It’s true, though. Under our constitution, cabinet confidentiality is sacrosanct. At the federal level, cabinet minutes are kept secret for 30 years - one of our New Year’s Day traditions is the media gets to report on the cabinet discussions by the government of the day on issues 30 years ago - often very interesting and gold for historians. Of course, things do get leaked - government’s might do it if they see it to their gain, and dissidents within government might do it to further their agendas. But the government is under no onus to confirm or deny such leaks. Interesting Qld is introducing a 30 day rule. On the other hand, lying to parliament is about the most serious of serious political sins with strong consequences - it’s grounds for start dismissal of a leader or minister who does so. You would have to be incredibly silly to lie about a matter that could be refuted by documents such as cabinet minutes.

Thanks Rob. Gave me a chance to post an interesting exchange I noted in an interview with Coates I posted in the Brisbane threads, but nobody picked up on, and I didn’t want to flood that thread further with a detour (it’s already confusing enough in a confusing situation). Mr Coates acknowledged there would be no problem with a world-class stadium at Victoria Park hosting the Olympic events and ceremonies. “If they’d decided to go ahead that would have been fine, they would have had to say it wasn’t Olympic related. “The Olympics will go and use venues that are there but we don’t want the blame and we don’t want to cost of stadia that aren’t necessary.” Full article: https://www.couriermail.com.au/news...w/news-story/7223cf9ecbf3fa437fcfefb7d350e796 So basically, they’re sort of okay with new venues, but as long as it’s kept off the Olympic books. Their overriding aim is to quarantine themselves from any suggestion the games are responsible for various costs. I’ve seen in other articles, for example, they’re also starting to insist infrastructure upgrades for transport etc are excised from the ledgers as non-Olympic costs. Which would be fine to a point - of course exorbitant over-spending needs to be reined in. But they’re now endorsing creative accounting to cover up costs. And what about their other mantra of the “New Norm” - working with the city to make the games fit the city rather than the city fit the games? In Brisbane’s case, for example, sure, the QSAC might be cheaper and workable. And both the Gabba and Victoria Park might be much costlier. But they’d leave a better, more needed and longer-term legacy for he city. Contested elections at least brought a rigour to the process that forced the bidders to put their best plans forward. Now, it seems, plans are an afterthought. Much of them is now in the “to be determined” bracket. I don’t see why they can’t leave some level of contest to the final stage - have their two “preferred bidders” put through to a final vote (with obvious curbs and safeguards on campaigning and promotion). Indeed, on paper the “New Norm” doesn’t rule it out. But the closest we’ve got to a contest under the “New Norm” is 2030’s “never mind the plan, who can be the fastest to give us a blanket government guarantee?”

Got tickled seeing this posted on SSC Here is the main bus transport interchange at the moment at QSAC. Ready for the Olympics!

That wouldn’t be the IOC’s call if the Qld Premier just fronted the media, as Dan did, and said we’re out. No doubt, the IOC and the “New Norm” would be better equipped to handle it than the CGF. But it would still be a massive loss of face, and “interested parties” would demand that they be able to put their case as a replacement. As to timing. I think pre-Paris would ensure it was a talking point during the games; “Could this, or LA, be the LAST games?”. Post-games could bury it, as far as it could be buried, in a post-games high (hopefully). And anyway, I doubt it would come so quick (if at all). Qld Labor would leave that to the LNP to get blood on their hands. I mean, I know Gonzo is having a field day hyping this, and it might be slightly more likely than a week ago, but I still see it as unlikely. So, the Qld Govt inquired about it’s options, then decided against it? Interesting but not a sig of intent or imminence.

Totally disagree… this would not be a bidding matter, but an existential crisis hitting the biggest sports event in the world. Just the crisis the media loves.

Of course the US wouldn’t care about the commies. Boston dropping from a bit isn’t hugely significant in the wider scheme. But the IOC losing a host - the second Denver but with a Summer Games… that would reverberate. Lots of op-ed’s “Is this the end of the Olympics?” “What now IOC” etc, all over the world.