Sir Rols

People I’ve known who’ve volunteered for the games have described it as the time of their lives and have no regrets. I’d like to hear from some of them in this discussion. @TorchbearerSydney? @Victorian? Or I know @Bear is mad keen for volunteering for ‘28. You’re right. It is a bourgeois privilege. So is digging village wells in Africa or going to build schools in the south Pacifuc or whatever. I actually looked into signing up for one of those wells in Africa programs once when I felt a need to get away from everything for a while - it;s actually quite expensive to sign up for one of those programs. It really is a middle class virtue cosplay adventure travel. And if we’re talking about bourgeois, so is most elite sport. You really have to have the money if you want to apply yourself seriously. And we’ve just had the Winter Games, the most elitist of them all. Unless you’re perhaps Norwegian or Canadian, the whole roster is just pastimes for middle class kids whose parents can support their hobbies in snow resorts. Someone asked during the games why Argentinians of Chileans, with their mountains, weren’t more represented at the games. And as my Chileno partner put it to me many times: “We can’t afford to go to the resorts, much less buy the gear or take the time off to actually practice these things. Only the really rich might.” When it comes to egalitarian sports, it’s probably only football, running and boxing where kids in favelas or shantytowns or kampongs can actually dream of getting out of their poverty cycle. And in most of those cases, it’s still mostly just a fairytale.

And ironically (I don’t know if this was mentioned in the video - I haven’t watched it), ten pin bowls has also featured in the commies - at KL ‘98. And I think it’s been in the Asian Games.

Okay, yes indeed. I didn’t realise they didn’t get accomodation. I agree that should be a minimum perk.

Exactly, and there’s still people lining up to do it.

lol, looks like where having the discussion here after all. I do get where you’re coming from. The Olympics are a multi-billlion dollar entertainment franchise whose business plan relies on Government subsidies and guarantees and volunteers. So I guess the questions are: why are governments prepared to underwrite the games? and why do thousands of people offer their services for free to them? The first depends on the country and government, but prestige, the “feel good” public morale factor, urban renewal etc would all come into it. For the second, I’d guess that many people find the games inspiring and exciting and really want to be part of it, or want to travel, or want their nation to show it’s best face to the world. Core OCOG staff do indeed have paying jobs, and the paid workforce rises over the years as one gets closer to the games. But it’s only in the actual games fortnight, or the week or two either side, where the demand explodes for an essentially unskilled auxiliary workforce to take on essentially temporary tasks. Most of the roles do not require any special skills or qualifications - though multiple languages might help. They’re for things like welcoming visitors at airports and around the city, providing information, running errands around d the village and venues. I’m not sure if there’s any commercial organisation in any country that could provide such numbers of essentially at call dogsbodies for such short term roles for a fee. I suppose you could scour employment agencies, but it’s still a tough call for trying to put together a reliable and motivated workforce for a two-week gig. Volunteers, on the other hand, there’s usually, if not always, more people that apply for the gig than finally get accepted. And they/re usually exactly the type if people that an OCOG wants to show their best face - motivated, excited, keen to please, willing to put in more hours than a paid flunky. in the games I’ve travelled to, I’ve always made a point and enjoyed talking to the volunteers. All I’ve spoken to gave been friendly to a fault, super enthusiastic, and keen to share their excitement and enthusiasm with visitors. They WANT to be there, not just forced to for money. Truly, truly lovely people. And I really do think they are huge part of what makes a games “succeed” or not. I’m not sure if that would be the case if they were just paid jobbers in for a quick buck. Do I think volunteers should get more perks - tickets and merch snd such? Hell yeah. I know we’ve got more than a few members here who gave been volunteers, and it would be good to get their point of view. I’ve got nothing but admiration for their dedication.

I thought that was common knowledge here. They were the ones most specifically mentioned as being on stand-by, at least until the cortina track looked like it was going to be finished in time in the latter parts if last year. i’ve got no idea why Lake Placid was the one either - I can only guess they were the ones who were actively lobbying most openly.

Lots of politicians go to the Olympics and get the sugar rush. Remember the Mayor of Orlando at Paris? It bumps up the l crowded list of interested parties and keeps some people happy.

Jen’s article (predictably, as a German) goes into that a lot more, basically laying out the vast sums that Germany outlays annually on the sliding sports. But as you say, nations throw their money at where their interests Kay and where they get good returns. And yeah, lots of summer sports you can point to as well that are elitist and require expensive, white-elephant prone venues. Take whitewater sports, where Brisbane is powering along to build, against many experts’ advice, Australia’s second white water centre. But opposition gets muted, because Jessica Fox is currently the country’s golden girl national darling. i’m quite open to looking at ways to rein-in the Olympic gargantuism. But I think these proposals sound like, as someone above said something similar but I can’t find now, trimming fingernails with a chainsaw. i’m really interested who’s been leaking these proposals to Jens, and Duncan, and GBMod - is it the IOC itself to test the waters and soften-up opposition before June, or is it the winter federation trying to get the outrage and opposition going?

It wasn’t that cut and dried. Here’s the discussion around it from the time Basically, Sweden, France and Switzerland had been placed in an IOC timetable to resolve 2030, which would have given all of them till March 2024 to get government approval. The indications were that that was coming from Sweden. But in between, Bach had a dinner with Macron at the Elyse Palace during which Macron basically said he’d guarantee whatever needed to be. The IOC jumped at it and awarded France 2030 in December, at a meeting that had been expected to just be a progress report. Also at that meeting, Switzerland, which wasn’t even as far as Sweden with government guarantees and had a lower rated bid plan, were basically promised 2038.

She’d need to get the votes first. And if you read Duncan’s second piece, right beneath the reforms story, it appears her performance at Milano didn’t exactly convince many about her authority or her handle on the organisation.

It would have to be. But that’s an awful long lead time for opposition to grow. And we’ve also had reports during Milano-Cortina that the IIC us firming up on Switzerland for 38. If Kirsty can pull it off, my respect for her will grow immensely. The IOC is an organisation that has baulked and been stymied in the past at even getting Modern Pentathlon dropped. But this would be treading on a lot of toes.

Another question: Would Kirsty have the strength and authority to push through such major reforms. She got elected on her first round, but just by the barest majority (49-48). Has she stacked the major positions with her own loyal lieutenants? The likes of Eliasch will probably fight tooth and nail, and he’s already proving to be quite influential. Ditto a number of major IFs and NOCs. Seems to be quite an undertaking for her to take up so early into her term.

There’s a lot to be said for that. Intellectually, it’s a good case. But it really comes down to what the games mean, and the identity of the two editions. What becomes of the Winter Games if you dilute the ice and snow focus? Do they then become a lesser B-grade version of the Summer Games instead of the snow/ice festival gives them their current identity? And when would such changes take place? Would they be foisted upon French Alps, Utah or Switzerland? Any or all would have a good case to say that’s not what we planned or signed up for. I’m open minded, but there’s so many ramifications that could come out of it. If Kirsty really does proceed with such plans, it would be a major break from the Bach “the more sports the merrier” philosophy. I mean, the LA program really is over-the-top and not even trying to play lip service to the notion of capping the size of the games.

That ship’s long sailed. The only ones really able to do that are the IOC members and those with super deep pockets and private jets. For the rest of the 99.9999999 per cent, what works on TV is what works.

I’ve read Duncan Mackay’s piece now (had to subscribe, but I;ve always had tremendous regard for his reporting), and it is very interesting. We may well be in line for a bloodbath in June if his sources are correct. I’m on the fence a bit about what he says is being talked about - the axe really does need to be taken to the program, but some of those mentioned really will be painful. Yikes! I’m going to be away in June. I may miss out on some big drama.

I watched these games pretty closely over the past two weeks - streaming is such a great development for the Olympics - and I’ve half rehearsed a final review in my mind a few times, but now it comes down to it, I’m not sure what to say. For all that I devoured them, I wasn’t really gripped by these games. There were moments I felt the old Olympic passion surge, but I didn’t make it to the end sad it was finishing and thirsting for more. It began well - the opening ceremony was the most fun for a long time - and ended, to me, ambivalently, - a closing ceremony that peaked in its first quarter of an hour then just fell away. Cortina (and Livigno and the other mountain locales) were extremely picturesque settings, truly lovely, while Milan was just the inside of a few ice venues. The look, again apart from the pretty Alps, was stolid and workmanlike. Verona was a wonderful setting to sign off from -but had nothing to do with the preceding two weeks. It’s hard to gauge the atmosphere on the ground, though from comments by the likes of @Citizen-Seth and @cfm Jeremie and a few press reports, it seems the Italians did warm to the games. From a couch perspective, I don’t know if that came across. Much was made that these were the first “two city games” (though I think that’s only in nomenclature- we’ve seen a few past spread out games, just not named as such), but on TV it seemed to all work together seamlessly. I’ve always been sceptical of “compact” games claims, and I think that matters less and less in the modern broadcasting age. Sports-wise, Australia had its best-ever Winter games, so that was nice. And there was the usual great feats and achievements. I think I missed some grand drama or scandal, a Valieva moment, to give some spark. I know it sounds cynical, but a bit of scandal helps to build drama. I guess what I’m saying is that my feelings towards Milano-Cortina are probably shaped a lot by my own ennui. The winter sports are fun to watch every four years, but I’m not passionate for them. I enjoyed M-C 2026 well enough, but I’ll probably forget them soon enough. My highly subjective score is 6/10. That probably says more about me than about Milano-Cortina.

They were on track to getting the political guarantees for 2030 until the IOC pulled the rug out from under them by changing their timetable with no notice - pure Bach bastardry. And they made it to the vote for 26 with a bid that wasn’t really that much more widespread than Italy’s. Not to mention being basically stabled in the back for 1994 (even if Lillehammer turned out to be an inspired choice)

Can I co-sign that as well? expresses my thoughts exactly. Or in summary, 20 minutes of greatness, however many hours after that of mediocrity

There actually was some mention in the commentary that they were costumes from the Verona Opera company historical collection.

Jeezus! And it took her 7 minutes to deliver that! Oh well, her speechwriters made sure she covered all the important beats - OCOG, athletes, people of Italy, volunteers, TOP partners, broadcast rights holders - all the usual, and contractual, platitudes. AF will thank you for posting it in full

Yeah, snd I think the IOC has already shown it’s wiling, if not encouraged, the use of existing tracks even in other countries. It was only the stubbornness snd pride of the Italians that stopped bobsled in 2026 being in Lake Placid. I doubt it will be chopped.

And now it’s like you’ve taken the words out of my mouth. I’m not gonna bother to do a step-by-step verdict, but basically, first 20 minutes were great, the rest was mid at best.

I’m actually quite glad. Nothing special about the any more

6 mins 55 secs

Does anyone else think she’s had elocution lessons. The Afrikaanish accent has toned down a lot.