Jump to content

FYI

Members
  • Content Count

    10309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    159

Everything posted by FYI

  1. The glaring irony here, is how the IOC gave Norway a tongue-lashing themselves when Oslo finally dropped out of the 2022 race, leaving them without the only bid that they really wanted then. Now Sweden pretty much does the same thing to the IOC. Doesn’t sound like Norway nor Sweden now will want to play the IOC’s tawdry bid “Games” for quite some time, until perhaps the IOC really does change. Which from the looks of it, ain’t gonna be anytime soon.
  2. So, Roger. Can you please explain how this would help Brisbane? Especially when it’s been cited by their own feasibility study (& also a couple of Aussies here) that much work & construction would be needed for a Brisbane bid to justify it post-Games? And that there’s also quite a shortage of hotel rooms to accommodate the Games. Doesn’t really sound too Agenda 2020 friendly.
  3. Oh my, so much DOUBLE TALK here! Yet Big Q thinks that I’m the one with the “double fetish”!!
  4. OMFG, are you for real?! “THAT” is soooo fu@king RICH coming from you!! You know what’s ‘amazing & ironic’?! Is that you “just described YOURSELF to a tee!!” It reminds me of the time a couple of years or so ago when you chased away a newbie from here cause he said that “you just enjoy being argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative.” And he was/is totally right. It’s not nonsense or an insult if it’s actually true. That’s your M.O. for virtually all of your posts. Well la-dee-dah! Do you want a lolipop for your prize now?! Or should we just start calling you AA JR. cuz ya know, we know how much he likes to brag about how the initial double was “his idea” (except for the order of course). Seems like it’s much more than just that. But I digress. And after Sweden’s passive/aggrassive press release yesterday, sounds like they actually will remember Monday’s vote for quite a while yet, & will be taking a break for quite some time.
  5. Why? Cuz you say so? It’s not overrated nor minutiae. Yet you’re gonna follow that with hindsight arguing (as usual) in Paris’ case, cuz it’s what you do. Whatever. I’m very well familiar with the circumstances that surrounded all of Paris’ bids, so I don’t need you to fill me in on any of them. So thanks anyway. But here’s the thing, you’re trying to rationalize those events as to why Paris waited cuz there’s actually tangible circumstances to apply that to. In other words, hindsight is 20/20, isn’t it. Yet you can never put that same kind of rational thinking into possible future events cuz as usual, you like to play the Devil’s advocate angle. You get too carried away in the ‘could’s or could nots’ of the ‘why’s or why nots’ something ‘can or can’t’ play out. You just claimed that 2030 is too soon bcuz of “potential competition”. So you can’t have it both ways & just cherry pick what you THINK is tangible & “possible” simply to fit any DA narrative that you so chose. I however, like looking at facts & history, & make my own determinations. But you conveniently left this out - that didn’t stop Madrid whatsoever in trying again for 2016, now did it? And they unexpectedly got to the final voting round with Rio with Chicago getting shown the door early. Go figure. So was it really a wise move that Paris sat that one out? We’ll never know, now will we. Again, you say 2030 is likely not in the cards for them. Why not then? Not saying I disagree with that, but then we can apply further analogy why they may skip more than just one round. At least I’m not saying that the Swede’s will stay away ‘til at least the 40’s or 50’s like someone else mentioned earlier. Just exactly how old are you? You said yesterday that you weren’t gonna comment about something cuz “it’s not worth it”. Yet here you are, like an uncontrollable giggling five-year old, “thinking” that you’re “right” about something. It’s time to get over this school-yard indulgence you have going over something that “could’ve or could’ve not” gone either way.
  6. We won’t know that about Paris, will we, BCUZ they did afterall get 2024. However, Paris did WAIT several years to try again for 2024 after their 2012 defeat against London. And prior to that, Paris waited two decades to try for 2012 after their 1992 defeat. And Sweden waited almost just as long when they tried again (& pulled out anyway) for 2022 after their last Olympic bid defeat almost two decades prior to that. So will Sweden be back? Probably so (never said that they wouldn’t be). But that likelihood is not at all that promising in the near-term after today, considering their bid history (or lack thereof in this case). No kidding. Is that hindsight working again? Well, 2030 would be “sooner” rather than later, wouldn’t it, but you pretty much are saying that you don’t expect them that soon either. So what’s the argument then. BCUZ I can then concur with that. But in IMO, I’d say moreso for 2038 at least, when SLC & Sapporo are out of the way, you know that “potential competition” & all. Especially when Sweden has lost to Japan & the U.S. before. You never know with these unpredictable IOC types (& feisty Godzilla, I mean Gunilla)! A 2030 deal could still be in the works!! And if not Stockholm, there’s always still SLC (or even Sapporo)!!! Well, to play the role of my favorite Devil’s advocate around here, it “could” mean that. But then again, it also “could not” mean that. The ship for a Summer Olympics in Sweden has long sailed. That last chance was when they bid for the 2004 Summer Olympics 22 years ago (which the Swedes weren’t fans of [to say the least] back then either). If the Swedes balk at the Winter Olympics now, which are a third of the size & expense of their summer counterpart, then another Summer Olympic bid ain’t happening. I can see another winter attempt though, but not again until a couple of more bid cycles at least.
  7. After today, something tells me that the Swedes won’t be back anytime soon. This last Swedish effort was tepid at best anyway (& very last minute, politically speaking), & it was obviously not enough, even for a winter sports country that’s never hosted the Winter Olympics before & who’s had several failed previous bids as well. None of that mattered to the IOC today, & I’m sure that the Swedes will remember that for quite a while yet. But of course, the SOK could still be glutton for punishment, so who knows.
  8. Busy for 18 months?! Wow! Anyway, don’t take that long of a break next time!
  9. Yeah, that’s a very interesting analysis, Roger. And you’re probably right on the money with that in the end.
  10. OMG, Roger! Where in the world have you been?! So glad that you’re back! Miss your insightful, other POV posts! And speaking of certain misguided posts like the ones you just quoted, there’s other previous short-sighted posts just like those that are a thing of nostagia now around here.
  11. Which is pretty much what I said here: https://www.gamesbids.com/forums/topic/28527-which-one-will-win-and-what-is-the-vote-difference/?page=4
  12. It was Milan’s extravagant shopping that won the day! And boy, AA must be stewing in his own juices, cuz he got yet another one WRONG!
  13. I’ve always said that the Swedes have a history of going against the Olympics in their own backyard, which yes, dates back to 1997 with their 2004 summer bid. If anything, the lack of any activity while the Evaluation Team was on the ground there a few months ago, speaks volumes, while in Italy it was pretty much abuzz during their evaluation visit. And while many were citing that the Stockholm bid was going to be “privately-financed”, I guess those numbers really weren’t adding up & made some IOC members uncomfortable. And like I said earlier, if this vote is any indication, is that the IOC is still leery about lukewarm support bids. And that should heed some credence for those who are already chanting “Norway” for the next round. Which let’s remember, the support level for the Oslo 2022 bid was also pretty much the same as the Stockholm 2026 bid.
  14. Well, your “giving the middle finger” & “so much for the ‘New Norm’ “ comments certainly give that impression, though. Not to mention your “but as a matter some local politician’s pride & stubbornness”, which can be said of virtually any bid, really.
  15. Exactly. Easier said than done. Like in Sweden’s case, it’s basically the Norwegian Olympic Commitee & not from the gov’t. And if this vote is any indication, the IOC is still very leery over lukewarm bid support.
  16. The Executive Board *approved* both bids to the final ballot. If the Milan bid was such crap, then why do that in the first place? I think it was Sweden’s very-late-in-the-Game “support” that didn’t sit well with many IOC members (let’s also keep in mind that they pulled out of 2022 when they could’ve been given those Games on a silver-platter in the end). Looks like it could’ve been a matter of ‘too little, too late’ kinda deal.
  17. 50-plus temps?! That’s very CHILLY for a Summer Olympics!!
  18. I have to concur. The Swedes were so last minute on this, as if they were pushed/forced into this whole thing from all the proponents, & I wonder how much Gunilla had her hands on this, since she wanted this very much. Seems like Sweden just can’t ever get this right. They should’ve held on with 2022, they would’ve won that one hands down. Oh well.
  19. Really? So the Swedish gov’t was (finally) onboard but not her?
  20. Well, that’s a significant margin! So much for a “close” vote. I bet what won it for Milan were all the IOC’s members wives who told them that the shopping there would be much better than in Stockholm!
  21. That’s all fine & dandy in theory. But since 2000, the Summer Olympics have gone, & will go to for at least the next three summer cycles, to either very large cosmopolitan or financial/political capitals. And I don’t see the IOC diminishing their ways that drastic anytime soon. Also, in order for those type of smaller cities to actually host, the size of the Games need to be drastically reduced, which would be a fight among all the different sporting federations as to which sports would get to stay, or not. It’s all easier said than done.
  22. OH WOW, really?! When did this finally happen?! What GB’s mellow-drama did I miss here?! Should’ve happened LONG ago, though, especially when others in the past were shown the door for far less infractions than you-know-who.
×
×
  • Create New...