Jump to content

FYI

Members
  • Posts

    11450
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    194

Everything posted by FYI

  1. Considering that it's the host cities that basically flip the entire bill to host those athletes & the sports they're involved in, at the world's biggest sporting venue, then these cities getting some form of return/recognition for their hard, working Olympic efforts is at the very least reasonable to expect. ,What attracted me to the Olympics to begin with, IS the "traveling circus" (as you call it) nature of the event. The globalism, the different cultures of each different host. I certainly felt excited about every different Summer Games from 2000-2020 (pre-pandemic of course). And it's that same appeal what has me excited about Paris 2024 & Milan 2026. I don't think that the Olympics would have the same impact if it were stationary in one locale or two (& that would bring it's own set of unique challenges as well if that were the case).
  2. The Olympics, in all actuality, are now more of a business, than just merely an athletic event anymore. Everyone & their grandmother, now want a piece of that Olympic pie. So while selecting an established number of hosts cities sounds good in theory, in practice it most likely wouldn't work as well. Although lately, we are seeing a number of more repeat hosts than ever before. But I think that's still more of a case-by-case basis rather than just being "established".
  3. That's probably because you're, more or less, just as guilty of said behavior, so of course you don't get it. Although, albeit, your conduct is not as extreme as "that guy", at least IMO anyway, since I do look at most your posts, shrug & just move on. Since I really don't care about your ceremony idiosyncracies or where the placements of flag poles should be, nor about how much airtime should the Spice Girls get at the next London Olympics.
  4. They must have wet dreams about this new-norm mumbo-jumbo. Instead of counting sheep at night, they must count new-norm power-points & that "crowded field of interested parties".
  5. Ya know, there's a saying that it's also wise of when to know to throw in the towel & maybe try again later, instead of stubbornly trying to move forward with something so futile. That strategy hasn't worked out too well for them in the past. But I guess some never learn.
  6. I only see 11 active cities on that bold list. That's the same number of "interested" cities that the IOC had for the 2004 Games. And how many of those are for the 2040 Games, as Bach also indicated? So then that means the number is even less for each 2036 & 2040. So then NO, 'the new bidding process' has NOT "supercharged" interest because of Brisbane's 2032 anointment. That's just pure hyperbole.
  7. Of course in the context of plausibility, it’s certainly possible, just like it was for Brisbane. But in order for that to happen, a solid/hypothetical Manchester or Glasgow bid would have to be in the mix with the likes of Doha-ha, Jakarta & India, etc. just like Brisbane was. But put it into the mix with a Shanghai or a Rome or a NYC, then Manchester or Glasgow starts to become that more far-fetched.
  8. I’ll quote the rest of that paragraph that you conveniently omitted:
  9. And LOL, you-know-who trying to tell someone that they're "literally obsessing over trying to explain away..." is literally the irony of all ironies.
  10. Touche. A lot of us have been over this for the past 15 months already. But the usual comeback is always, " look, stop with the 'whacky conspiracy theories'. The new-norm is so great, so WOW, how can anyone BUT me not see that!" Lol, good luck with that. That was like trying to tell a certain Angelino from a few years back that they didn't need to keep yodeling about how much rainbow & sunshine L.A. 28 was going to be (while constantly putting down Paris 24 in the process), yet they never ceased to continue with their L.A. rants.
  11. Literally, your post was followed up by not one, not two, not even three, but by TEN "new-norm" hyperbolic, typical spamming posts (as if that suppose to mean anything in the grand scheme of things anyway). So that should answer your question quite thoroughly.
  12. While the similarity of Barcelona having an IOC VP in the EB, like Brisbane did, that's where the similarities end, though. Since not even JAS JR. can fix this mess that the Pyrenees 2030 bid is. And that's even before we get to the July referendum. The NOlympics crowd is going to have a field day with this now. In Brisbane's case, the gov't support from all levels, was/is so cohesive, which is why the their bid was easily able to be "fast-tracked". That's not the case here with Barcelona whatsoever. So any idea of Jas Jr. doing a Brisbane here, has clearly been dealt a serious blow with this latest development.
  13. I don't think by that previous list that the IOC was "enthused" by secondary cities, either. More context in those instances gives more insight on those previous selections. Most of us around here already know how Brisbane & Barcelona came to be. Atlanta was simply at the right place, at the right time, only due to the simple fact that Athens (the presumed/early favorite for 1996) just wasn't ready. Montreal was just a compromise between the two Cold War superpowers at the time (Moscow & L.A.). And wasn't Munich, West Germany's largest (& most renowned) city at the time anyway? And Melbourne I think was more about bringing the Games to the Southern hemisphere for the first time, since their main rival Buenos Aires only lost by one vote. Plus, wasn't Melbourne also Australia's principal city at the time? And Antwerp, that was so far back in time anyway, when the Olympics were just starting to gain main stream popularity. I still say if push comes to shove, that the IOC would still "choose" the glitziest city on offer, versus a secondary/provincial one with less glitz.
  14. That means that in seven months it'll also be the Christmas/holiday season.
  15. The only way I can see this happening, is if the IOC is also ready to award 2034 simultaneously. It's no secret that's the cycle the USOC is most interested in anyway, so then Samaranch Jr. getting his way won't be seen as much of an issue. However, just awarding 2030 that way, would present a problem. And I don't think that the USOC (who have been quite invested in this for several years now [afterall, that was suppose to be one of Brisbane's positives], or even the JOC, would go away that quietly. Look at the mild stir the DOSB, India & Qatar made over 2032. It would be louder this time around. But that's getting a bit ahead of things here, since again, the real test comes in a couple of months, when the people of Barcelona will either say yay or nay to a 2030 bid. And if they say nay, that's something that even the almighty Samaranch Jr. can't unravel.
  16. Yeah, I thought the same thing when I saw that. If we divide up the ones that are interested in 2036 & 2040, the number is probably no higher than the bidding cycles of each of 2004, 2008 & 2012, when we had 11, 10 & 9 initial bidding cities (before the short-lists were made) respectively for each of those cycles. So yeah, just some tailored-made Bach lip-service here.
  17. Ya think? Where have you been. That's pretty much been par-for-the-course with them for quite some time now, & this "new-norm is the best thing since sliced bread" BS has been on *overdrive* for the past 15 months ever since Brisbane was named 'preferred bidder' for 2032. So 'offended' is putting it mildly. More like OCD-driven hysteria (which is evident is so many threads with the incessant new-norm spamming whenever someone mentions anything critical about the "new process". It even just bumped up it's new-norm "library" thread [yes, that's what they labeled it ] from a few months back so they can "teach us" all about it ). It really does make Oly28's ceremonies/flag pole ramblings seem so trivial in comparison. And more akin to a certain delirious Angelo & his feverish tirades from a few years back.
  18. I think that would stir almost as big of an IOC scandal than the one from over 23 years ago. But this time, with one of the accused cities looking in. But first, we need to see if Barcelona even survives their winter bid referendum this summer.
  19. LOL, I remember a certain Angelo using the same 'rusted-on' tactic a few years back as well.
  20. And that's what this "nonsense" is really all about (& always has been). Because questioning the "new norm" for whatever it's worth, in their mind also questions Brisbane's so-called win. It's akin to when a certain you-know-who didn't want to acknowledge any foreign interference in a certain presidential election, because then it would call their own 'win' into question.
  21. You continually sounding like a broken-record (or in your case, a "rusted-on mantra") whenever you're confronted with actual CREDIBLE news sources that contradict your PR spin doesn't help your stance.
×
×
  • Create New...