Jump to content

Nacre

Premium Members
  • Content Count

    1377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Everything posted by Nacre

  1. Sour beets would be more appropriate for Russia, which are "kvas".
  2. Adelaide would be a great host city. Australia has a huge advantage because a cricket stadium like the Adelaide Oval can be easily converted into an athletics stadium. Meanwhile ice hockey rinks and Canadian football stadiums are not as useful. A Canadian city like Hamilton will need more time to prepare a games than a comparable Australian city, and the CGF are being a bit foolish in pressuring Hamilton to move its bid forward four years. They are not ready and they know it.
  3. I think the heads of these sporting federations simply do not understand the problems facing host cities. Bidding is a tiny fraction of the total cost. Saving $5 CAD million on bidding is not much compared to a total budget of $1 CAD billion that will almost certainly have cost overruns, although creative accounting will undoubtedly be used to make sure politicians don't look bad and executives get their bonus pay. Reducing the minimum venue sizes should be job #1 for the CGF. It is simply indefensible that many sports like athletics and cycling have higher required capacities for the Com
  4. I would say it was the other way around. The only countries interested in hosting this event are dictatorships who want to make themselves look good.
  5. South African social segregation also affected black athletes and fans. Similarly Russia has been punished for state-sponsored doping, and not its anti-gay legislation or sending weapons and "little green men" into Ukraine. The problem with punishing countries for human rights violations and political malfeasance is that every country violates human rights to some degree or other. Capital punishment is legal in the USA and the country has its own problems with mass imprisonment and racism. So should the USOC be banned from the Olympics? Should Japan be banned from the Olympics for its ref
  6. Japan spent roughly $9.6 billion on the Olympics by the end of 2019. Unfortunately I can't find data since then. But with expected total expenses of about $25-30 billion they should still be able to save a large sum of money by canceling the games - far more than the IOC's contributions. It is of course the fear of -as you put it- "having spend billions on the Olympics with nothing to show for it" that is motivating Japanese politicians to continue with the games, costs be damned. But if they are not able to host the games safely with fans, it will simply be throwing yet more money away.
  7. Cutting the cost of providing security, hospitality to athletes and officials, transporting people, et al absolutely would save them money. Of course it would also deny them access to the revenue from broadcasting funds, and in the unlikely chance that fans were able to attend then to ticket sales as well. The question is whether the television revenue would exceed the costs. In 2012 the security costs were $720 million, and the IOC's total contribution was $910 million. So the money the IOC kicked in barely covered the security costs alone. Japan's share of the broadcasting revenue is no
  8. The Japanese are losing interest in hosting the games anyway. For example: https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h00780/ https://nypost.com/2020/07/20/japanese-people-want-no-part-of-2021-olympics-poll/ I doubt that the Japanese people would mind saving a huge sum of money during a prolonged economic contraction by cancelling the games. It's the politicians like Abe and Yuriko Koike who need to save face and keep the Olympics alive. There would presumably be little appetite for a pointless insult to China over something that the majority of Japanese want given the current reality
  9. This is what happens when a committee makes design decisions. I do too, but organizations start with high concept ideas for the design (like diversity), then the designer has to create something based on those ideas, then finally a group of people in a committee all pull the design in different directions and make the designer make those changes. And you end up with something that looks worse than what a designer would have come up with on their own.
  10. This. Kazakhstan gets less press than China, but it is a dictatorship and has the same low support for human rights as China. The IOC's choice between Almaty and Beijing was a small economy with snow and a big economy far from the mountains. There was no choice between human rights and authoritarianism.
  11. Technically it is a strike, not a boycott, as the players have (temporarily) withdrawn their labor rather than ostracizing the league employing them. The NBA and the players union have fairly warm relations and have cooperated well during the ongoing protests.
  12. Perhaps, but that would not accomplish anything either. It's not as if Russia reversed its anti-gay legislation after Obama declined to attend the Sochi games.
  13. Macron got nearly double the vote of LePen in 2017. It is unlikely that France will elect a far right leader sympathetic to Trump. And even being a far right leader is no guarantee of support. Viktor Orban of Hungary has threatened to turn his country to China for support if the European Union does not give him more financial support.
  14. I really, really doubt it. Because Trump is despised by the rest of the democratic world, any politician who gives Trump what he wants will be seen negatively by their own electorate. Europe has thus far been lukewarm in its views of Trump's economic proposals to weaken China, and an Olympic boycott will be even less well received.
  15. Why? The construction of the 2018 athletes village cost $550 million AU. By 2026, assuming a 2.5% inflation rate (the Australian dollar averaged 2.52% annual inflation from 2000-2019), an equivalent village would cost $622 million AU. It seems unlikely that literally everything else involved would cost only $378 million AU. Are you only counting the operational costs for the budget, and not the capital costs?
  16. You are looking at this logically. Most politicians care about winning elections, not making rational decisions. And this becomes exacerbated in a climate of political radicalism like the one we are in now. Again, I agree with your view. And I hope that Biden will be able to resist the pressure to do something stupid to take action against China, Russia and Iran. But I also hoped there would not be enough voters in 2016 who put sober analysis ahead of destructively antagonistic policies like "building a wall with Mexico", trade wars, and destabilizing eastern Europe. I was wrong, and lots
  17. Politicians make decisions for political reasons. Carter boycotted the games because of domestic pressure to do something about the USSR after the invasion of Afghanistan and the Iranian revolution, not because it was a good idea. (Even at the time a boycott was clearly a bad idea.) Whoever is president in 2022 will also be under pressure to respond to China's belligerence towards Taiwan, its aggressive policies towards neighbors like India and Vietnam, its theft of Western intellectual property and its attempts at corporate sabotage in the USA and EU. (And some dubious complains about Covid-1
  18. Sure, but there's no comparison between Trump and Jimmy Carter either. If Biden is elected he will be under pressure to do something about China too. It was already starting when he was on the campaign trail early in the crackdown on Hong Kong.
  19. Biden is not exactly pro-China either. An Olympic boycott would 1) accomplish nothing in getting China to accept more human rights, 2) merely encourage the Chinese to engage in tit-for-tat retaliation, 3) give up some leverage in negotiations (we will attend the Olympics and sing China's praises if China does _____), and 4) encourage more political militancy in the West. Hopefully government advisors can explain to Trump (and to Biden if he wins election) that while something needs to be done about China, an Olympic boycott is not the thing to be done.
  20. I admit I haven't done a huge amount of research on the development of the Canadian national team in every sport (hence "I am not sure"). But as I said I think the legacy goal for the 2015 games should be to improve the grassroots level of sport in Ontario as opposed to Britain's focus on Olympic medals with its sports funding. Toronto's 2015 games seem to be a good template for other cities to follow in using a mix of existing venues, temporary venues and facilities suitable for local communities. Hopefully other North American cities will make similar bids in a decade or two.
  21. I am not certain that the investment in sporting venues has made an improvement in Canada's medal chances (building a national velodrome yielded 0 out of 60 medals for last year's track cycling world championships, for instance) but I hope that Ontarians at the grassroots level of sport have enjoyed the facilities. That is what really matters with these sporting venues: giving people in the community a chance to get some fitness and make friends through sport.
  22. Actually Russia is a good example, as the fans DID NOT have to be routed all over the country. Russia only picked host cities in the European part of Russia. There were no games in Krasnoyarsk, Yakutsk, Vladivostok and so on. So the distance was about the same as using only the cities on the east coast of the USA + Canada. If they only used New York, Boston, Toronto, Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, New Orleans et al then it would in fact be a lot easier for the national teams and fans. Similarly I hope the ANZAC world cup will group teams so they do not have to fly between Australia and New Zeal
  23. I think it will honestly be pretty horrendous for players and fans. The USSF only cares about stuffing it pockets with cash, so you can expect them to pick hosts by how much money they can make rather than making travel easy for the national teams and fans following their teams. On the flip side I can't wait to hear their explanation for how it is actually environmentally friendly to route a team 10,000 km in the group stage from Montreal to Los Angeles to New York to Houston.
  24. I wish the state legislatures in America were unicameral with proportional representation and preferential voting. I do not think Queensland's Olympic bid is a good idea, but its political system and The Spirit of Queensland train are good models for the rest of the Anglo colonies to learn from.
  25. And this is why Los Angeles has been so successful. It has bid again, and again, and again with plans that make sense for Los Angeles rather than the sports federations.
×
×
  • Create New...