Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Nobody's OFFICIALLY said "Nevada 2022." I just did that because I know some gnats here are allergic to the name RENO 2022 as I am allergic to them now. But the state's Lt.-Gov. is now getting involved, so it looks like all systems are go when the USOC says "Go."

And after something called PyeongChang 2018, Reno 2022 sounds like a breeze. B)

If Istanbul win that will mean four Olympics not in Western Europe so I like Munich's chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 870
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Oh please, such biased idiocy from Athensfan whose stupid SUMMER USA dream will not come true in the NEXT 40 years!!.... /\ Reno is a trend-starter in global political movements of conscience!! Th

For 2022 I'm quite sure that Europe will make it. It's the very fist time that there are 3 consecutive winter games not held in Europe with Vancouver in NA and Sochi and PC in Asia (sure Sochi is part

It has been explained to you COUNTLESS times already "why", but you, just like your "pathetic" lost brother Tulsa, REFUSE/WON'T listen. And what's most "pathetic" of all, is that you're suppose to be

I think it would be excellent to have a Swedish Olympic Games - they are deserving.

The problem is having a local site to underpin the non-Alpine events. Ostersund has a population of 60,000, but typically there are several sites required

A Curling arena

A principle ice hockey arena

A secondary ice hockey arena

A speed skating venue

A ice area for ice dancing and short track

Could Ostersund sustain these venues post games?

An alternative however could be a joint Norwegian-Swedish bid with Trondheim and Are as the venues.

For their 2018 proposed bid Trondheim linked with Oppdal for Alpine events, which is slightly further away than Are which is 78miles from Trondheim and on major road (E14) and rail link.

Trondheim is a cruise liner destination, a major university town allowing post games usage of an Olympic village, and has an international airport which is A330/B767 capable

It also has a thriving sports scene with Handball and Ice Hockey who could be tenants for a two of the arenas, a football team talking of expanding and putting a retractable roof on their football stadim to 30,000+ and a Nordic arena at Granasen which holds over 40,000. Only a speed skating arena and sliding site are missing.

Two arenas could be build for the IceHockey which could be used post games for Rosenberg IHK and Bryasen Handball (12-14,000 and 6,000)

A dockside speed skating rink could be used as a community site similar to the Richmond Oval (8,000)

The Lerkendal football stadium with roof could be temporarily used for the Ice Skating (16,000) and Curling (6,000) by adding a partioning wall, a temporary stand on one side and putting down a temporary rink - football in Norway is in the summer so they'd have several months to prepare this temporary structure.

All the Nordic events could be at Granasen, the Alpine events at Are, so Sweden could at least co-host the Olympics.

Trondheim has a current population of 174,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be excellent to have a Swedish Olympic Games - they are deserving.

The problem is having a local site to underpin the non-Alpine events. Ostersund has a population of 60,000, but typically there are several sites required

A Curling arena

A principle ice hockey arena

A secondary ice hockey arena

A speed skating venue

A ice area for ice dancing and short track

Could Ostersund sustain these venues post games?

An alternative however could be a joint Norwegian-Swedish bid with Trondheim and Are as the venues.

For their 2018 proposed bid Trondheim linked with Oppdal for Alpine events, which is slightly further away than Are which is 78miles from Trondheim and on major road (E14) and rail link.

Trondheim is a cruise liner destination, a major university town allowing post games usage of an Olympic village, and has an international airport which is A330/B767 capable

It also has a thriving sports scene with Handball and Ice Hockey who could be tenants for a two of the arenas, a football team talking of expanding and putting a retractable roof on their football stadim to 30,000+ and a Nordic arena at Granasen which holds over 40,000. Only a speed skating arena and sliding site are missing.

Two arenas could be build for the IceHockey which could be used post games for Rosenberg IHK and Bryasen Handball (12-14,000 and 6,000)

A dockside speed skating rink could be used as a community site similar to the Richmond Oval (8,000)

The Lerkendal football stadium with roof could be temporarily used for the Ice Skating (16,000) and Curling (6,000) by adding a partioning wall, a temporary stand on one side and putting down a temporary rink - football in Norway is in the summer so they'd have several months to prepare this temporary structure.

All the Nordic events could be at Granasen, the Alpine events at Are, so Sweden could at least co-host the Olympics.

Trondheim has a current population of 174,000

I doubt that the Swedes would want to share an Olympics with their neighbors. Neither one has shared an Olympic Games in the past with the other; why should they start now? Besides, the IOC does NOT like shared hosting duties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that the Swedes would want to share an Olympics with their neighbors. Neither one has shared an Olympic Games in the past with the other; why should they start now? Besides, the IOC does NOT like shared hosting duties.

1. They've previously jointly bid for the European Football Championships

2. the IOC are keen to have another Norwegian bid and it would be a way in which to have Sweden rewarded for their Olympic movement support

3. With so many facilities being spread between different sites, will the Olympic movement geuninely be that bothered if part of the games are held over the border ... they have already been part of other bids and don't forget in 1956 the Melbourne Games had their equestrian events in Stockholm

4. Due to the increasing expense of hosting games and the IOCs desire not to have white elephants its a way of ensuring that smaller nations can hoster the games in cooperation

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. They've previously jointly bid for the European Football Championships.

Those are not the Olympics. Different animal. The joint bids for FIFA 2018 lost.

2. the IOC are keen to have another Norwegian bid and it would be a way in which to have Sweden rewarded for their Olympic movement support.

Source? Why should Sweden take a back seat to Norway? :blink: Isn't the Winter 2016 YOGs going back to Norway?

3. With so many facilities being spread between different sites, will the Olympic movement geuninely be that bothered if part of the games are held over the border ... they have already been part of other bids and don't forget in 1956 the Melbourne Games had their equestrian events in Stockholm.

That was NOT by choice. The IOC was NOT happy to have to split those Games. It means double travel and organizing expenses; double insurance for everyone around.

4. Due to the increasing expense of hosting games and the IOCs desire not to have white elephants its a way of ensuring that smaller nations can hoster the games in cooperation.

So what? There is NO dearth of cities from single nations wanting to spend for the IOC.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of a Swedish Olympic bid for the winter games, here's a few images of a new ski-complex being proposed/built in Sweden. There is to be a 700m downhill ski course! The complex is located approximately 45 minutes outside Stockholm in the town of Bålsta

17599_1_ski.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are not the Olympics. Different animal. The joint bids for FIFA 2018 lost.

and the European ones like Switzerland/Austria and Poland/Ukraine won.

Distance between venues is considered important - its 100miles from Denver to Vail along the I-70, only 76miles from Trondheim to Are

Source? Why should Sweden take a back seat to Norway? :blink: Isn't the Winter 2016 YOGs going back to Norway?

Games are awarded to cities not countries. Why would Sweden be taking a back seat if the Alpine events are at Are? Why go back to North America again? Scandinavia has not held a games since 1994 and based on Lillehammer, all events and competitors would be enthusiastically supported

That was NOT by choice. The IOC was NOT happy to have to split those Games. It means double travel and organizing expenses; double insurance for everyone around.

but it has happened. The IOC are interested in a good and successful games. They also want a legacy - what legacy would a games in Denver bring? Would Reno end up being a white elephant?

So what? There is NO dearth of cities from single nations wanting to spend for the IOC.

Because the IOC are conscious to ensure it doesn't become a rich mans club which is why they it helps to part fund Games with its centrally negotiated sponsorship and TV deals but also create a legacy plan as part of the proposals.

Why should America get the games? The USOC had a temper tantrum and refused to bid for the 2020 games despite Rogge's invitation, their bribery scandal ruined the 2002 event which will be remembered principally for corruption and the IOC have looked to be more adventureous with their hosts - Sochi, Rio, Pyeongchang.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of a Swedish Olympic bid for the winter games, here's a few images of a new ski-complex being proposed/built in Sweden. There is to be a 700m downhill ski course! The complex is located approximately 45 minutes outside Stockholm in the town of Bålsta

17599_1_ski.jpg

So can we expect a Stockholm bid? :P Or is this indoor downhill skiing course the solution for the likes of say, Quebec City? But of course, given the reasonable mountain slopes already, I would expect Quebec to propose not a ski ramp this time, but a proper topping of one of it's undeveloped mountain slopes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and the European ones like Switzerland/Austria and Poland/Ukraine won. - That's on a regional basis...within one TIGHT continent. On an int'l level, when was the LAST bi-national Olympic bid that won? The Poprad Tatry-Friuli-Venezia bid for 2002 or (2006, I forget now) NEVER got anywhere. The 2 national committees were fighting for which one would get the top billing. You forget that Salzburg 2014 which was using the bobsled run in Germany, ended up 3rd. SO much for your joint winter bids.

Distance between venues is considered important - its 100 miles from Denver to Vail along the I-70 (that's why I consider Denver a weak bid), only 76 miles from Trondheim to Are - Yes, but Trondheim is Norwegian territory; Are is Swedish. Montreal tried to team up with the Lake Placid region for another WOGs go, but eventually both localities decided it was a no-go.

Source? Why should Sweden take a back seat to Norway? Isn't the Winter 2016 YOGs going back to Norway?

Games are awarded to cities not countries. I KNOW THAT. But in discussion, the terminology is interchangeable. If you can't make out the difference, then maybe u shouldn't be on here.

Why go back to North America again? Why? Because there are ONLY 3 regions in the world that can stage the WOGs at the desired season. Scandinavia has not held a games since 1994 and based on Lillehammer, all events and competitors would be enthusiastically supported - OK, if u say so. :rolleyes:

That was NOT by choice. The IOC was NOT happy to have to split those Games.

but it has happened - well, so did World Wars I and II.

The IOC are interested in a good and successful games. They also want a legacy - what legacy would a games in Denver bring? Denver, I HAVE NO IDEA. Would Reno end up being a white elephant? They're trying NOT TO.

So what? There is NO dearth of cities from single nations wanting to spend for the IOC.Because the IOC are conscious to ensure it doesn't become a rich mans club which is why they it helps to part fund Games with its centrally negotiated sponsorship and TV deals but also create a legacy plan as part of the proposals.

The USOC had a temper tantrum and refused to bid for the 2020 games despite Rogge's invitation -- When did the USOC have a "temper tantrum"? Just because one sits out a round, doesn't mean it's throwing a temper tantrum. :rolleyes:

NO ONE IS FORCED TO BID. If the IOC invited the USOC, it's because it wanted more suckers in there for their Game. Just because I invite you to an pot party, doesn't mean you'll come, will you? :blink: Rogge "invited" South Africa; they ALSO demurred. Why aren't you inventing some twisted story for their refusal? :blink:

their bribery scandal ruined the 2002 event which will be remembered principally for corruption...uhmmmm, it takes 2 to tango; and a federal judge threw out the case -- so technically, in front of U.S. law, there was NO wrong-doing. Again, you just believe the BAD PRESS being written about the U.S.

OLYMPICS; Acquittals End Bid Scandal That Dogged Winter Games

By LEX HEMPHILL

Published: December 06, 2003, from The New York Times

A federal judge Friday acquitted the leaders of Salt Lake City's Olympic bid, Thomas K. Welch and David R. Johnson, of charges that they illegally influenced International Olympic Committee members for their votes. The judge's action put an official end to the five-year-old bribery scandal that tainted the 2002 Winter Olympics.

Judge David Sam, who had dismissed the case in 2001 before it came to trial only to have it reinstated on appeal, granted the defendants' motion for acquittal without sending the case to the jury. He ruled that there was insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction on any of the 15 counts in the federal indictment against Welch, 59, the former president of the Salt Lake Bid Committee, and Johnson, 45, the committee's former vice president.

''Last night was probably the longest night of my life,'' Welch said, ''and that five minutes before the judge was the sweetest.''

and the IOC have looked to be more adventureous with their hosts - Sochi, Rio, Pyeongchang. Yeah...good for them. You'll get no objection from me.

Of course, bidding is free and open. But the IOC can also cut you off before the SHORT LIST.

The USOC will bid if and when it wants to. That's their prerogative as Norway and Sweden can also bid anytime they want to. What I'm only saying is based on PAST experience, the IOC does NOT care for bi-national bids. They have said so. And if you don't believe the policies of organizations when they state them, then that is your prerogative (or folly).

1956 was FORCED UPON the IOC. It was their own move that backfired. When Summer 1956 was won by Melbourne by the ONE STUPID vote of the IOC president, Avery Brundage, OVER Buenos Aires, little did the organization realize at that time that Australia would NOT bend its equine quarantine for one silly international event. By the time AUSTRALIA put its foot down on NO FOREIGN HORSES (around 1954), the preparations for Melbounrne were farther along; it was too late to re-award them to Buenos Aires and be ready for 1956; and it was time to find an ALTERNATE site for the equestrian events so that they could also take place in 1956.

But good luck for Norway & Sweden if they want to submit a joint bid. Why should anyone stop them? You fail to realize that splitting hosting duties between 2 countries means that:

- the IOC and the federations will have to deal with TWO different gov'ts;

- double travel and organizing expenses; double insurance for everyone around.

- have to execute 2 sets of contracts;

- deal with 2 sets of headaches;

- host countries normally get byes in the team events...so 2 countries will now have auto places in team events therefore cutting out deserving teams from other parts of the world?;

- which heads of state will preside at the Opening? Remember the IOC charter is written with ONLY for ONE head of state to Open the Games? So how do you solve that?

So, in conclusion, why should the IOC (or any logical organization for that matter?) really split a Games when there is a sufficient number of cities which can host them individually and single-handedly? :unsure:

I think you're just fascinated by the idea of a joint-Scandinavian bid more than its international realities and practicalities. ;)

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on. The USOC did not have a "temper tantrum" over 2020. For years they've been saying they wouldn't bid. After two failed bids they needed time to go back to the drafting table. The ONLY reason they started reconsidering for 2020 was the fact that it looked like a revenue deal might be reached before the bid deadline. As it turned out, tgat didn't happen. The USOC did not react in anger. They followed the considered guidelines they set years ago.

Incidentally, Rogge only wanted the US to bid to raise the profile of the race and promote the Olympic brand. I do not believe Rogge wanted to see the Games in the USA in 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The USOC, after they flunked out in 2016 inferred that they would not bid again, because they felt the IOC was politically against them having failed with both New York and Chicago.

A number of American cities such as Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Dallas etc expressed a desire to bid for 2020, but the USOC refused to entertain any candidates despite a request by Jacques Rogge to submit a candidate. As the richest nation, their reason for not bidding is far more tenuous than a poorer country like South Africa.

The fact that a US judge under US law through out a bribery case is irrelevant as it is still perceived as a stain on the Olympic movement. Add to Denver's withdrawl in 1976 and the less than enthusiastic response to the Atlanta's hosting in 1996, I think the USA cannot assume that they are entitled to host a game due to it being 'their turn'. The IOC might worry that a Reno bid could be a winter Atlanta, over commercialised - the one and only time the IOC President has not described the games as being the best ever merely saying Well done Atlanta

The Swiss have not hosted since 1948 so they make a very strong candidate, though there is always a concern how their referendums go and this would need to be sorted out prior to a decision of whether Berne or Geneva might host.

Poland could bid with Zakopane-Krakow and considering the infrastructure investment going on, it would be unwise not to consider them a serious threat.

Oslo could bid but Bergen-Voss, and Trondheim-Oppdal or Are could be serious contenders. Lillehammer proved that the games would be well supported in all events irrespective of whether there was a home contender.

If you look at things from a geographical persepctive - Western North America has hosted in 2002 and 2010, the Caucuses in 2014, the Far East in 2018 but the Tatras, the Pyrenees and Carpathians never and Scandinavia not since 1994. Therefore they have a significant resonance with the IOC voting members, that gifts and money in envelopes won't this time help overcome.

As for co-hosting, it will happen. In cricket it happens at most CWC except England, in football it occured in 2002 with Japan-South Korea, it happened in the Rugby Word Cup (now an Olympic sport in 7s) in 1987, 1991, 1999, and 2007 and they had no challenge at all in having different heads of states present or dealing with different national respresentative bodies. Norway-Sweden would represent a low risk trial because the existing relationships that permeates through the cultures and business dealings that continue to occur

Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes no sense to say the US is obligated to bid for 2020 because of the country's wealth and Rogge's invitation. Germany, Canada, Australia, the UAE and others are also wealthy and chose not to bid. Should they be similarly censured? No.

The US had back-to-back failures. Big failures. It wasn't even close. Why would they waste the money on bidding again until they can fix the things that are broken - such as the revenue deal that still isn't done? The USOC wants more Games, but is up to them to decide if the geopolitics are favorable, if there's a qualified city, if relations are sufficiently improved with the IOC. The US certainly does not "owe" the IOC an Olympic bid.

As for the US thinking the IOC owes them - the Games are always a privilege - not a right. The USOC is behaving quite deferentially. They're certainly not screaming "You owe us!" The vast majority of American's on these boards agree. You can always find a few hot heads who are exceptions. For the most part, we hope to host the Games soon and would love the chance to do so, but we do NOT believe we are entitled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of a Swedish Olympic bid for the winter games, here's a few images of a new ski-complex being proposed/built in Sweden. There is to be a 700m downhill ski course! The complex is located approximately 45 minutes outside Stockholm in the town of Bålsta

17599_1_ski.jpg

Proposed? Or being built?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see, for the next winter olympics, I would say Germany (Munich), Sweden (Are), Norway (Tromso), Switzerland (St. Moritz) will be excellent bids and they will be more tradiotionable, by the wat Scandinavia hast hosted recent games so do the german alps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The USOC, after they flunked out in 2016 inferred that they would not bid again, because they felt the IOC was politically against them having failed with both New York and Chicago.

A number of American cities such as Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Dallas etc expressed a desire to bid for 2020, but the USOC refused to entertain any candidates despite a request by Jacques Rogge to submit a candidate. As the richest nation, their reason for not bidding is far more tenuous than a poorer country like South Africa.

What rot! No country is obliged to bid if they don't want to or feel it's not in their best interests to throw $100 million on the table just for the sake of "making up the numbers". The USA, whether one thinks they've hosted more than their fair share not, has done more than most countries to support Olympism. They have no obligations to the IOC, or any commitment to prove.

Edited by Don Rolando
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see, for the next winter olympics, I would say Germany (Munich), Sweden (Are), Norway (Tromso), Switzerland (St. Moritz) will be excellent bids and they will be more tradiotionable, by the wat Scandinavia hast hosted recent games so do the german alps.

StMoritz/Davos have withdrawn from the Swiss process. I think it will be either Geneva or Berne. It's a pity Zurich aren't bidding.

Tromso has said No. Oslo are likely but the concern is the Lillehammer for Alpine events is too far away. Norefjell which was used in 1952 and is 130km compared to 240km might be better. Two other possible contenders might be Bergen-Voss or Trondheim-Oppdal. The latter would be a strong contender due to a number of existing facilities plus a strong legacy proposition.

Are is too small and likely would link with Ostersund, but with a population of 60,000 could they use the venues post games? (Are however is not that far from Trondheim over the border in Norway which is 3x as big as Ostersund = joint bid)

Munich would be a big contender but have environmental issues in upgrading Garmish.

Personally I would go

Trondheim

Ostersund

Munich

Berne

Link to post
Share on other sites

StMoritz/Davos have withdrawn from the Swiss process. I think it will be either Geneva or Berne. It's a pity Zurich aren't bidding.

Tromso has said No. Oslo are likely but the concern is the Lillehammer for Alpine events is too far away. Norefjell which was used in 1952 and is 130km compared to 240km might be better. Two other possible contenders might be Bergen-Voss or Trondheim-Oppdal. The latter would be a strong contender due to a number of existing facilities plus a strong legacy proposition.

Are is too small and likely would link with Ostersund, but with a population of 60,000 could they use the venues post games? (Are however is not that far from Trondheim over the border in Norway which is 3x as big as Ostersund = joint bid)

A joint bid is NOT going to happen - it's not an option. As the Swedish sports ministry was told in no uncertain terms by Gunilla Linberg:

Minister wants Swedish-Norwegian Winter Olympics

Sweden should apply to host a Winter Olympics - together with Norway. So says Sports Minister Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth. But the Swedish Olympic Committee gives thumbs down: "It is completely impossible," said Gunilla Lindberg, Secretary General of the Swedish Olympic Committee to newspaper Svenska Dagbladet.

Since the summer Olympics in 1912 in Stockholm, Sweden hopes to stage the new games have been in vain. Sweden has been running for seven Olympic Games, six of those winter games, but never been assigned to the event. Our Norwegian neighbors, by contrast, received two Winter Olympics. This has brought a thought in Sweden Sport:

"I think and hope that it is a question that Sweden's Olympic Committee should take up, for example, Sweden and Norway will eventually be able to make a joint application," said Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth to a question in parliament about the possibility of a Winter Olympics 2022.

Before the Winter Games 2002 Canada searched for the the Winter Games for a third consecutive time, but it then became Salt Lake City who received the International Olympic Committee (IOC) trust. So far, no Olympic games split between countries, and the question does not arise now either according to Gunilla Lindberg, general secretaray in the SOC and a member of the IOC

"I am very surprised at her statement. You can not just blurt this stuff," said Gunilla Lindberg, to the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet.

Lindberg said it would cost at least $60 million to apply for an Olympic games - money that must come from the government. But she says that the government has not yet discussed the issue with the SOC. When asked if it might be time to seek an OS together with Norway, Gunilla Lindberg was clear:

"No. It is completely impossible."

Dagens Nyheter

And where did you get the info about St Moritz/Davos not being in the running? Last I heard, they WERE all but the officially annointed location for Switzerland to bid for 2022:

Swiss Olympic Committee Backs Joint Davos-St. Moritz 2022 Bid

Edited by Don Rolando
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for co-hosting, it will happen. In cricket it happens at most CWC except England, in football it occured in 2002 with Japan-South Korea, it happened in the Rugby Word Cup (now an Olympic sport in 7s) in 1987, 1991, 1999, and 2007 and they had no challenge at all in having different heads of states present or dealing with different national respresentative bodies. Norway-Sweden would represent a low risk trial because the existing relationships that permeates through the cultures and business dealings that continue to occur

Yea and how'd that work out with South Korea and Japan? The logistics of it were less than ideal and it caused FIFA to decide that they they're no longer interested in dual bids. Either way, events like the World Cup require multiple large stadiums and are best spread across several different cities, if not different countries. So it makes sense to do it that way there. Not the Olympics which is supposed to be confined largely to 1 city (or in the case of a Winter Olympics, a city and a nearby mountain community). So this idea that co-hosts work for those events mean it will work for the Olympics doesn't follow. The South Korea-Japan bid that won only had 1 bid competing against it, that being from Mexico, so it's not like they beat out a full field of other bids. Virtually any dual-country Olympics bid will have to do that so if the IOC has to make that choice, why do something that's low risk instead of something that's no risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that a US judge under US law through out a bribery case is irrelevant as it is still perceived as a stain on the Olympic movement.

Then that's YOUR and their problem then. By our laws, it was an acquittal. :P And if it wasn't for that, the IOC would never have cleaned house then. Duh!! :rolleyes:

U're nuts. U're making things up and totally unfounded conclusions. U need to have your deductive reasoning systems checked out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

StMoritz/Davos have withdrawn from the Swiss process. I think it will be either Geneva or Berne. It's a pity Zurich aren't bidding.

Tromso has said No. Oslo are likely but the concern is the Lillehammer for Alpine events is too far away. Norefjell which was used in 1952 and is 130km compared to 240km might be better. Two other possible contenders might be Bergen-Voss or Trondheim-Oppdal. The latter would be a strong contender due to a number of existing facilities plus a strong legacy proposition.

Are is too small and likely would link with Ostersund, but with a population of 60,000 could they use the venues post games? (Are however is not that far from Trondheim over the border in Norway which is 3x as big as Ostersund = joint bid)

Munich would be a big contender but have environmental issues in upgrading Garmish.

Personally I would go

Trondheim

Ostersund

Munich

Berne

I though St.Moritz/Davos was already chosen as the Swiss bid?

Link to post
Share on other sites

StMoritz/Davos have withdrawn from the Swiss process. I think it will be either Geneva or Berne. It's a pity Zurich aren't bidding.

Tromso has said No. Oslo are likely but the concern is the Lillehammer for Alpine events is too far away. Norefjell which was used in 1952 and is 130km compared to 240k

m might be better. Two other possible contenders might be Bergen-Voss or Trondheim-Oppdal. The latter would be a strong contender due to a number of existing facilities plus a strong legacy proposition.

Are is too small and likely would link with Ostersund, but with a population of 60,000 could they use the venues post games? (Are however is not that far from Trondheim over the border in Norway which is 3x as big as Ostersund =

joint bid)

Munich would be a big contender but have environmental issues in upgrading Garmish.

Personally I would go

Trondheim

Ostersund

Munich

Berne

St Moritz has withdrawn :o I didnt knew sorry, well then I agree with Berne or maybe Zurich. Well I rather Tromso than Trondheim but a Norweigan bid and a German will be my choice! Also will like to see Swiss os Swedish olympics...

Link to post
Share on other sites

St Moritz has withdrawn :o I didnt knew sorry, well then I agree with Berne or maybe Zurich. Well I rather Tromso than Trondheim but a Norweigan bid and a German will be my choice! Also will like to see Swiss os Swedish olympics...

Sorry it was Central Switzerland

St Moritz/Davos are still in BUT they are now talking of holding some events in Zurich but there is a concern the proposal is becoming way too fragmented.

Trondheim would be better than Tromso because it would simply be much cheaper and would have a usable legacy

1) There already is a skijumping / nordic facility at Granasen

2) They have a 30,000 seat stadium used by Norways leading football team Rosenberg for the opening ceremony

3) They have two leading indoor teams in Ice Hockey and Handball who could use two of the areas.

4) They have a rapidly expanding university who can use the Olympic village post games

5) They are a leading area for speed skating in Norway so the track would not be a white elephant

6) The downhill site is Norways biggest (?) ski resort so has the facilities.

7) They have enough hotel rooms and an international airport capable of B767/A330 operations

Tromso would be hugely more expensive ... and what would they do with the facilities are the games? If they are temporary where is the legacy? Ostersund in Sweden has the same problem. What sports teams will use the empty arenas?

The problem with Swiss bids is that any major public expenditure requires a public referendum .. the they have a habit of rejecting these bids. That is why Berne had to withdraw in 2010 because the public voted against it and why Zurich hasn't even bothered.

Munich would be a great choice if the Garmish issues can be resolved, but Trondheim would be a new Olympic contender venue with a clearly defined post games legacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then that's YOUR and their problem then. By our laws, it was an acquittal. :P And if it wasn't for that, the IOC would never have cleaned house then. Duh!! :rolleyes:

U're nuts. U're making things up and totally unfounded conclusions. U need to have your deductive reasoning systems checked out.

That it incredibly naive. The English FA blew the whistle on FIFA corruption. Did they get the World Cup in 2018? No, they were kicked out immediately in the first round as a backlash even though FIFA agreed to clean up their act.

So basically there was a corruption scandal and then under US laws the Salt Lake bid were told they did nothing wrong. So the global movement was embarassed yet nobody found guilty?

All the members of the IOC vote for the games location .... I think you are being a bit naive if you don't think it will have an impact - blowing the whistle and then saying actually we didn't do anything wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...