Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ker-NO-boy,

U KNOW nothing! How da f*ck do u know what will happen in 2015 or 2019?

Or the Norwegian royal family? Yeah, there was only a 42-year gap between Oslo and Lillehammer? Whereas it was only 12 years between LA 1984 and Atlanta 1996; 6 years between Atlanta and Salt Lake. Tell u what...they SECRETLY LIKE COMMERCIAL -- their wives do!!

Royal influences? :lol::lol: Try the Bourbons of Spain. How influential were they in pushing Madrid over London or over Rio, or taking World Cup 2018? NADA. ZIPPO!! At least the US 2022 WC bid got 8 VOTES...something which the UK, Oz or Spain-Portugal didn't even COME CLOSE TO!! As a matter of fact, I think a certain country even sent their Crown Prince and like its far-away colony, only got ONE VOTE each!?! Fancy that.

What that old Falangist Samaranch said were the ravings of an old, demented fool. Then u must think Sepp Blatter is one of the sages of our age.

That's why they gave the JUNIOR YOGs to Lillehammer because the Senior WOGs are for the BIG BOYS, not the juniors like Norway. Call the Royal Famil...boo-hoo.

I don't see why Mackay cannot be expanded. My contacts within the Reno group have said they will use temporary indoor venues...they may even rent YOUR 2012 basketball arena or something like that if it is not cost-effective to lease that one in particular. Do you really think PyeongChang and Gangneun are picturesque cities? Salt Lake is a CLEAN but BORING TOWN.

Baron, don't let the facts get in the way of your bile.

1) It was widely known that Atlanta was poorly received and highlighted as an example of how not to organise a games

2) Lillehammer won the WYOG because they were the only bidder, which saved the IOCs bacon and which will be a browny point. Even though the IOC asked Lake Placid to bid, the USOC refused.

As Harbin also bid in 2012, along with Innsbruck who won and now Lake Placid are looking to bid for 2020 does this make China and the USA juniors too?

To describe Lillehammer as 'juniors' merely reinforces the arrogant stereotype which wins the USA so few friends these days.

3) Your desperation of argument now extends to two different organisations IOC and FIFA and the way they chose hosts. The IOC vote with about 95 delegates, FIFA 22, and they vote in blocs. The USA representative didn't even vote for the USA 2022 bid. The British at least blew the lid on the corrupt practises before the vote which has now led to widescale reform of the voting practises. The bribes Salt Lake City made were uncovered 3 years afer the bid - you had to be caught with your hands in the till.

4) the RH Princess Anne as a former IOC member clearly helped the London bid overcome both Madrid (hindered by 1992) and Paris where it was the arrogance of Chirac that lost them the bid late in the day - a lesson for you there

5) It will now be at least 28 years between 1996 and whenever the USA bids and at least 20years between Salt Lake City and the next possible games. As a country 60x the size of Norway, that's pretty poor.

6) The USA weren't even bidding against the English or Spanish bid so how can you compare votes for two different competitions. It was a fact the Oz were going to struggle because their stadia aren't suited to football.

The USA sent the most powerful man on the planet to secure 2016 and he ended up with egg on his face and a temper tandrum from the USOC. Whilst in 2012, NYC also barely avoided not being rejected in the first round,.

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

Baron, don't let the facts get in the way of your bile.

1) It was widely known that Atlanta was poorly received and highlighted as an example of how not to organise a games

2) Lillehammer won the WYOG because they were the only bidder, which saved the IOCs bacon and which will be a browny point. Even though the IOC asked Lake Placid to bid, the USOC refused.

As Harbin also bid in 2012, along with Innsbruck who won and now Lake Placid are looking to bid for 2020 does this make China and the USA juniors too?

To describe Lillehammer as 'juniors' merely reinforces the arrogant stereotype which wins the USA so few friends these days.

3) Your desperation of argument now extends to two different organisations IOC and FIFA and the way they chose hosts. The IOC vote with about 95 delegates, FIFA 22, and they vote in blocs. The USA representative didn't even vote for the USA 2022 bid. The British at least blew the lid on the corrupt practises before the vote which has now led to widescale reform of the voting practises. The bribes Salt Lake City made were uncovered 3 years afer the bid - you had to be caught with your hands in the till.

4) the RH Princess Anne as a former IOC member clearly helped the London bid overcome both Madrid (hindered by 1992) and Paris where it was the arrogance of Chirac that lost them the bid late in the day - a lesson for you there

5) It will now be at least 28 years between 1996 and whenever the USA bids and at least 20years between Salt Lake City and the next possible games. As a country 60x the size of Norway, that's pretty poor.

6) The USA weren't even bidding against the English or Spanish bid so how can you compare votes for two different competitions. It was a fact the Oz were going to struggle because their stadia aren't suited to football.

The USA sent the most powerful man on the planet to secure 2016 and he ended up with egg on his face and a temper tandrum from the USOC. Whilst in 2012, NYC also barely avoided not being rejected in the first round,.

Such BALONEY! Not even going to waste my time addressing TWISTED and crooked arguments.

U know what? We'll take home most of the gold anyway--regardless of where they hold it. :P: :lol:

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

Doable yes, but in many ways the USOC need to stick with the same venue rather than chop and change bidders every single games.

No, no, no. The evidence simply does not support that repeat bidding by the same city yields results. This is and remains a myth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are currently proposals to, and a huge amount of debate about whether they should - they'd need to find several hundred metres though which is a huge ask

Well either way, my point is that Finland is a strong winter sports nation that doesn't have a hope of hosting the Games at the moment due to its current lack of mountains. And it would be a shame if the Winter Olympics are deemed to have outgrown somewhere like Ă–stersund which does have the natural features necessary for hosting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the RH Princess Anne as a former IOC member clearly helped the London bid overcome both Madrid (hindered by 1992) and Paris where it was the arrogance of Chirac that lost them the bid late in the day - a lesson for you there

Strange that. Two years ago I was listening to Sebastian Coe telling us that it was Tony Blair with his night-before-the-vote hotel room visits that won it for Chicago, and that HRH Anne was simply a passenger. But, you must be right, after all, what does Seb Coe know about the London 2012 bid?

Whilst in 2012, NYC also barely avoided not being rejected in the first round,.

Say what? I think my head just exploded. So, NYC "AVOIDED" "NOT" being rejected in the first round? Are you thus saying they were rejected in the first round??

Tony Blair with his night-before-the-vote hotel room visits that won it for Chicago

Read "London", since I have no idea how to edit on this board...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange that. Two years ago I was listening to Sebastian Coe telling us that it was Tony Blair with his night-before-the-vote hotel room visits that won it for Chicago, and that HRH Anne was simply a passenger. But, you must be right, after all, what does Seb Coe know about the London 2012 bid?

Say what? I think my head just exploded. So, NYC "AVOIDED" "NOT" being rejected in the first round? Are you thus saying they were rejected in the first round??

Read "London", since I have no idea how to edit on this board...

Clearly Blair helped at the last moment, when Chirac expressing his opinion on Finnish food, but the HRH clearly helped us into the race even though our technical bid was poorer than both Paris and Madrid.

In 2012, NYC came a poor fourth only just managing to beat a very average Moscow.

I know what you mean about editing.

Whilst some cities bid and bid and never succeed like Ostersund, that is often because there are challenges they often will never overcome. If Reno bid and failed in 2022, then they should IMO be the automatic US candidate in 2026. The chance to take feedback and make changes to an existing bid are much easier for the IOC to measure than to wipe the slate clean and start over somewhere else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doable yes, but in many ways the USOC need to stick with the same venue rather than chop and change bidders every single games.

They've only done that with their summer bids. Their past winter bids have been a lot more focused. Back in the 80s when they nominated a city to bid for the 1992 Olympics, they chose Anchorage and pretty much promised to keep bidding with them until they won. After the 1994 bidding, it was decided to make a change and Salt Lake City went up with the promise that they get a crack for at least the 1998 and 2002 Olympics. So if the USOC is committed to a 2022 bid, chances are Reno or Denver gets a package deal where if they lose in 2022, they automatically get nominated (if they're still interested) for 2026.

And to Canis's point.. let's not assume that Rio and PC's repeat bids have become precedent just because Rogge and the IOC encourage bidders to bid. Australia won with Sydney after putting Brisbane and Melbourne up in the previous 2 cycles. London won on their first try after Manchester and Birmingham had both run. Sochi, for all intents and purposes, wasn't a repeat bidder and they were going up against 2 repeat bids from 2010. Yes, the USOC should probably pick a city and stick to them, but it needs to be the right city. Pushing the same bid multiple times, if it's not what the IOC is looking for, isn't necessarily going to produce a winner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no, no. The evidence simply does not support that repeat bidding by the same city yields results. This is and remains a myth.

I agree in principal. However, I still think it is important to build momentum. Other countries can bid with a variety of cities and because of the size of the country and the strength of the NOC, there is still some momentum. Because the US is so large, because each city and state has so much autonomy and such an individual personality, because the USOC has not really been able to rally the troops behind a unifying vision, American bids tend to feel like one-offs that are disconnected from each other. I'm not saying the solution is a single repeat bidder, but something needs to happen to build momentum. A repeat bidder is one possible way to try to do that.

Kernowboy-- on the whole I agree with your points, but saying that the US not hosting for 20 years after Salt Lake is "pretty poor" makes no sense to me. The US has hosted more Games than any other nation an that record isn't likely to be eclipsed this century. On Rio's map we're the Olympic-hogging bad guys and then you say we should feel ashamed because of a 20 year gap? The IOC is committed to global Games. Thanks in large part to the contributions of US technology and culture we now have a global economy that enables more countries to host. This is not a source of shame for the US. I do agree with most of your points, but I must take issue with this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Reno bid and failed in 2022, then they should IMO be the automatic US candidate in 2026. The chance to take feedback and make changes to an existing bid are much easier for the IOC to measure than to wipe the slate clean and start over somewhere else.

Sounds like the perfect plan to me!! We need one more Euro candidate for 2022 aside from Munich and Oslo. Sofia? Toulouse? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In defence of Reno.

If they are moving away from their casio, gambling driven economy and can actually suggest the range of developments proposed in 2015 (if they are USOCs candidate) then they could offer up a challenge though I think it could be a preliminary bid prior to 2026.

There is clearly Squaw Valley - the only time there was no bobsleigh at the games in 1960 - whose hill could be updated and provides for the alpine events

Doable yes, but in many ways the USOC need to stick with the same venue rather than chop and change bidders every single games.

A few facts and opinions...

1.No need to "move away" from a thriving industry, don't even understand this comment.

2.Squaw could hold every alpine event but jumping and bobsled with it's eves closed on a bad day, and so could 5 or 6 other resorts around the lake. Squaw now combined with Alpine Meadows is the larges resort in North America. Not that Squaw will or should be the primary Alpine venue, but lets just say it might be a nice touch. I'd love to see snowboarding and freestyle events at Sierra-at-Tahoe, though you Euros might be more at home at Heavenly (lots of smokers in the lift queue due to North Shore casinos).

3. Same old bidders can be boring for us because there are so many options, not against it but no rules are needed here, we have no limits despite what you hear or tell yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meant "South Shore" casinos. Which by the way are not bad and are large, I could see a lot of people having a fantastic time during the games by staying up in this area, there are endless things to do all around the lake in winter. It's totally fun a night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.K. switched cities around when they were bidding. Then took a 12-year break to bid again with London for 2012. Australia switched cities around, too, when they were bidding until the were successful with Sydney 2000. So I don't why saying the USOC threw a "tamper tantrum" has anything to do with anything. Would you say France also threw a temper-tantrum by not joining the 2016 & 2020 races, too.

Did it ever occur to you that it was the CITIES & NOT the USOC that weren't interested in pursuing 2020? Like you said, after sending the most powerful man on the planet to secure the Games, with a much better technical bid than the 2012 one, & the U.S. 2016 delegation still walked away with "egg on their face". Again, like you said; since the U.S. is so "loved" in the world by countries such as Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, etc, do you honestly think that the 2016 dismal showing did anything to encourage any U.S. cities to just throw away another $80 million dollars on an Olympic bid on the off-chance that the world that loves us so much might be much more receptive to us only 4-years later? Give me a fricken break. Your rhetoric is so contradicting it's not even funny.

And besides, this thread is about 2022, which the USOC has not said anything about whether they will, or they won't. And like Quaker said, the USOC has been much more keen to do repeat winter bids in the past than they have summer bids. And that's mainly moreso because "it's take two" to get things going. If cities are not interested, you can't force them. It's outta the USOC's hands. And also taking time out & trying to gauge the situation before you make your next move shouldn't be viewed nagatively, either. It only makes sense to try & see where things went wrong before you make another full-pledged effort & throw away another butt-load of cash down the toilet bowl.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.K. switched cities around when they were bidding. Then took a 12-year break to bid again with London for 2012. Australia switched cities around, too, when they were bidding until the were successful with Sydney 2000. So I don't why saying the USOC threw a "tamper tantrum" has anything to do with anything. Would you say France also threw a temper-tantrum by not joining the 2016 & 2020 races, too.

Did it ever occur to you that it was the CITIES & NOT the USOC that weren't interested in pursuing 2020? Like you said, after sending the most powerful man on the planet to secure the Games, with a much better technical bid than the 2012 one, & the U.S. 2016 delegation still walked away with "egg on their face". Again, like you said; since the U.S. is so "loved" in the world by countries such as Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, etc, do you honestly think that the 2016 dismal showing did anything to encourage any U.S. cities to just throw away another $80 million dollars on an Olympic bid on the off-chance that the world that loves us so much might be much more receptive to us only 4-years later? Give me a fricken break. Your rhetoric is so contradicting it's not even funny.

And besides, this thread is about 2022, which the USOC has not said anything about whether they will, or they won't. And like Quaker said, the USOC has been much more keen to do repeat winter bids in the past than they have summer bids. And that's mainly moreso because "it's take two" to get things going. If cities are not interested, you can't force them. It's outta the USOC's hands. And also taking time out & trying to gauge the situation before you make your next move shouldn't be viewed nagatively, either. It only makes sense to try & see where things went wrong before you make another full-pledged effort & throw away another butt-load of cash down the toilet bowl.

The UK were told in no uncertain terms that there was no way unless they bid with London. We bid in 1992 with Birmingham and 1996 and 2000 with Manchester. Realising that with continenal rotation, that we would not likely beat Athens in 2004, we won the first time we had a reasonable chance as 2008 was not possible.

Paris having failed in 1992, 2008 and 2012. Unlikely to succeed in 2016, I am surprised they chose not to go in 2020 though suspect they believe 2024 (100yrs anniversary) is the better bet.

There were multiple cities who said they were interested in 2020 - various cities expressed an interest but the USOC said the USA would not bid

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=oly&id=6884167

Many IOC members have said the United States receives an inordinate share of revenue. The United States receives 20 percent of global sponsorship money and 12.75 percent of television money, an arrangement that will be renegotiated in 2013.

"Any U.S. bid city will be in a difficult place until the USOC works out a new relationship with the IOC in terms of the revenue cut the U.S. gets," said Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports.

I think if the USA had bid for 2020, you'd likely have won.

It was Baron-Pierre IV who decided to insult every non-US bidder and all I am doing is simply stating and providing evidence that the IOC don't vote for contenders because their wives like shopping

Link to post
Share on other sites

There were multiple cities who said they were interested in 2020 - various cities expressed an interest but the USOC said the USA would not bid

This has been discussed here before to death. At no time did the cities of New York, Chicago or Dallas say that they "officially" wanted to bid for 2020. Articles that say as such are/were twisting it around.

In Dallas, it was mainly business tycoons that were spurring the talk, but nothing official from City Hall. Same with New York & Chicago. Seriously, I'd like to see other news pieces/sources where *city officials* said that they were "interested" in bidding & not just plaining printing that they "expressed interest". And besides, "expressing interest" does NOT constitute into a bid. It takes much, much more than "expressing interest" to get an Olympic bid to get going.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed here before to death. At no time did the cities of New York, Chicago or Dallas say that they "officially" wanted to bid for 2020. Articles that say as such are/were twisting it around.

In Dallas, it was mainly business tycoons that were spurring the talk, but nothing official from City Hall. Same with New York & Chicago. Seriously, I'd like to see other news pieces/sources where *city officials* said that they were "interested" in bidding & not just plaining printing that they "expressed interest". And besides, "expressing interest" does NOT constitute into a bid. It takes much, much more than "expressing interest" to get an Olympic bid to get going.

And if the USOC are saying that they won't support any bid, what is the point in any city doing any more than expressing interest?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the USOC are saying that they won't support any bid, what is the point in any city doing any more than expressing interest?

Ultimately, the USOC is the gatekeeper. They'll decide when it might seem favorable to bid. Of course, cities have to express interest--as certain quarters in Las Vegas, Tulsa and Dallas seem to have done so. Doesn't mean the USOC will bite..nor think those are the right settings anyway.

On the reverse, the prospective cities of remarkable, resilient, refreshing Reno-Tahoe and dismal, dreary, deadweight Denver are content to wait and be ready when the USOC feels it's time to put in a Winter bid and calls upon them.

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

And if the USOC are saying that they won't support any bid, what is the point in any city doing any more than expressing interest?

Well, the USOC saying that they are not supporting any city didn't stop the delusional wannbes like Tulsa & Vegas from trying to do it on their own. The USOC also submitting the WADA papers (but yet leaving the city name part blank) suggests to me that they at least wanted to keep their options open. Perhaps waiting 'til the very last minute if someone (worthwhile) would throw their hat in the ring.

I think that they were banking on Los Angeles that they would give it a go. The USOC saying previously that they weren't bidding was obviosuly more of a reality check since they knew full well, that after 2 consecutive Summer bids, from 2 out of the top 3 cities in the country, that these cities weren't gonna be so keen to do it all over again so soon when the "egg on the face" was still ever so fresh & present.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the USOC are saying that they won't support any bid, what is the point in any city doing any more than expressing interest?

The USOC never said they wouldn't support a bid, they simply didn't find a bid they wanted to support (in part evidenced by the lack of a domestic process). Just because the USOC was looking for a city to bid with and there were cities interested in bidding does not guarantee those 2 things were going to come together. That plus the USOC/IOC relations over the revenue deal, the losses in 2012 and 2016 made it less than desirable to bid. But again, don't confuse that with a lack of interest or conviction. Could the United States have been in position to win 2020? I doubt it. Previous Olympics in South America, the revenue agreement still not finalized, and simply a lack of a viable bid city made it unlikely. The United States is not obligated to bid even when Jacques Rogge says he wants them to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well either way, my point is that Finland is a strong winter sports nation that doesn't have a hope of hosting the Games at the moment due to its current lack of mountains. And it would be a shame if the Winter Olympics are deemed to have outgrown somewhere like Ă–stersund which does have the natural features necessary for hosting.

Right getting back to the Winter Olympics theme, this gets worse.

Glasgow could in theory hold a Winter Olympics game.

The Commonwealth Games demonstrates there are a number of indoor facilities that could host events:

The SECC Hall4 has a capacity of 12,500 seats for indoor events.

The Scottish Hydro Arena is inclose proximity and holds 12,000

The Clyde Auditorium can hold up to 3,000 people

The Braehead Arena holds 4,000 people for Ice Hockey

and the National Indoor Sports Arena holds 5,000.

But what about the mountains?

Well ( and this was a surprise to me ), the biggest vertical drop in Scotland is apparently the Glencoe Ski Centre at 803m. The mountain isn't high but it is also low at Sea Level. A little further along is the Nevis Range ski resort at 543m vertical drop.

Yes, there would need to be further investment in a speed skating rink, a bobsleigh run - which might have support as sliding events are an area that Team GB have success in - and of course ski jumping facilities.

But if you've ever been to Scotland in winter, or spring, there is certainly the snow.

And these centres are less than 80miles from Glasgow

It really is sad when natural geography precludes traditional winter sports countries from effectively bidding

NB* I'm not sure if would be possible to build a sufficiently challenging downhall course

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right getting back to the Winter Olympics theme, this gets worse.

Glasgow could in theory hold a Winter Olympics game.

The Commonwealth Games demonstrates there are a number of indoor facilities that could host events:

The SECC Hall4 has a capacity of 12,500 seats for indoor events.

The Scottish Hydro Arena is inclose proximity and holds 12,000

The Clyde Auditorium can hold up to 3,000 people

The Braehead Arena holds 4,000 people for Ice Hockey

and the National Indoor Sports Arena holds 5,000.

But what about the mountains?

Well ( and this was a surprise to me ), the biggest vertical drop in Scotland is apparently the Glencoe Ski Centre at 803m. The mountain isn't high but it is also low at Sea Level. A little further along is the Nevis Range ski resort at 543m vertical drop.

Yes, there would need to be further investment in a speed skating rink, a bobsleigh run - which might have support as sliding events are an area that Team GB have success in - and of course ski jumping facilities.

But if you've ever been to Scotland in winter, or spring, there is certainly the snow.

And these centres are less than 80miles from Glasgow

It really is sad when natural geography precludes traditional winter sports countries from effectively bidding

NB* I'm not sure if would be possible to build a sufficiently challenging downhall course

Interesting! Can you send me link on the 803 drop place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the USOC are saying that they won't support any bid, what is the point in any city doing any more than expressing interest?

EXACTLY. THANK YOU!!

Until the USOC officially opened the door to 2020, nobody was going to do anything more than express interest.

FYI's theories may be exactly right. There are a host of reasons that may have contributed to the fact that the US isn't bidding.

However, the only reason that has been publicized is the fact that a revenue deal still hasn't been reached. That alone is a valid reason to table all conversation of bidding. Who knows? It may even have an impact on 2022. There's still no deal....

Kernow, much as I would love to see Summer Games in the US, I don't think that it probably would have happened for 2020 anyway. I do have to part company with you there. It's true that if you're not in it, you can't win it, but I think the odds are better for 2024 or 2028.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right getting back to the Winter Olympics theme, this gets worse.

Glasgow could in theory hold a Winter Olympics game.

The Commonwealth Games demonstrates there are a number of indoor facilities that could host events:

The SECC Hall4 has a capacity of 12,500 seats for indoor events.

The Scottish Hydro Arena is inclose proximity and holds 12,000

The Clyde Auditorium can hold up to 3,000 people

The Braehead Arena holds 4,000 people for Ice Hockey

and the National Indoor Sports Arena holds 5,000.

But what about the mountains?

Well ( and this was a surprise to me ), the biggest vertical drop in Scotland is apparently the Glencoe Ski Centre at 803m. The mountain isn't high but it is also low at Sea Level. A little further along is the Nevis Range ski resort at 543m vertical drop.

Yes, there would need to be further investment in a speed skating rink, a bobsleigh run - which might have support as sliding events are an area that Team GB have success in - and of course ski jumping facilities.

But if you've ever been to Scotland in winter, or spring, there is certainly the snow.

And these centres are less than 80miles from Glasgow

It really is sad when natural geography precludes traditional winter sports countries from effectively bidding

NB* I'm not sure if would be possible to build a sufficiently challenging downhall course

I'm a bit lost. I don't know if you are being facetious or not... Finland has perfect winter sports conditions, the only issue is a downhill course which may or may not be addressed with an ambitious project. It has a strong winter sports background and a population active in many winter sports and knowledgeable and enthusiastic about many others. You can hardly compare Helsinki with Glasgow in this regard.

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...