Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

In order for the US to lose 2024, 2028 and 2032, the IOC would have to deny them 5 consecutive times. I don't see that happening -- especially in the wake of the revenue deal. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

What I'm hearing is that if 2026 is out of the picture, you're projecting the worst case Summer scenario -- 5 consecutive rejections -- which seems highly unlikely. However, if 2026 is in the picture, you're projecting the best case Summer scenario -- the IOC will award the US Summer Games in the 30s -- also highly unlikely.

I don't see it happening either, but that said, you're the only who keeps telling us of this new world order within the IOC and how maybe a city would get selected over a U.S. city to "rankle" the Americans. You keep saying how there's negativity towards the United States (while admitedly, I'm the one who is saying watch the IOC come begging the United States to host an Olympics if the money ever dried up). I still think you're getting a little too caught up in the idea that the United States needs to host a Summer Olympics as soon as they can get one and would be well-served to ignore a higher probability Winter hosting in order to make that happen.

Your two scenarios imagine two radically different IOCs -- one is outright hostile and spiteful towards the US, while the other is extremely generous and warm.

I find both of the above scenarios to be unrealistically polarized. The IOC knows that they need to keep the US happy (meaning American Games of some sort are in the cards sometime in the next few cycles). However, the IOC is not going to treat the US like the darling they were in the 70s, 80s and 90s (meaning American Games will be spaced farther apart).

I think the above is a pretty balanced view. Under the circumstances described above -- if you have to content yourself with one Olympics for several decades, why not go for Summer? Even if it means risking the possibility of waiting an extra 2 to 6 years? If you assume 2024 fails (and it could succeed), the distance between 2026 and 2028 and 2032 is 2-6 years. That's it. Why not be patient and get what you really want?

Again.. who says the Summer Olympics is what the USOC really wants? That's your position, we don't know if it's theirs, yet you keep making it sound like it is and claim there's evidence out there that supports it. Not to mention how you keep saying how you are as unimpressed with the Winter candidates as McKayla was with her silver medal.

And also with the frequent hostings.. be careful where you're trying to create an equivalency between 4 hostings in 22 years and the possibility of 2 within 10 years. The former is not likely to ever come close to happening again. The latter I believe is still well within the realm of possibility, especially if it's the United States, even if it's Winter to Summer. I don't accept like you seem to want to that it's as unlikely to happen as you seem to think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, which is easier to put in place?

1. state-of-the-art 80,000 T&F stadium + 2,800 unit Olympic Village, for starters - at least $1.8 billion (throwing in delays and inflation)

2. temporary 18,000-seat arenas or 2, a new bobsled track, newly groomed slopes, a speedskating arena - at most $270 million?

Uhmmmm...let's see...

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

Quaker, Summer Games are my preference. Evidently they aren't yours. That doesn't mean my preference is too strong. It's a preference.

As for what the USOC wants, I can't say for certain, but here are the indications suggesting they'd prefer Summer Games.

1. SOGs are uniformly acknowledged to be the more prestigious event.

2. The US last hosted WOGs and the last two Games in North America were WOGs.

3. The US last two bids were for SOGs.

4. The US could have bid for 2022, but chose not to.

If the USOC now prefers Winter Games (and I suppose this is possible) there is no evidence yet to support the change of heart. There is evidence to support the opposite view, though I admit it's certainly not conclusive.

It doesn't matter if I equate 4 Games in 22 years with 2 Games in 10 -- our friend George will, and so will a lot of the IOC, I expect. I just don't see any evidence that they would seriously entertain 2 American Games in 10 years. Frankly, I think the whole proposition will sound totally ludicrous to many of them. Is it impossible? No. Is there any reason to think it will happen? I don't see any apart from optimism and obsolete history. Are there good reasons to suspect it won't happen? Yes.

OK, which is easier to put in place?

1. state-of-the-art 80,000 T&T stadium + 2,800 unit Olympic Village, for starters - at least $1.8 billion (throwing in delays and inflation)

2. temporary 18,000-seat arenas or 2, a new bobsled track, newly groomed slopes, a speedskating arena - at most $270 million?

Uhmmmm...let's see...

Is the goal to take the easy way out? Or is the goal to do what's best for the Olympic Movement and Olympic athletes in the US?

If there's a capable city willing to address the stadium issue then "ease" is a moot point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. SOGs are uniformly acknowledged to be the more prestigious event. I don't think the ISU and 10 other winter federations, the Ice Capades, Rossignol, Tylenol, a thousand or two US winter athletes, etc., would quite agree.

2. The US last hosted WOGs and the last two Games in North America were WOGs. And?

3. The US last two bids were for SOGs. Precisely. Maybe it's time to change the tune?

4. The US could have bid for 2022, but chose not to. Uhmmm...the door isn't shut. Haven't you changed your mind sometimes. How many times has the USOC changed its CEO and officers, etc., in short tenures? There's no shame in that. They have NOT inconvenienced anyone nor reneged on a contract with any other party if it changes its mind.

Is the goal to take the easy way out? No; it's being practical, adapting to a changing tune, and seizing the moment since the Summer door seems temporarily shut.

No Top 4 city is willing to come forward with the stadium issue. There's Vegas, Tulsa & Minneapolis if you are just so desperate to bid...and we all know how those would go down in the international arena. And that would be EVEN STUPIDER than letting a Winter opportunity go by.

Who cares if Toronto hosts? I am sure NBC wouldn't complain. Let the Canadians wet themselves grabbing the next NA Summer Games.

if USA takes 2024 olympics

If Durban drops off of the African continental shelf first.

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

As I wrote before, I'm not expecting a parade of new frontiers. I'm expecting a concerted effort to move the Games around the globe. I'm sure hosts will be repeated. I just don't think anyone will host 2 Games 10 years apart.

The point is, the IOC has always had the desire to move the games round the globe and open new frontiers. Nothing has changed. While the IOC was introducting new fonriers, it still managed to have summer/winter games held close together in the same country.

The IOC hasn't changed on their level of committment to new frontiers. There's no evidence they've changed anything, including their willingness to hold summer/winter games in the same country. You can imagine they have. You might be right. Just stop acting like its clear, factual, common sense, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quaker, Summer Games are my preference. Evidently they aren't yours. That doesn't mean my preference is too strong. It's a preference.

I don't have a preference. Your preferences and opinions can be as strong as you want them to be, but they're still YOUR opinions. Where I draw the line is where you say it's the USOC's preference as well because you can spin it to where it seems like they're agreeing with you. That's not evidence, that's more like conjecture. You're like a political candidate who is trying to spin the cirumstances to agree with your side and then call it evidence that what you believe is correct. Let's dig a little deeper..

As for what the USOC wants, I can't say for certain, but here are the indications suggesting they'd prefer Summer Games.

1. SOGs are uniformly acknowledged to be the more prestigious event.

2. The US last hosted WOGs and the last two Games in North America were WOGs.

3. The US last two bids were for SOGs.

4. The US could have bid for 2022, but chose not to.

1 is true, but I don't believe it has to be either/or and I can think of at least 2 countries (Germany and Spain) who have given off indications that they don't think it is either. Not to mention Russia who is already mentioned as a possibile candidate for 2024. So let's once again agree to disagee on that one.

baron covered number 2, and throwing it back to number 1, there's no reason to believe they're not pursuing Summer Games while also looking at Olympic games.

3 is evidence of nothing.. the 2012 bid came 16 years after Atlanta. 16 years after Salt Lake is 2018 and there's also the matter of Vancouver having already hosted. Now that we're talking 2024 and beyond, there's more distance from those Olympics.

And 4.. they could have bid for 2020 and chose not to. So that's more like evidence they're NOT specifically pursuing 1 path.

If the USOC now prefers Winter Games (and I suppose this is possible) there is no evidence yet to support the change of heart. There is evidence to support the opposite view, though I admit it's certainly not conclusive.

Once again, why does it have to be either/or? You keep saying that it is that way, but lack of evidence is not evidence. We don't know what they're thinking. Just because you want it to be a certain way doesn't mean that's what is going on behind the scenes. You need to stop viewing all this through this narrow lens where you want to believe something and think that anything that's happening that agrees with your position qualifies as evidence.

It doesn't matter if I equate 4 Games in 22 years with 2 Games in 10 -- our friend George will, and so will a lot of the IOC, I expect. I just don't see any evidence that they would seriously entertain 2 American Games in 10 years. Frankly, I think the whole proposition will sound totally ludicrous to many of them. Is it impossible? No. Is there any reason to think it will happen? I don't see any apart from optimism and obsolete history. Are there good reasons to suspect it won't happen? Yes.

Again.. you don't see it because you want to frame this whole thing where it's going to pan out the way you way it to. I'll keep saying it.. you can't predict what's going to happen 15-20 years and more down the line. Trends that seem apparent now may not hold going forward. And if you're saying the USOC should shy away from things they shouldn't expect or may not be able to rely on, I think that's a bad course of action. Ask the citizens of Atlanta how that worked out for them. Most Olympic bidding in the first place is taking a chance. Like zeke said.. you may be right, I may be crazy (but it just may be a lunatic you're looking for), but just because you see it all this way does not mean that the rest of us are wrong for seeing it differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. SOGs are uniformly acknowledged to be the more prestigious event. I don't think the ISU and 10 other winter federations, the Ice Capades, Rossignol, Tylenol, a thousand or two US winter athletes, etc., would quite agree.

Of course there are special interests for whom the Winter Games are more important. The Summer Games are larger, attract higher athletes and work with much bigger budgets.

2. The US last hosted WOGs and the last two Games in North America were WOGs. And?

It's time for a change. The US and North America have had plenty of Winter Games, it's time to go back to Summer.

3. The US last two bids were for SOGs. Precisely. Maybe it's time to change the tune?
Neither NYC nor Chicago lost because they were bids for Summer Games. They lost for other reasons, not least among them the revenue deal and bad blood between the USOC and IOC. No US candidate would've won 2014 or 2018 either.
4. The US could have bid for 2022, but chose not to. Uhmmm...the door isn't shut. Haven't you changed your mind sometimes. How many times has the USOC changed its CEO and officers, etc., in short tenures? There's no shame in that. They have NOT inconvenienced anyone nor reneged on a contract with any other party if it changes its mind.
Keep dreaming, Baron. The USOC left no room for doubt. They are looking at 2024 and 2026 -- not 2022.
Is the goal to take the easy way out? No; it's being practical, adapting to a changing tune, and seizing the moment since the Summer door seems temporarily shut.
Who says the door is shut? Do you know the content of the USOC's conversation with potential bid cities? Again, NYC and Chicago lost for reasons that had nothing to do with the fact they were bidding for Summer Games. Their losses are not evidence of closed opportunities to Summer Games. If the USOC comes back and says "Our options were Tulsa or Vegas, so we're going with a winter bid," then I'll accept that the Summer door is temporarily shut.
No Top 4 city is willing to come forward with the stadium issue. There's Vegas, Tulsa & Minneapolis if you are just so desperate to bid...and we all know how those would go down in the international arena. And that would be EVEN STUPIDER than letting a Winter opportunity go by.

You're assuming facts not in evidence again. You are stating hypothesis as fact. I agree that offering Tulsa, Vegas or Minneapolis would be a waste of time -- just like Reno or SLC would be. I might be persuadable about Denver, but that's it.

Who cares if Toronto hosts? I am sure NBC wouldn't complain. Let the Canadians wet themselves grabbing the next NA Summer Games.

Spoken like a true patriot. Sure, Games in Canada can be ok for the US, but not like Games at home. Canada's "Own the Podium" program boosted Canadian athletes and facilities -- not American ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a preference. Your preferences and opinions can be as strong as you want them to be, but they're still YOUR opinions. Where I draw the line is where you say it's the USOC's preference as well because you can spin it to where it seems like they're agreeing with you. That's not evidence, that's more like conjecture. You're like a political candidate who is trying to spin the cirumstances to agree with your side and then call it evidence that what you believe is correct. Let's dig a little deeper.

I specifically said it is possible that the USOC now prefers Winter Games. However, all the evidence currently available points to Summer -- not Winter. I acknowledged that this evidence was not conclusive and I said I have no way of knowing what the USOC is thinking.

1 is true, but I don't believe it has to be either/or and I can think of at least 2 countries (Germany and Spain) who have given off indications that they don't think it is either. Not to mention Russia who is already mentioned as a possibile candidate for 2024. So let's once again agree to disagee on that one.

None of my recent posts address the question of whether the US might bid for both 2024 and 2026. It seems you misread something. I do think a 2024/2026 pair of bids is possible, but I don't believe it is likely. Of course a country can choose to bid for both Summer and Winter Games while holding the belief that Summer Games are the more prestigious option.

baron covered number 2, and throwing it back to number 1, there's no reason to believe they're not pursuing Summer Games while also looking at Olympic games.

Summer Games vs. Olympic Games? There must be a typo there. Once again, why should North America host 3 Winter Games in a row? (something that has never happened before on any continent in Olympic history) Isn't it time for an intervening Summer Games?

3 is evidence of nothing.. the 2012 bid came 16 years after Atlanta. 16 years after Salt Lake is 2018 and there's also the matter of Vancouver having already hosted. Now that we're talking 2024 and beyond, there's more distance from those Olympics.

My third point shows the USOC chose to pursue Summer Games rather than Winter Games. It is absolutely valid evidence. Your point about Salt Lake City being too close, just reinforces my argument about why Summer Games make more sense. Sure a little more time has passed. So what? The most recent American Games were Winter Games. So were the most recent North American Games.

And 4.. they could have bid for 2020 and chose not to. So that's more like evidence they're NOT specifically pursuing 1 path.

No they could not have pursued 2020. There was no revenue deal. After Chicago's disgraceful exit, it was clear that major housecleaning was in order. That says absolutely nothing about Summer vs. Winter. It only speaks to the need to repair USOC/IOC relations. In contrast, there WAS a revenue deal in plenty of time for 2022 and relations are improving. Of course we do not know for certain the USOC's reasons for bypassing 2022, but is still sensible to say that if they were gung ho about Winter Games, ignoring the opportunity to bid doesn't make much sense.

Once again, why does it have to be either/or? You keep saying that it is that way, but lack of evidence is not evidence. We don't know what they're thinking. Just because you want it to be a certain way doesn't mean that's what is going on behind the scenes. You need to stop viewing all this through this narrow lens where you want to believe something and think that anything that's happening that agrees with your position qualifies as evidence. Again.. you don't see it because you want to frame this whole thing where it's going to pan out the way you way it to. I'll keep saying it.. you can't predict what's going to happen 15-20 years and more down the line. Trends that seem apparent now may not hold going forward. And if you're saying the USOC should shy away from things they shouldn't expect or may not be able to rely on, I think that's a bad course of action. Ask the citizens of Atlanta how that worked out for them. Most Olympic bidding in the first place is taking a chance. Like zeke said.. you may be right, I may be crazy (but it just may be a lunatic you're looking for), but just because you see it all this way does not mean that the rest of us are wrong for seeing it differently.

First, there's plenty of evidence. Whether or not it's paid attention to is another matter.

I'm not fabricating extreme scenarios where there USOC foregoes 2026 and is then denied three Summer bids in a row. To me that's the definition of a narrow, distorted lens.

You're right we can't predict what's going to happen in the future, but nor are we totally in the dark. We have rational minds and are able to interpret present data and make reasonable extrapolations. The IOC HAS made more of a priority of staging globally diverse Games. For those who say this is not true, all I can say is that we haven't been reading the same articles for the last ten years. It's not a trend. It's a value system -- and that means it has staying power. The world's attitude towards the USA HAS changed, whether or not most Americans are aware of that, whether or not they want to be aware of it.

I am not constructing a fantasy scenario to support my personal tastes. I believe the above are very real dynamics that will affect future Olympic votes.

I have nothing against Winter Games. I'm looking forward to Sochi. I watch Winter Games religiously and I like them. However, I genuinely believe that if the US hosts Winter Games next, it will postpone American Summer Games so long that the Olympic Movement in the US will be damaged. This isn't some sort of manipulative ploy. This is what I believe.

Others dissent and that's their right, but that doesn't make my argument specious or baseless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irony alert.

Every other line I write is "I think" "In my opinion" "I believe" -- just for you Zeke. Work on your reading comprehension.

if USA takes 2024 olympics i am sure that you will support the idea that must take them in 2036-2040 again, because it wiil be too late again in 2050s

Ok, George. I'll take a stab at your incendiary little provocation.

If the US were fortunate enough to host the 2024 Olympics, I think they would have to wait until 2056 or 2060 at the earliest to host Summer Games again.

Once again, George, READ. It's the others in this thread who think the US can host 2 Games in 10 years -- not me. I'm arguing with them on that point. And yet you still take me to task....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irony alert.

Big time. :D :D

Athens.. it's now twice you've called someone else out for stating their hypotheses as fact when you've pretty much done that yourself.

I specifically said it is possible that the USOC now prefers Winter Games. However, all the evidence currently available points to Summer -- not Winter. I acknowledged that this evidence was not conclusive and I said I have no way of knowing what the USOC is thinking.

Ugh, you really are just like a political candidate here. No.. all the evidence you CHOOSE to present points to Summer because it fits your position. I don't agree that all evidence points to Summer. I don't think we know enough to say what points to anything. Again, what you're offering is more conjecture than it is evidence. There's a big difference.

None of my recent posts address the question of whether the US might bid for both 2024 and 2026. It seems you misread something. I do think a 2024/2026 pair of bids is possible, but I don't believe it is likely. Of course a country can choose to bid for both Summer and Winter Games while holding the belief that Summer Games are the more prestigious option.

Once again, that's your belief. Don't apply that logic and assume that other countries think the same way. Yes, the Summer Games are bigger and more prestigious, but we've seen multiple countries try for Summer and then go after Winter, so what does that say about what they think is more prestigious? Because it's not like Rome and Toronto have given up (aside from what the world economy did to Rome 2020). Those countries did exactly what you're saying the United States shouldn't do.

Summer Games vs. Olympic Games? There must be a typo there. Once again, why should North America host 3 Winter Games in a row? (something that has never happened before on any continent in Olympic history) Isn't it time for an intervening Summer Games?

Why not? And what happened to obsolete history? Sure it's time for an intervening Summer Games, in theory. But if you have greater confidence in landing a Winter Games, why shove that idea completely aside to focus on Summer?

My third point shows the USOC chose to pursue Summer Games rather than Winter Games. It is absolutely valid evidence. Your point about Salt Lake City being too close, just reinforces my argument about why Summer Games make more sense. Sure a little more time has passed. So what? The most recent American Games were Winter Games. So were the most recent North American Games.

Yes.. CHOSE. Past tense. Then they decided to back off from bidding for Summer to re-evaluate their strategy. Now they're looking at 2024 and 2026. We can debate until we're blue in the face which is more likely, but especially if we're talkng the future, the very simple truth is that we don't what they are going to choose going forward.

No they could not have pursued 2020. There was no revenue deal. After Chicago's disgraceful exit, it was clear that major housecleaning was in order. That says absolutely nothing about Summer vs. Winter. It only speaks to the need to repair USOC/IOC relations. In contrast, there WAS a revenue deal in plenty of time for 2022 and relations are improving. Of course we do not know for certain the USOC's reasons for bypassing 2022, but is still sensible to say that if they were gung ho about Winter Games, ignoring the opportunity to bid doesn't make much sense.

Let's not re-hash this old argument again. It was a smart move to not go after 2020 for a variety of reasons. But they could have fast-tracked the revenue deal if they wanted to bid, even though that probably would have been a bad move. That they didn't bid in 2022, yes, shows they're not gung ho about Winter Games. But that doesn't imply a preference for Summer either. All we know so far says that they don't have a clear preference for 1 or the other going forward.

I'm not fabricating extreme scenarios where there USOC foregoes 2026 and is then denied three Summer bids in a row. To me that's the definition of a narrow, distorted lens.

Just offering up a possibility, even if it's unlikely.

You're right we can't predict what's going to happen in the future, but nor are we totally in the dark. We have rational minds and are able to interpret present data and make reasonable extrapolations. The IOC HAS made more of a priority of staging globally diverse Games. For those who say this is not true, all I can say is that we haven't been reading the same articles for the last ten years. It's not a trend. It's a value system -- and that means it has staying power. The world's attitude towards the USA HAS changed, whether or not most Americans are aware of that, whether or not they want to be aware of it.

History doesn't always predict the future. Right now the "new frontier" concept seems attractive because we saw Rio win and we've seen Winter Olympics in 2 locations they've never been before and Istanbul is on the horizon, and South Africa is lurking in the shadows. But that doesn't mean it's going to stay that way. And just like world views on the United States, that's true now, but we don't know it will be that way 5 or 7 or 10 years from now when these votes start coming into play.

I have nothing against Winter Games. I'm looking forward to Sochi. I watch Winter Games religiously and I like them. However, I genuinely believe that if the US hosts Winter Games next, it will postpone American Summer Games so long that the Olympic Movement in the US will be damaged. This isn't some sort of manipulative ploy. This is what I believe.

Others dissent and that's their right, but that doesn't make my argument specious or baseless.

No it doesn't, and if your preference is for Summer Games and that going for a Winter next would be damaging, I have no problem with that, even though I choose to disagree. Where I (and I believe zeke and baron as well) take some umbrage is when you're trying to argue how this is what the USOC believes and that we don't see eye to eye with you on that. It's why we've had this debate over the past couple of days. It's like you've said so many times before.. we simply don't have enough information to know what's going on and what's going to go on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never passed off my hypothesis as fact. I've said there's a lot of support for my hypothesis -- and there is.

I have no crystal ball and never pretended to have one. I talk about "reasonable extrapolation" -- not certainty. You are choosing to ignore this.

Im not going to write "I think" "I believe" or "in my opinion" before every sentence just because you're looking for something to pounce on. Im not Mt. Sinai and I know it. I do have some good points though.

I haven't even read Quaker's last post yet. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. This circular debate has been going on long enough. I will never convince you of my view -- and it's not my aim to. It's my goal to articulate my perspective clearly and -- for the time-being -- I'm satisfied I've done that.

If the USOC goes for Winter Games, I hope they do so with their eyes wide open to the potential ramifications and I hope they do it with a candidate they believe in.

I also don't think a Summer bid at any cost is the way to go. If I had all the facts the USOC does, I might conclude that no bid at all makes sense for either 2024 or 2026. I hope they consider this option and make a wise choice.

As for this thread, I'm on hiatus. There's enough other stuff going on in my life right now that I don't have the excess energy for it.

Have fun y'all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just sayin, Athens. Just sayin.

Somebody really insists on the "I think", "I believe", "In my opinion before every single sentence. Look at the totality of my posts. Look at the spirit in which they are written.

Quaker, I think you are more interested in argument for the sake of argument than the topic of conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody really insists on the "I think", "I believe", "In my opinion before every single sentence. Look at the totality of my posts. Look at the spirit in which they are written.

Quaker, I think you are more interested in argument for the sake of argument than the topic of conversation.

Not at all. It's just that sometimes the spirit of your posts reads like "how can you see this differently than I do." It's not being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. I think you just get caught up in your own preferences that you convince yourself it's what is actually going on in reality. Not that you're the only person who does that here, but still. I know how much you'd love for the USOC to choose the path you want them to follow, but I don't see that the so-called "evidence" indicates that's what we're going to see.

I think we've both exhausted ourselves on this one. Not to call both of ourselves out for a useless argument, but that original statement I think is what triggered this whole discussion. The truth is, we don't know. We don't know when we're going to know. We don't know IF we're going to know until after we know it. That's the only thing anyone here needs to accept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://web.archive.org/web/20070701035234/http://deseretnews.com/oly/view/0,3949,35000108,00.html

xdkblue.gif

Samaranch reflects on bid scandal with regret

Deseret News Archives - May 19, 2001

LAUSANNE, Switzerland—IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch said Friday he will come to Utah for the 2002 Winter Games, even though he called the Salt Lake bid scandal one of the worst moments of his 21-year tenure.

Samaranch spoke about his presidency for more than a half-hour with a small group of reporters from American, French, Japanese and British newspapers and press agencies, including the Deseret News.

"I will be very pleased to be in Salt Lake," the 80-year-old Spaniard told the group seated around a table in a private office atop the Olympic Museum on the shores of Lake Geneva.

Samaranch expects to be named an honorary president after he steps down at the IOC session in Moscow this July. His role at the Salt Lake Games will be to sit beside his replacement at the opening and closing ceremonies in Rice-Eccles Stadium.

He stopped short of saying he regretted the IOC's 1995 decision to give the Games to Salt Lake City in light of the bribery allegations that surfaced three years later and have led to federal criminal charges against two former bid leaders.

"I cannot go so far. What I regret, really regret, is what happened in Salt Lake City," Samaranch said. Next to the Soviet Union's boycott of the 1984 Summer Games in Los Angeles, he said the "months and weeks we suffered during the Salt Lake City problem" were the worst of his presidency.

He blamed the scandal on visits made by IOC members. Such visits to cities bidding to host an Olympic Games were banned under the reforms adopted by the IOC in 1999.

"Without visits, there would be no scandal," Samaranch said. But one of the five candidates vying to replace him, Un Yong Kim, is calling for the visits to be reinstated.

Kim, whose son faces felony charges in connection with a job arranged for him by Salt Lake bidders, wants the IOC to pay for members and their spouses to travel to bidding cities.

Previously, bid cities paid for such visits.

"I am sad," Samaranch said when asked about the proposal to reinstate the visits. "Only maybe 50 percent of the members were visiting the bidding cities with their wives, with their children. . . . It was a disaster, because many of them, they did not have technical expertise."

When IOC members choose from among the five cities competing for the 2008 Summer Games in Moscow, they will have to rely on the work of an evaluation commission made up of such experts.

Samaranch said he doesn't believe there's enough support among IOC members to lift the prohibition against bid-city visits. "I don't think the great majority of the members are for the visits," he said, suggesting the idea of reinstating them could be little more than a campaign promise.

"You know what happens with an election. . . . You are promising many things. Remember in Spain, that one candidate went to a city, he was delivering a speech and said, 'If I win you will have bridge.' The people said, 'Well, we will have a bridge but we have not a river.' "

The IOC, he said, did react quickly to allegations that members had accepted more than $1 million in cash, gifts, trips and scholarships from Salt Lake bidders. Ten IOC members were forced to resign or were expelled, and another 10 were sanctioned by their peers.

"After more than two years, nothing new, nothing new has come to light. Maybe we work very quick, but maybe the others work very slow," Samaranch said, an apparent reference to the U.S. Department of Justice investigation.

The trial of former bid leaders Tom Welch and Dave Johnson on charges of fraud, conspiracy and racketeering is scheduled to begin July 16. It happens to be the same day the IOC will choose a new president in Moscow.

The full membership of the IOC is scheduled to meet in Salt Lake City before the Games begin on Feb. 8. However, some members have already said they don't want to come, in part because they fear being swept up in the aftermath of the federal case.

Samaranch, though, said he expects at least 125 of what will then be 130 members to attend the session and the opening ceremonies of the 2002 Winter Games. After that, though, nearly half could head home, something he said, "is normal in the Winter Games."

During the scandal, Samaranch told a French newspaper that he no longer enjoyed coming to work at the nearby lakefront chateau that serves as IOC headquarters. Instead, he said then, he preferred leaving his office.

These days, he said, "I am happy to open the door. But every time I open the door, I am thinking that is nearly the last time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only problem is George, if there is a BRIBE, there must be a taker. So the IOC members who received, were also thieves. And the 2 Salt Lake City guys WERE NOT proven guilty by the US Justice Department. The charges were thrown out by a federal judge.

So.... another wasted effort from you. And frankly, George, NOBODY cares except very negative, envious people like you.

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...