Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, alphamale86 said:

The question is more about the downline actions. If this gets drawn out longer than it needs to then it can become an issue to consider a year later. Just today they discussed the possibility that Brazil might want Lochte extradited back to Brazil. What if the US says no? Brazil has 2 of the US swimmers in custody how does that affect decisions if there becomes a tug of war on the issue. The political implications of extradition may linger longer than the simple action of urinating on a public wall.  

They can't extradite him on what is considered a misdemeanor crime (lying to the police) in Brazil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alphamale86 said:

True but what happens to the three who are still in Brazil?

They rot in jail until Trump gets elected and he sends in Seal Team 6 to rescue them. Either that, or they sit around in luxury hotels for a week while the RIO officials dicker around, the give one heck of an apology, then they and get told don't come back. 

Meanwhile, Lochte sits around with his playmate girlfriend and tripes to come up with the follow up to "jeah". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing serious is going to happen to them. If anything the worst that will happen is they get a lifetime ban from entering Brazil. They're not going to make this into an international incident other than making the swimmers involved and the US team look bad.

And I'm with Jesse on this I never liked Lochte, with his douchebaggy attitude, that whole stupid grill crap, his interest in being an attention whore every chance he gets. Dude's a mess and I hope that he loses all sponsorships from this from here on out. He should be left penniless for this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alphamale86 said:

The question is more about the downline actions. If this gets drawn out longer than it needs to then it can become an issue to consider a year later. Just today they discussed the possibility that Brazil might want Lochte extradited back to Brazil. What if the US says no? Brazil has 2 of the US swimmers in custody how does that affect decisions if there becomes a tug of war on the issue. The political implications of extradition may linger longer than the simple action of urinating on a public wall.  

I love that we're talking about extradition and political implications here as if the guy is wanted for murder.  This was not a major felony here.  But the eyes of the world are on Brazil and he's a prominent athlete, so of course right now it's a big story.  Come Monday, the world's media is going to start leaving Brazil and we will all cease to treat this like a major international incident.  There's not going to be long-term effects from this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

I love that we're talking about extradition and political implications here as if the guy is wanted for murder.  This was not a major felony here.  But the eyes of the world are on Brazil and he's a prominent athlete, so of course right now it's a big story.  Come Monday, the world's media is going to start leaving Brazil and we will all cease to treat this like a major international incident.  There's not going to be long-term effects from this.

A simple "I don't think so because of xyz" would have sufficed Quaker it's discussion board getting all riled up with sarcasm isn't really warrented when you come on a board to discuss different opinions. After sifting through all of your extra noise I understand your point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regards to terrorism as I brought it up.

Terrorism, mass shootings, etc. is a problem both cities have and I think it will factor into the thinking of IOC members. The question is whether or not France's could hurt Paris more than the crime in the US. Will they help France? What are your thoughts?

I personally think that depending on how LA brands itself in 2017, the terrorist attacks could make France seem like to risky of a nation than the US. Especially if the US effectively puts on a strong face of stability and security over the next year. But this opinion is based on many variables that may or may not happen and I by no means think this is what will definitively happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, alphamale86 said:

A simple "I don't think so because of xyz" would have sufficed Quaker it's discussion board getting all riled up with sarcasm isn't really warrented when you come on a board to discuss different opinions. After sifting through all of your extra noise I understand your point

So in other words.. 97b240534d014b3cd14cb60dcbd8823d5f0b0024

Again, it is the nature of this forum to view a race as if the vote was tomorrow.  Obviously that's not the case.  What's important now is not going to be so important a year from now, particularly a story that's going to be forgotten about by next week.  You're talking about down the line actions and political implications.  Do you honestly believe this is going to have any sort of long-term effects on the United States, their relations with Brazil or the IOC, or anyone beyond the 4 guys involved in the story?  You're entitled to your opinion, but it sounds like given some time to think it over you realize that now maybe it didn't make so much sense in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RuFF said:

Quaker doesn't discuss the topics. Instead he feeds his own ego and becomes personal and discusses you instead of what you're talking about. 

You know it's funny.. I said to myself earlier I wonder if RuFF would read my reply to him if I opened it with a response to you being a dick.  I guess the answer is no.  Maybe I still sound too much like your wife and therefore you want nothing to do with having a discussion.

If you weren't such a giant fucktard, you would realize the the 1 and only person who replied to your "if anybody cares to seriously discuss" post earlier was me.  But no, tell everyone how I'm the one who doesn't discuss topics instead of what you want to talk about.  Amazing how you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of.  Who's projecting now, as you like to say.  

Here was my reply earlier that you apparently decided to ignore.  If you actually want to reply and have a serious discussion, have at it..

15 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

LA still has elements they need to build as well.  They need the temporary overlay for the Coliseum to host track and field.  They have their temporary set-up for their swimming venue that may or may not serious compromise the existing structure it's being built over.  These are not inexpensive projects, and being temporary, they offer very little legacy.  And in reference to Tokyo, it raises the question of whether or not costs can be controlled rather than spiraling out of control like they seem to do for almost every Olympics.  LA has their budget and a number they're expected to spend.  But what happens if that number starts to trend upward?  LA is not going to be immune to that simply because they use a lot of existing infrastructure.  There may be less risk with an LA bid, but there's also a lot of temporary building that will be expensive and has little chance of leaving meaningful legacy.  So the question with LA is less about is all this building going to be useful after the Olympics and more is all this temporary spending going to be of benefit to the city that spending that money elsewhere would not be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On August 18, 2016 at 4:07 PM, JesseSaenz said:

BMeanwhile, Phelps, who got 5 gold and 1 silver in Rio.... is at home with his fiancée and newborn waddling in a pool.

The 180 is mind boggling.

US Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps spending his first day of retirement in a pool with his three-month-old son, Boomer, and his fiancee, Nicole Johnson.

 

I had mentioned in the Rio news thread yesterday that these "kids" (which I can't believe that Rio official described them as such yesterday, what a joke [maybe though, he was trying to be diplomatic] But I guess as old as he is, they are) need to take tips from Phelps on how to get their life back in order. Lochte (& even his cohorts) are far from being "kids", & need to act accordingly. Especially when we're talking about an event like the Olympics that requires discipline & control, not "to have fun", relatively speaking. One can have fun without getting stupidly drunk & acting like an a$s everywhere. That's not what the Olympics are about, IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, FYI said:

I had mentioned in the Rio news thread yesterday that these "kids" (which I can't believe that Rio official described them as such yesterday, what a joke [maybe though, he was trying to be diplomatic] But I guess as old as he is, they are) need to take tips from Phelps on how to get their life back in order. Lochte (& even his cohorts) are far from being "kids", & need to act accordingly. Especially when we're talking about an event like the Olympics that requires discipline & control, not "to have fun", relatively speaking. One can have fun without getting stupidly drunk & acting like an a$s everywhere. That's not what the Olympics are about, IMHO.

Not even so much how the "kids" acted at the gas station (though that's bad enough) - but to act like obnoxious frat boys and trash the host's reputation rather than own up to their own indiscretions is the really low act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/08/2016 at 1:21 PM, alphamale86 said:

Do you think the Ryan Lochte robbery scandal will have any implications on the 2017 vote and LA's chances?

If it turns out that Lochte and the other swimmers indeed lied about their account and that the US won't want to extradite Lochte to face charges for providing a false statement to the police that could form an image that the US thinks it's about international sovereignty. Might not be a huge thing but it could leave a bad taste in voters mouths, no?

It's crazy how this thing is playing out, Lochte in America the other three in Brazil. this is going to last a lot longer than we think unless Lochte flies back to Rio

No, I don't believe that. And the United States Olympic Committee apologised on Thursday to the people of Brazil for the behaviour of the American swimmers. I know some kind of arrogance may cause turbulence during the final bidding year. In the past there are some instances where South American countries did vote united against another bid. African representatives the same. And even Madrid 2012 and 2016 commitee had a bad feeling of fellow europeans voting against Spain. Chicago 2016 bid had lots of arrogance but in the end the bid lost for other reasons.

LA2024 is a much stronger project. I did visit LA in december (great city!) and the only turndown there is the huge traffic congestions. And I am from São Paulo - a city plagued with traffic problems. The driver in LA even joked "-Well, the same number of cars here!". I think the major issue on "Rio 2016 operations" is actually the traffic and the slow public transportation. And guess what... last week european journalists said the last time they saw this kind of problem was in Atlanta 96. I used a lot the LA subway system but it's a small network and very slow and at times looks very dangerous. I spent more than one hour to get from Koreatown to the Coliseum (5 miles)  using the public system (not in the rush hour). But the venues are there only needing some work for the Olympics.

I have a strong feeling the IOC wants to bring the Olympics to Paris in 2024. Even in Brazil this message is clear by the coverage of officials talking about the 2024 games. Maybe because France was very smart to send important people to Rio to sell the bid. Even president François Hollande was here. They look more passionate about hosting the Olympics. Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2016 at 6:23 PM, tpman said:

LA2024 is a much stronger project. I did visit LA in december (great city!) and the only turndown there is the huge traffic congestions. And I am from São Paulo - a city plagued with traffic problems. The driver in LA even joked "-Well, the same number of cars here!". I think the major issue on "Rio 2016 operations" is actually the traffic and the slow public transportation. And guess what... last week european journalists said the last time they saw this kind of problem was in Atlanta 96. I used a lot the LA subway system but it's a small network and very slow and at times looks very dangerous. I spent more than one hour to get from Koreatown to the Coliseum (5 miles)  using the public system (not in the rush hour). But the venues are there only needing some work for the Olympics.

 

So since last December, LA has added light rail from the ocean to downtown and light rail to the eastern suburbs. In the next four years, there'll be a line connecting LAX to West LA and an underground line throughout downtown which should allow you to get from West LA to the USC area, where the Coliseum is, by light rail, and there will also be a subway extension in West LA. If a tax measure gets passed by LA voters in November (a similar measure passed in 2008 and almost passed in 2012), there's a decent chance there will also be a subway from the UCLA area to downtown LA. If LA were to pass the tax measure, and it got 2028, there'll be even more new stuff, which is why imo LA 2028 > LA 2024.

On the political stuff, I think it's kind of a wash. The US is currently going through an embarrassing presidential election with a bunch of racial strife, mass shootings, etc. France has its issues with terrorism and also seems like it's about to have an uninspiring presidential election (the potential of Sarkozy-Le Pen-Hollande really doesn't inspire the most confidence). Still, both countries have shown the capability to host large sporting events without any attacks, and I think the IOC will notice that at the end of the day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, insert90 said:

So since last December, LA has added light rail from the ocean to downtown and light rail to the eastern suburbs. In the next four years, there'll be a line connecting LAX to West LA and an underground line throughout downtown which should allow you to get from West LA to the USC area, where the Coliseum is, by light rail, and there will also be a subway extension in West LA. If a tax measure gets passed by LA voters in November (a similar measure passed in 2008 and almost passed in 2012), there's a decent chance there will also be a subway from the UCLA area to downtown LA. If LA were to pass the tax measure, and it got 2028, there'll be even more new stuff, which is why imo LA 2028 > LA 2024.

On the political stuff, I think it's kind of a wash. The US is currently going through an embarrassing presidential election with a bunch of racial strife, mass shootings, etc. France has its issues with terrorism and also seems like it's about to have an uninspiring presidential election (the potential of Sarkozy-Le Pen-Hollande really doesn't inspire the most confidence). Still, both countries have shown the capability to host large sporting events without any attacks, and I think the IOC will notice that at the end of the day.

Although, Metro said a few months back that if LA lands the Olympics, the Subway to UCLA would be accelerated to be complete in time for the opening ceremonies in 2024... but only if LA wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Jesse Saenz said:

Although, Metro said a few months back that if LA lands the Olympics, the Subway to UCLA would be accelerated to be complete in time for the opening ceremonies in 2024... but only if LA wins.

From what I understand, having the subway to UCLA being built by 2024 isn't dependent on the Olympics. They first requested federal funds for 2024 completion way back in 2011, and have been trying since then. The Olympics are a nice incentive to speed it up, but the project has plenty of merit on its own, and is one of the more worthwhile mass transit projects in the entire country imo. If the November ballot measure gets passed, which I think has a decent shot of happening, the Purple Line's construction is going to be sped up, Olympics or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

French daily L'Équipe says today that the general feedback they got in Rio from the IOC insiders is that it is the US's turn and as a consequence Los Angeles 2024 is the favourite.

Edited by hektor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, hektor said:

French daily L'Équipe says today that the general feedback they got in Rio from the IOC insiders is that it is the US's turn and as a consequence Los Angeles 2024 is the favourite.

Can you share your source please? I can't seem to find it on the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JO2024 said:

Can you share your source please? I can't seem to find it on the internet.

Yeah, me neither. And if that were really the case, then Paris 2024 should just pull out now, no? Why should they go through this charade for yet a fourth loss. But beside that, I CAN'T see anyone at the IOC giving any kind of inclination either way, really.

With Rome being on the fence of pulling out or not, does the IOC really want their most solid European option to pull out, too (especially when Hamburg 2024 already called it quits). Does the IOC really want another 2022 race? Cuz then all they're left with is L.A. & Budapest as choices, & yet another consecutive, lackluster Olympic bid race. And that's not what the IOC wants, I'm sure.

I'd like to know WHO these "IOC insiders" are, & in what context was any of this said (if at all). And also, what kind of paper is "L'equipe". Are they general positive about the 2024 bid when they print about it, or not. It all has to do about the context, really, cuz without it, that statement doesn't really mean much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. And basically, if this is the US turn, not only Paris should drop out, but also Rome and Budapest.

I find it extremely surprising though that some "IOC insiders" would say such a thing. Has it ever happened before, and did it turn out true?

Would the IOC be mad enough to rule out European bids after 2022? Do the IOC really want to say "**** off" to Europe right now?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2016 at 4:43 PM, FYI said:

I had mentioned in the Rio news thread yesterday that these "kids" (which I can't believe that Rio official described them as such yesterday, what a joke [maybe though, he was trying to be diplomatic] But I guess as old as he is, they are) need to take tips from Phelps on how to get their life back in order. Lochte (& even his cohorts) are far from being "kids", & need to act accordingly. Especially when we're talking about an event like the Olympics that requires discipline & control, not "to have fun", relatively speaking. One can have fun without getting stupidly drunk & acting like an a$s everywhere. That's not what the Olympics are about, IMHO.

You know I've been getting irritated about how people have been using Michael Phelps as a great example for change. I've been thinking to myself "all he did was smoke a f**king bowl what's got goddamn big deal???" and then I realized I forgot he was stopped for driving drunk I think twice lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, JO2024 said:

I find it extremely surprising though that some "IOC insiders" would say such a thing. Has it ever happened before, and did it turn out true?

The only times that I've seen the IOC give any inclination to any given city, is BEFORE a bid campaign begins. And that probably has more to do with enticing more cities to bid than anything else.

18 minutes ago, JO2024 said:

Would the IOC be mad enough to rule out European bids after 2022? Do the IOC really want to say "**** off" to Europe right now?

The IOC can't afford that approach against Europe. And if they were, then they're really, really stupid.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...