Jump to content

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Am I the only one that doesn't find a problem with not putting your hand over your heart during the national anthem? 

No; I also don't have a problem with not putting your hand over your heart during the national anthem.  It's not a requirement.  We were only taught as children to put your hand over your heart while saying the Pledge of Allegiance, which I think is also an odd school morning ritual.

I really do believe that patriotism is the inflated assertion of imaginary superiority.  

 

Edited by ejaycat
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The thing you LA boosters just can't seem to understand is that the IOC only cares about what the host city will do for "the Olympic movement." The sports federations are not interested in urban devel

Sigh! I've tried not to get too involved in the tit-for-tatting in the whole LA debate. And tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and allow that you're a passionate and blinkered supporter of LA

I am struck by the statement that "there is no reason to attack LA." There is no reason to attack any city or any people in any city. This is the horror of terrorism. Whichever city wins any Olympi

On August 24, 2016 at 5:41 PM, FYI said:

In terms of what? Paris itself? I answered that in the post you quoted. What about you. What do you think will happen if L.A. losses 2024?

The olympics goes on. LA might bid again they might not but it won't matter any cause the olympics will just go to whoever wants it. Same for Paris they might bid again or might not but I don't think it will be the spite it used to be if either don't return so I think it's an even playing field on that note. The IOC doesn't NEED either city for the movement to continue. If Paris doesn't get it, that's not a referendum on Europe if LA doesn't get it it's not a referendum on the USA. They simply got beat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition if we look at the last time Paris lost, they got beat by a surge in LONDON. It was a close race but London's bid gained strength. When Chicago bid that was a referendum on the US. The rev sharing deal was a huge stumbling block for Chicago. To go in as the dominant favorite and lose in the first round was a major message voters were sending to the USOC. Well now that's out but the chicago loss still lingers. So without anything really in it's way I personally think for LA it is going to come down to who surges at the end. What is in those bid books, the plan, the marketing. Cause right now Paris is the Front Runner in name only. I'll say this again they are not capitalizing on that status I almost feel like they're making that mistake like the 2012 race all over again where they get a bit complacent. 

 

I guess we'll see when the bid books come out

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruff, how do we know that with this Lochte thing the IOC will hold another referendum on the US.

I mean earlier I thought if LA lost we'd be back again, but honestly, if we loose by a large margin again like Chicago and New York I think we should tell the IOC to just **** off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alphamale86 said:

When Chicago bid that was a referendum on the US. The rev sharing deal was a huge stumbling block for Chicago. To go in as the dominant favorite and lose in the first round was a major message voters were sending to the USOC.

Referendum on the US? No it wasn't. Going in as dominant favourite? No it wasn't. It was very much Rio's to lose - that was the bid that was getting standing ovations at its presentations in the lead-up to the vote and was pretty well seen as the fast surging favourite. Probably the only sources seeing Chicago as the favourite were CNN and perhaps some other local US news outlets. Rio didn't win because the US dropped the ball - it won because a lot of people were becoming enchanted by the idea of taking the games to Rio, and it had managed, thanks to the Pan-Ams and its then economic boom, to show it could do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

personally i'm a fan of the conspiracy theory that the revenue sharing beef was hurtful but any way you slice it, chicago just didn't have the necessary momentum going into the vote to swing it. LA is at least a chance for a do-over in that regard. they just have to break the spirit of inevitability around paris, or keep it from spreading. looks like we're hearing whispers that LA is at least trying that approach.

paris is too much drama anyway. i think we all know that they'll whine and complain about everything the IOC does or doesn't do for seven years straight. circa 2023 they'll go on a media frenzy blaming the IOC for all the pre-games bad press (and there's always pre-games bad press). honestly, they'd save themselves a lot of headache by just going with LA, so of course they probably won't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, alphamale86 said:

In addition if we look at the last time Paris lost, they got beat by a surge in LONDON. It was a close race but London's bid gained strength.

Yes, but you're looking at "LONDON" & L.A. as if they're sorta equals in this, when in actuality, they're not. London's "surge" happened to be that they were another mega-EUROPEAN capital giving Paris a good run for its money. Two global capitals that hadn't seen the Summer Olympics in over half a century. Either way, the 2012 Games were headed to a glamorous European capital.

That's not the case here. This is clearly a choice with a mega-European capital (that was denied the last time around for a third time), with a been-there, done that repeat host that hosted as recent as 1984. London & L.A. aren't even in the same league, relatively speaking, when it comes down to it.

2 hours ago, alphamale86 said:

Cause right now Paris is the Front Runner in name only. I'll say this again they are not capitalizing on that status I almost feel like they're making that mistake like the 2012 race all over again where they get a bit complacent. 

Do you know this for a fact? The vote is still over a year away, & perhaps Paris is just waiting to 'capitalize' on all its goods so they can indeed have that "surge" where & when it counts. Cuz one thing that I'll say, is I seriously doubt that they'll be 'complacent' this time around. That's like saying L.A. will be complacent again & just rely on their "we're ready today", like they've done in the past.

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Going in as dominant favourite? No it wasn't. It was very much Rio's to lose - that was the bid that was getting standing ovations at its presentations in the lead-up to the vote and was pretty well seen as the fast surging favourite. Probably the only sources seeing Chicago as the favourite were CNN and perhaps some other local US news outlets. 

I wouldn't say that Chicago was the "dominant" favorite. But I also wouldn't say that "it was 'very much' Rio's to lose", either. That one article that I posted a few pages back cited that the 2016 race was between Chicago & Rio, & that the race was "close as hell", claimed by "IOC insiders" only a couple of days before the 2016 vote. That's primarily why the huge dismay when the U.S. bid got ousted first.

The standing ovations that Rio 2016 got during the presentations I don't know if they really mean anything in hindsight. Just look at all the standing ovations that Madrid 2020 got in presentations right before the vote, & then many were buying into the hysteria that "Madrid's got the momentum now", only to find out in the end, that the Spaniards weren't even close.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, FYI said:

 

I wouldn't say that Chicago was the "dominant" favorite. But I also wouldn't say that "it was 'very much' Rio's to lose", either. That one article that I posted a few pages back cited that the 2016 race was between Chicago & Rio, & that the race was "close as hell", claimed by "IOC insiders" only a couple of days before the 2016 vote. That's primarily why the huge dismay when the U.S. bid got ousted first.

The standing ovations that Rio 2016 got during the presentations I don't know if they really mean anything in hindsight. Just look at all the standing ovations that Madrid 2020 got in presentations right before the vote, & then many were buying into the hysteria that "Madrid's got the momentum now", only to find out in the end, that the Spaniards weren't even close.

Okay, yeah, I'd concede that Rio wasn't quite the unstoppable certainty that, say, Beijing 2008 was. But I still think Rio went into that vote, even before we knew how the results would play out, with a clear edge. There was no way that Chicago was anywhere near a "dominant favourite" - to me at best only the most likely of the remaining bids to challenge should Rio not have had what it took. It goes without saying that the huge shock was that Chicago got ousted first and so ruthlessly, but not that it lost. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bid Index had Rio as the favorite, with Chicago closing to a close second. As you said, no surprise Rio won. The surprise was Chicago going out first. 

Then again, I can't think of any other Olympic vote where people care so much about the order cities are eliminated - it's just who won and who lost. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

^Its probably bcuz no other Olympic vote was dubbed "close as hell" for the two perceived front runners, by people "inside the loop", & then have one of those two bids tossed out first. As described, even bid index here had Chicago & Rio as first & second. 

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Okay, yeah, I'd concede that Rio wasn't quite the unstoppable certainty that, say, Beijing 2008 was. 

The scrappy Canadians here at the time back in 2001, would say otherwise, to say the least! <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, alphamale86 said:

In addition if we look at the last time Paris lost, they got beat by a surge in LONDON. It was a close race but London's bid gained strength. When Chicago bid that was a referendum on the US. The rev sharing deal was a huge stumbling block for Chicago. To go in as the dominant favorite and lose in the first round was a major message voters were sending to the USOC. Well now that's out but the chicago loss still lingers. So without anything really in it's way I personally think for LA it is going to come down to who surges at the end. What is in those bid books, the plan, the marketing. Cause right now Paris is the Front Runner in name only. I'll say this again they are not capitalizing on that status I almost feel like they're making that mistake like the 2012 race all over again where they get a bit complacent. 

 

I guess we'll see when the bid books come out

I was thinking this the other day too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 26, 2016 at 3:54 PM, alphamale86 said:

The rev sharing deal was a huge stumbling block for Chicago.

So without anything really in it's way I personally think for LA it is going to come down to who surges at the end. 

There's PLENTY in L.A.'s way, & this for starters, can be their version of the revenue sharing spat, & a "huge stumbling block" for L.A. (among other things). 

SPORTS

Anti-U.S. Sentiment Could Ruin Los Angeles’ 2024 Olympics Bid

IOC members reportedly ticked at Americans’ push for drug sanctions against Russia.

 5 days ago

Karolos Grohmann

JERRY LAI / REUTERS

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, left, speaking at a press conference in Rio about L.A.’s Olympic bid, acknowledged there could be backlash from the IOC.

A bid by Los Angeles to host the 2024 Olympic Games could fall victim to anti-American sentiment brewing inside the International Olympic Committee, sources inside the IOC said.

The bid, which is competing against three European cities, risks an anti-U.S. protest vote by several IOC members angry over America’s prominent role in pursuing doping allegations against Russian athletes, the sources said.

The IOC will decide on bids from Los Angeles, Paris, Rome and Budapest in September next year.

At least three non-Russian IOC members, speaking on condition of anonymity, said America’s intervention into allegations of systematic Russian doping had marred the run-up to the Rio Games and tarnished the IOC brand.

“Of course the Los Angeles bid will face some consequences from this,” an IOC member said.

The U.S. Department of Justice is probing allegations of Russian doping on U.S. soil, and the U.S. anti-doping agency (USADA) called for a total ban on Russians in Rio even as U.S. athletes with a history of positive drugs tests competed there.

ED JONES VIA GETTY IMAGES

L.A.’s campaign to host the 2024 Games continued at a Rio press conference, but the United States’ push for doping sanctions against Russia could reportedly hurt the bid.

None of the IOC members interviewed by Reuters could give an estimate of how many of the IOC’s 98 members were thinking along the same lines. Elections for host cities can be decided by a handful of votes and be heavily influenced by politics.

Last year’s vote for the 2022 winter Olympics was won by Beijing, with just four votes more than Kazakhstan’s Almaty.

Russia alone has three IOC members.

The head of the LA 2024 bid team, Casey Wasserman, said it would not make sense for IOC members to vote against Los Angeles on the basis of investigations totally unrelated to its bid.

“Doping agencies in America are independent. They are not under the control of the United States Olympic Committee (USOC); they are certainly not under the control of a private independent bid, which is what we are,” Wasserman said.

“We are independent of USOC and of the city of Los Angeles; we are private and to somehow use that against us seems misguided,” he added.

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti has acknowledged that there could be a backlash from some IOC members but has also distanced the bid from the actions of the other, independent U.S. bodies, such as the Department of Justice and USADA.

Another IOC member said a separate Department of Justice investigation into corruption at world soccer’s governing body, FIFA, also rankled some committee members, given close links between the two sporting bodies.

Several senior FIFA officials were arrested last year, awakened at their five-star hotel in Zurich and held in prison pending extradition to the United States over corruption and embezzlement charges.

IOC member Issa Hayatou of Cameroon is FIFA’s senior vice president, while Sheikh Ahmad Al Fahad al Sabah of Kuwait, who is in charge of the IOC’s central fund, the Olympic Solidarity, is a member of the FIFA council.

ASSOCIATED PRESS

The “Rocket Man” was among the highlights of the Opening Ceremony of L.A.’s most recent Olympics in 1984. Officials may have to overcome anti-U.S. sentiment among IOC authorities to host the games again.

Neither of the two members, who declined to comment, has been named in relation to investigations of the FIFA cases.

Another IOC member said there would be “significant” fallout for the Los Angeles bid.

A Canadian lawyer’s investigation into what he called systematic Russian doping led to the world athletics federation banning the country’s track and field team, with the exception of just one athlete, from the Rio Games.

USADA had formed a coalition of anti-doping bodies calling for a blanket ban on all Russian competitors at the Games, but the IOC eventually cleared more than 270 Russians to compete.

Last month, United World Wrestling Federation President Nenad Lalovic, an IOC member and a member of the World Anti-doping Agency (WADA) board, made comments to Reuters that were indicative of the frustration felt by some IOC members.

“USADA should be focused on the health of American athletes and those competing in the United States,” Lalovic said.

“Now it seems that USADA and the Canadians took over responsibility of WADA. Nobody entitled them to do that.”

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57badd37e4b00d9c3a187da5

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in other words, the IOC is still more concerned about its image rather than actually presenting and supporting clean sport.  So, what else is new?  Of course, there are also IOC members who would welcome "cleaning of the house" as there are the old-time communist-state apparatchiks still hanging around the IOC.  It has to start somewhere, sometime.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I've been out of town over the weekend.  I guess I missed some interesting discussion more of the same random nonsense in this thread.  Thanks for that FYI, I do miss your traditional backhand slaps, so good to see you threw one in there for me for old time's sake.  And RuFF, I hope you appreciate the irony that for all the times you've thought FYI and I were the same person, here are you and CITYofDREAMS with the exact same thought wrongly attributed to the another poster.  That's cute.

That said.. yes sports fans, the vote is a year away.  So we need to stop talking about Ryan Lochte as if anyone is going to give 2 shits about that a year from now.  Or hell, probably even a month from now.  Unless you actually think it's a big deal he's going to be on Dancing With The Stars, relative to LA's 2024 chance.  Of course, with regard to all the doping scandal news (that one may actually be in the news a year from now), someone should probably tell Casey Wasseerman that saying “We are independent of USOC and of the city of Los Angeles; we are private and to somehow use that against us seems misguided” is really ignorant of IOC politics.  Nothing he can do about that one, but don't pretend like voters out there won't make that kind of connection.  Much as, say, when a French prime minister makes a seemingly innocent comment about the food in another city.  Probably had no affect on that outcome, but those are the kinds of things that happen when this game is played.

On 8/26/2016 at 7:55 PM, zekekelso said:

Bid Index had Rio as the favorite, with Chicago closing to a close second. As you said, no surprise Rio won. The surprise was Chicago going out first. 

Then again, I can't think of any other Olympic vote where people care so much about the order cities are eliminated - it's just who won and who lost. 

Bravo to this comment.  It's amazing how 7 years after the fact this is still a point to be brought up.  But does it mean anything?  That Chicago went out first is just not that meaningful.  Especially when you consider New York didn't exactly fare so well either.  I remember reading that they may have gotten a few extra votes in the first round just to allow the USOC to save face and not be the first out.  Their vote total went down from 19 to 16 in the 2nd round, as if we needed more evidence how twister this whole process can be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never thought of this...could European members be spiteful and vote for LA in hopes their nation could host in 2028? If Paris lost odds are they wouldn't be back, no Asian city could realistically bid, Africa has pledged to stay out, and North America would be out opening the door wide for any European city like Rome or Madrid. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm, no. "Spiteful" about what. What European members (besides maybe the couple of Spanish ones) are gonna vote against Paris just so Madrid could have "that shot" (besides not very many, if any) anyway. 

Rome won't be back either if they still have their new mayor that refuses to support a bid until the city gets back into shape. The Germans keep having referendums & then pulling out their bids. 

If anything, the Europeans may want to finally have a "home (European) Games", since by 2024, five Olympic Games would have been staged away from the continent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Madrid won't be interested in bidding for a long time. The Olympic stadium is under construction as a football one with no track for Atletico de Madrid, the Aquatic Centre (under construction) has been reconverted in a gym for that football team members and the new local government nor madrileños are interested in bidding after spending their money on 3 attempts in a row. Enough is enough.

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...