Faster Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 No need to get so uppity about Venice. They did produce a bid dossier and were a domestic candidate for 2020. Is it possible, absoutely not, but doesn't mean y'all need to act like a bunch of Star Trek nerds when someone says they liked Enterprise. Florence is a non-starter. Mind you I think it is unfortunate that cities like Hamburg, Milan, Naples, Lyon, Marseilles could not be awarded the Games. They would have to offer a more human-sized games, and probably have a more meaningful impact on these cities long-term development and growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Anyway it seems that Milan spoke too soon... It seems Rome keeps with the proper project http://video.repubblica.it/edizione/milano/olimpiadi-2024-pisapia-roma-piu-preparata-di-milano/141758/140292 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 No need to get so uppity about Venice. They did produce a bid dossier and were a domestic candidate for 2020. Is it possible, absoutely not, but doesn't mean y'all need to act like a bunch of Star Trek nerds when someone says they liked Enterprise. Florence is a non-starter. Mind you I think it is unfortunate that cities like Hamburg, Milan, Naples, Lyon, Marseilles could not be awarded the Games. They would have to offer a more human-sized games, and probably have a more meaningful impact on these cities long-term development and growth. About Venice - Yes, I checked the bid and I said frankly it was a bid with many cheese holes and huge issues related of those points: Logistics, transport and space. Giving that plan as a bid in 2013 will be a waste in resources and time. About being uppity? Well, the objetive of the forum is that - Arguments. Maybe the truth hurts, but even when all the cities are open to bid, don't mean all of them are qualified. Actually Hamburg and Lyon could develop a good project at the SOG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olympic Fan Darcy Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Milan? Venice? Really? Venice has less then 300 000 people. It's like offering Lyon or Marseille instead of Paris. Like seriously why bother? Or offering Adelaide or Perth instead of Melbourne. If Rome won't be the candidate give up. It's one of the worlds most known cities and is possibly the only city capable of hosting a summer games in Italy, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Barcelona is different in that regard because of the element of Catalonia and because of their history. That was a huge part of their narrative and virtually no city on the planet could bring such a story to an Olympics. The transformation Barcelona experienced from the Olympics has a lot less to do with them being Spain's "second city" and everything to do with them wanting to be recognized as the Catalan capital. Huh? Barcelona getting the Olympics had nothing to their or that they wanted to be recognized as the Catalan capital, & everything to do that JAS literally moved Heaven & earth to make sure that his Hometown got the big coveted prize. Without him, Paris would've wound up with the 1992 Games. So yeah, in that sense, no other city on the planet could bring such a story to an Olympics. No.. no one has ever thought of Venice hosting because that's stupid. I mean really really stupid. Pretty sure space would be a pretty big issue for Venice. This may sound a bit douchey, but I'm gonna say it: what the heck are you smoking to come up with that one? Ummm, Mr. Bernham wasn't the only one to think of Venice. When CONI was looking for their 2020 candidate, several Italian cities stepped up to the plate. Then they decided to only continue with Rome & Venice. We also had a couple of vehement pro-Venice posters here during that time. Needless to say that Rome got the nod, but apparently Venice had something to offer if CONI made them one of the final two along with Rome. *Had nothing to do with their narrative.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Venice wanted to do a regional bid and included the Veneto and the larger Friuli-Venezia Giulia region. So no go. Besides, what could you actually fit in Venice proper? Maybe a Fencing hall and the race-walking. Maybe kayaks. But that's about it. Italy isn't that large a country to offer choices other than Rome. Besides, repeat hosts are all the rage today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 ^oh, I agree. I was merely dispelling the notion that no one, other than Mr. Bernham, had ever thought of Venice before. And while Milan is not the most attractive of Italian candidates for a Summer Olympics, it could "technically" host one. But other than Rome & Milan, yeah, Italy has no one else for a Summer Games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Huh? Barcelona getting the Olympics had nothing to their or that they wanted to be recognized as the Catalan capital, & everything to do that JAS literally moved Heaven & earth to make sure that his Hometown got the big coveted prize. Without him, Paris would've wound up with the 1992 Games. So yeah, in that sense, no other city on the planet could bring such a story to an Olympics. If that's all Barcelona was about, why are we having this discussion of how other cities want to emulate their success? I know the history, how Samaranch pretty much rigged the whole thing so that Barcelona would win. Certainly that's the story of how the vote went down and how they won, but it's not like Samaranch was the only reason Barcelona wanted the Olympics and that they had no narrative beyond him. And again, part of the success story of those Olympics and the city in general has everything to do with their history which is why other cities can't really copy Barcelona's narrative. So yea, without Samaranch it wouldn't have happened, but if we're going to talk about what the Olympics did for Barcelona, especially with regard to other prospective cities, then yes I think it has plenty to do with their history and not just about 1 man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 If that's all Barcelona was about, why are we having this discussion of how other cities want to emulate their success? I know the history, how Samaranch pretty much rigged the whole thing so that Barcelona would win. Certainly that's the story of how the vote went down and how they won, but it's not like Samaranch was the only reason Barcelona wanted the Olympics and that they had no narrative beyond him. Who wants to emulate their success, though? I think when many people talk about Barcelona, they speak of it in the hindsight sense of how the Olympics could catapult a certain city onto the global stage. In that sense, I would agree that Milan doesn't need that. And I have heard others mention that about Chicago, too, which you asked about earlier. There, too, I would also say that Chicago doesn't necessarily need that either. I think the only cities that we could probably make that distinction with, are places like Durban &/or Sochi. Where the Olympics could totally transform the image of those cities, even long after the Games are gone. Sometimes I do agree that message gets construed as to what the Olympics could do for a city & why they would get the chance for such an opportunity of grand transformation in the first place. It obviously doesn't work that way for every lesser-known city. Didn't do that much for Atlanta nor Nagano, for example. *that message gets misconstrued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Anyway it seems that Milan spoke too soon... It seems Rome keeps with the proper project http://video.repubblica.it/edizione/milano/olimpiadi-2024-pisapia-roma-piu-preparata-di-milano/141758/140292 Google translate says: Olympics 2024, Pisapia: "Rome's most prepared of Milan" The mayor of Milan, at the end of a meeting with the President of CONI, the Italian candidate John Malagò the Olympics of 2024, acknowledged that Rome Milan is prepared to host the event. "Rome is ahead of us because in 2025 there will be the Jubilee, so it's prepared for an international comparison that can lead to victory. But Milan Expo: together we will win" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 No need to get so uppity about Venice. They did produce a bid dossier and were a domestic candidate for 2020. Is it possible, absoutely not, but doesn't mean y'all need to act like a bunch of Star Trek nerds when someone says they liked Enterprise. Florence is a non-starter. Mind you I think it is unfortunate that cities like Hamburg, Milan, Naples, Lyon, Marseilles could not be awarded the Games. They would have to offer a more human-sized games, and probably have a more meaningful impact on these cities long-term development and growth. In addition to sounding self-inflated and condescending, this post really isn't fair since Venice and Florence were suggested in simultaneously and dismissed simultaneously. If Venice cannot host ("absolutely not" in your words), then it's appropriate to say NO, particularly when the idea is proposed alongside Florence. Anyone who has been to those cities (whether they know anything about the Olympics or not) should know immediately that while both are marvelous travel destinations, neither one is even close to being able to host an Olympic Games. Nor, really, would you want them to. Their charms lie elsewhere and such violence would have to be done to the cities to make them serviceable hosts that the end result is likely to be a tragic loss of character and history rather than a successful civic transformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 I think we've got an intriguing enough thread here without throwing in stupid ideas like Florence which is a beautiful little gem of a city, but totally incapable of even getting close to hosting an Olympics! The President of Lombardy province seems to have spoken too soon. And when he said Milan is the only candidate, I suspect he means in his opinion Milan is the only city capable at the moment, rather than a statement of fact about who'll actually be bidding. This smells like posturing at the moment, and I suspect CONI would still prefer Rome. The newest quotes from Roger87 suggests this isn't open and shut as the headline of this thread suggests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 The thing about Barcelona though, is that it was a really beautiful city that had just fallen into a dustbin and disrepair. It used the Olympics to get a make-over; and that was trick needed to bring out all its glory. I doubt that something like this would work for Milan. Why do the tourist and movie industries avoid it like the plague? Because it is really a nondescript city to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathesgelatin Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Milan? Venice? Really? Venice has less then 300 000 people. It's like offering Lyon or Marseille instead of Paris. Like seriously why bother? Or offering Adelaide or Perth instead of Melbourne. If Rome won't be the candidate give up. It's one of the worlds most known cities and is possibly the only city capable of hosting a summer games in Italy, This is academic, really, but I know the case of Lyon well - I did the research for my master's thesis there and have studied the city's history extensively. Lyon's metro has 2 million people. I think they would actually be quite capable of hosting a games. Will they? Nah. France doesn't seem interested in bidding and if they do they would surely go with Paris. But, I think Lyon would be a magnificent host and I'd like to imagine it would be good for their world stature as well. Anyway, I don't think comparing Lyon to Venice and Florence is very apt. Yes, maybe none of them have a chance to host the games, nor should. But for different reasons. Mind you I think it is unfortunate that cities like Hamburg, Milan, Naples, Lyon, Marseilles could not be awarded the Games. They would have to offer a more human-sized games, and probably have a more meaningful impact on these cities long-term development and growth. I sort of agree with this sentiment in some respects. I actually wonder if the moment for smaller, less known cities hosting the Olympics will return. Right now there definitely seems to be an emphasis on world historical cities, world capitals, repeat hosts, etc., and I don't see that changing for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Until the Games are downsized, the IOC has to choose between large world capitals. That's all there is to it. They are too complicated and too expensive for moderate size cities to manage. I doubt we will see an Italian bid for 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 I love Italy... travel there often. Couple comments: Milano: Don't overlook Milano. It's has all the 5* hotels and 5* shopping IOC members and their families love. Great airport. Trains to everywhere. Reasonable Metro. Realitsically, that's it. Other than Roma and Milano, everything else is too small. No need to look at the specifics... but on a couple cities that have been mentioned... Venezia: No effing way. If you ranked all the "famous" cities in the world on their ability to host the Olympics, Venezia come in either dead last, or just ahead of Chernobyl. It's an series of tiny islands, subject to frequent flooding, without an inch of free space. Napoli: They can't pick up their garbage... they can't host the Olympics. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Lyon's metro has 2 million people. I think they would actually be quite capable of hosting a games. Will they? Nah. France doesn't seem interested in bidding and if they do they would surely go with Paris. But, I think Lyon would be a magnificent host and I'd like to imagine it would be good for their world stature as well. Well, even Detroit finished ahead of Lyon for 1968. And Jacques Rogge (former IOC president) said himself that a city needs to have a minimum of 2.5 million in the metro area to even be considered. So Lyon still falls short of that. Not to mention that I doubt that Lyon has what it takes to win over those very fastidious individuals over at the IOC. It's Paris or bust for France. Until the Games are downsized, the IOC has to choose between large world capitals. That's all there is to it. They are too complicated and too expensive for moderate size cities to manage. Or until these world capitals or world cities don't step up to the plate anymore. Then the IOC will be forced to make some major adjustments. I doubt we will see an Italian bid for 2024. We could say the same about the U.S. But you would say that it's still too early to tell. That same logic applies to Italy as well. Still way too early to determine if the Italians will bid or not. "Lets just wait & see". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Who wants to emulate their success, though? I think when many people talk about Barcelona, they speak of it in the hindsight sense of how the Olympics could catapult a certain city onto the global stage. In that sense, I would agree that Milan doesn't need that. And I have heard others mention that about Chicago, too, which you asked about earlier. There, too, I would also say that Chicago doesn't necessarily need that either. I think the only cities that we could probably make that distinction with, are places like Durban &/or Sochi. Where the Olympics could totally transform the image of those cities, even long after the Games are gone. Sometimes I do agree that message gets misconstrued as to what the Olympics could do for a city & why they would get the chance for such an opportunity of grand transformation in the first place. It obviously doesn't work that way for every lesser-known city. Didn't do that much for Atlanta nor Nagano, for example. It's really more of a rhetoric from folks here to use as a comparison for cities they're looking at more than anything. Basically it's saying "hey, Barcelona was transformed by the Olympics, maybe this city could do the same." But that's why I bring up the history of Barcelona and why it differentiates them from other cities. Samaranch's politics aside, it's not just that the Olympics brought the city to the forefront, but it also plays into the previous 50 years of the city's history. To that end.. The thing about Barcelona though, is that it was a really beautiful city that had just fallen into a dustbin and disrepair. It used the Olympics to get a make-over; and that was trick needed to bring out all its glory. I doubt that something like this would work for Milan. Why do the tourist and movie industries avoid it like the plague? Because it is really a nondescript city to begin with. I believe we have Generalísimo Franco to thank for that one. Getting the Olympics in `92 wasn't just about a make-over for the city but also about breaking the shackles of the Franco regime and allowing the city and its people to be themselves once again. If a city like Milan or Chicago or whatever other "second city" you could find wants to bring themselves to the forefront, they don't have that history of oppresion to use as motivation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 Doesn't need to be a world capital. Barcelona certainly wasn't, neither is Sydney. Osaka, Milan, Barcelona, Cologne, Hamburg, St. Petersburg and numerous American cities that could reasonably host the Olympics and are not the capital or largest city within their country. Rio is also neither and many of you put Durban out there and it is even further down South Africa's list yet everyone here thinks they can host. Yet it is smaller than Milan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 1. Rio is also neither and 2. many of you put Durban out there and it is even further down South Africa's list yet everyone here thinks they can host. Yet it is smaller than Milan. #1 - Rio might not have the economic or political clout that Sao Paulo or Brasilia have, but it certainly attracts the tourist $$. If I would visit only one city in Brazil or South America, my $$ would go to Rio. In that regard, it really is a world capital -- minus the official titles. 2, Durban has a more salubrious climate than Milan. 3. It is a newer city and seems to have the strategic open spaces needed to build Olympic parks, etc., which Milan does not. Also, Durban is NOT straddled by ancients monuments of the Sforza Castle sort that impede efficient development and infrastructure construction that an Olympic host city is put through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 The thing is, what city in all of Africa is truly a "world city". If some on here are saying that even Sydney or Rio isn't, then there's certainly no city in Africa that could claim that type of title, & that includes Cape Town, which many on here are so enamored with. It's erroneous anyway to simplistically compare Africa with other "world capitals" in the first place. That's not what the first Olympics in Africa would be about anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted October 4, 2013 Report Share Posted October 4, 2013 The thing is, what city in all of Africa is truly a "world city". Abuja, James' hometown!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 5, 2013 Report Share Posted October 5, 2013 This is devastating! Roma is my favorite Italian city. Despite the fact I've never been to Milano, Roma still seems like more of an Olympic city. Firenze is beautiful, but not an Olympic city. Venezia is nice, not my favorite city. It's too cramped and not an Olympic city. About Sydney, I count that as a Capital of the World... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted October 5, 2013 Report Share Posted October 5, 2013 This is devastating! Roma is my favorite Italian city. Despite the fact I've never been to Milano, Roma still seems like more of an Olympic city. Firenze is beautiful, but not an Olympic city. Venezia is nice, not my favorite city. It's too cramped and not an Olympic city. About Sydney, I count that as a Capital of the World... Well its not official yet as it looks bleak. Sydney really?? I wouldn't put it ahead of the likes of London or NYC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 5, 2013 Report Share Posted October 5, 2013 I always thought NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Tokyo, and Sydney were the capitals of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.