Jump to content

Durban 2024/28?


baron-pierreIV
 Share

Recommended Posts

Complete: Yeah, because every previous host country must be quiet and stable to have the right to develop the Olympic Games... Until South Africa didn't came to a civil war, this can't be an excuse to drop it. I mean Brazil, China, Russia, Mexico anyone?

And from your tiring accusation of - "Why Durban? Why not another city?"

Durban was prepared as an international city from the South African city, that's why it exist one of the biggest convention centers around the world, was a host city of events and has projects of infrastructure. Also, South Africa is perhaps the only option for the IOC to have a SOG in Africa (As Jacques Rogge said). This continent of 56 countries and athletes in different areas. As the IOC made with China, Latin and South America, hese branches represents a big opportunity. That's why we came for South Africa, and considering the actions of South Africa, dropping Johannesburg's Olympic and Commenwealth big (In case of ignoring Z) and impulsing Durban, showed interest for the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Johannesburg's chances over Durban's simply because I believe RSA is more likely to pick it as their candidate city than pick Durban. Politics within RSA is a far more important factor, IMO, than weather.

As for Johannesburg's weather... is an average August high of 20C (with no rain) so much worse than London's high of 23C that it disqualifies Johannesburg? Again, I'm not saying Johannesburg doesn't have problems as possible SOG host. Just they their problems are smaller than the other African cities right now.

You really do come across clueless at times. Answer my earlier question. Why would South Africa prepare Durban for the IOC meeting, Durban for the Commonwealth Games and then go, you know what actually it's Johanesburg that's the right one for the Olympics, f-all the goodwill, learning, infrastructure and "acclaim" Durban got on this journey, let's host it in Johannesburg winter (which is well colder than 20c, most days struggle above 15c and most nights are at freezing.)

But then again you say it comes down to politics. The ruling partys power base and leader are from Durban too. So yes if politics is important that also swings to Durban.

How the problems of Joburg hosting are smaller than other cities as you state is a one person view, currently devoid of any facts to support it. Sorry.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answer my earlier question. Why would South Africa prepare Durban for the IOC meeting, Durban for the Commonwealth Games and then go, you know what actually it's Johanesburg that's the right one for the Olympics, f-all the goodwill, learning, infrastructure and "acclaim" Durban got on this journey, let's host it in Johannesburg winter (which is well colder than 20c, most days struggle above 15c and most nights are at freezing.)

Because the off-cycle IOC meeting and the Commonwealth games are almost always held in cities that *aren't* good candidates to host the SOG. If you are going to argue that Durban is likely to be a SOG host because they hosted <event X> look at the other cities that hosted <event X>. Are they good SOG host candidates? And I could turn around and ask you... Why was Johannesburg chosen to host the 2010 World Cup final and not Durban?

As for the weather, I spend at least 10 seconds googling that 20C number. Its on the internet... it has to be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good grief. You're arguments all always so black-&-white. No room for any gray areas (which the IOC is also so full of). And that still doesn't negate Johanneburg's altitude issue which you're conveniently ignoring. And yes, let's take your word for it by doing a "quick" google search over someone else who's actually lived there for a very long time.

You really do come across clueless at times.

It's more akin as to what he gives Durban's chances of "not" getting the Olympics - which is 99.99% of the time.

And that's being 'generous'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the off-cycle IOC meeting and the Commonwealth games are almost always held in cities that *aren't* good candidates to host the SOG. If you are going to argue that Durban is likely to be a SOG host because they hosted <event X> look at the other cities that hosted <event X>. Are they good SOG host candidates? And I could turn around and ask you... Why was Johannesburg chosen to host the 2010 World Cup final and not Durban?

As for the weather, I spend at least 10 seconds googling that 20C number. Its on the internet... it has to be true.

Weren't you the one who dismissed melbournes chances entirely in favour of Brisbane based on weather? You realise Durban emerges from winter earlier than J'burg?

Furthermore, JB has the elevation issue. It's Africa's Mexico City in more ways than one. Not the best environment for athletes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weren't you the one who dismissed melbournes chances entirely in favour of Brisbane based on weather? You realise Durban emerges from winter earlier than J'burg?

Furthermore, JB has the elevation issue. It's Africa's Mexico City in more ways than one. Not the best environment for athletes.

Don't think so. I don't remember ever pushing Brisbane.. but it's possible.

Yes, I realize Durban is warmer that Johannesburg. I just think other factors are more important.

Yes, Johannesburg has an elevation program. Though it is 500m lower than Mexico City. And the IOC did pick Mexico City to host. While I agree weather and elevations are problems for Johannesburg, I don't think they disqualify it as a host.

Look, I'm not saying Johannesburg would be an ideal host city. I'm not saying I think it likely to host soon. All I'm saying is I think they are slightly more likely to host than Durban. While posters are quick to see Johannesburg's problems with weather and elevation, they are less quick to see Durban's negatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the off-cycle IOC meeting and the Commonwealth games are almost always held in cities that *aren't* good candidates to host the SOG. If you are going to argue that Durban is likely to be a SOG host because they hosted <event X> look at the other cities that hosted <event X>. Are they good SOG host candidates? And I could turn around and ask you... Why was Johannesburg chosen to host the 2010 World Cup final and not Durban?

As for the weather, I spend at least 10 seconds googling that 20C number. Its on the internet... it has to be true.

You are like talking to a child that loves his spoon and doesn't want to give it up.

Your answer tells me you have never visited? Makes you an expert don't it? Amazing

Don't think so. I don't remember ever pushing Brisbane.. but it's possible.

Yes, I realize Durban is warmer that Johannesburg. I just think other factors are more important.

Yes, Johannesburg has an elevation program. Though it is 500m lower than Mexico City. And the IOC did pick Mexico City to host. While I agree weather and elevations are problems for Johannesburg, I don't think they disqualify it as a host.

Look, I'm not saying Johannesburg would be an ideal host city. I'm not saying I think it likely to host soon. All I'm saying is I think they are slightly more likely to host than Durban. While posters are quick to see Johannesburg's problems with weather and elevation, they are less quick to see Durban's negatives.

Go phone the SA government, I think they are waiting for your call desperately to enlighten them. Because they have never even consider Johannesburg for Olympics or Commonwealth games. They must be wrong too. Go tell them off.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Johannesburg has an elevation program. Though it is 500m lower than Mexico City. And the IOC did pick Mexico City to host.

Just bcuz the IOC picked a city with an altitude problem before doesn't automatically mean that they're looking to do it again. Plus, they picked Mexico City before really knowing the difficult challenges a city of that high an altitude poses. Not to mention Mexico City's contenders also had problems. Like the instability of Argentina at the time. Lyon really not being of Olympic caliber & Detroit (the forgetten stepsister of U.S. cities & Olympic bids). If was also the making of Latin America's first Games, so it also had the narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the off-cycle IOC meeting and the Commonwealth games are almost always held in cities that *aren't* good candidates to host the SOG. If you are going to argue that Durban is likely to be a SOG host because they hosted <event X> look at the other cities that hosted <event X>. Are they good SOG host candidates? And I could turn around and ask you... Why was Johannesburg chosen to host the 2010 World Cup final and not Durban?

As for the weather, I spend at least 10 seconds googling that 20C number. Its on the internet... it has to be true.

Don't think so. I don't remember ever pushing Brisbane.. but it's possible.

Yes, I realize Durban is warmer that Johannesburg. I just think other factors are more important.

Yes, Johannesburg has an elevation program. Though it is 500m lower than Mexico City. And the IOC did pick Mexico City to host. While I agree weather and elevations are problems for Johannesburg, I don't think they disqualify it as a host.

Look, I'm not saying Johannesburg would be an ideal host city. I'm not saying I think it likely to host soon. All I'm saying is I think they are slightly more likely to host than Durban. While posters are quick to see Johannesburg's problems with weather and elevation, they are less quick to see Durban's negatives.

So in favor of Johannesburg, we have politics and.. not much else. In favor of Durban, we have more favorable weather, less of an altitude problem, a relationship with the IOC from 2011 session, the Commonwealth Games, and a general sense that this is the city that SASCOC would be targetting for an Olympic bid. What factors other than "politics" do you think will drive this decision?

In response to your 2010 World Cup Final question, it's because Johannesburg had the bigger stadium and that's a requirement for them for the capacity of the Final. Of course, the flipside of your logic there is.. why was Durban chosen to host the 2011 IOC session and not Johannesburg?

You keep telling us we're ignoring Durban's negatives. Says the poster keeps telling us Johannesburg's negatives aren't that important. The thing to keep in mind.. this is not the IOC picking the host. This is SASCOC picking their candidate. Obviously they're going to want to choose the city that gives them the best chance for success, but they seem to have some direction on this one. You say look at other cities that hosted event X. So what? Doesn't change the fact that the focus is on Durban. You say Mexico City got picked in spite of the altitude so why not Johannesburg? Again, another so what argument?

Durban is not an ideal host city. But it's in Africa where the IOC would like to host an Olympics at some point in the not-too-distant future. So where South Africa would put forth a bid (if they go after this sooner rather than later.. you're 100% right that if we're talking 20 years down the line, there could be other African cities in the mix), they have some leeway in choosing a city that has flaws but still offers up enough of what the IOC is looking for. Durban, especially once they have a Commonwealth Games under their belt, seems like a better pick than Johannesburg, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in favor of Johannesburg, we have politics and.. not much else. In favor of Durban, we have more favorable weather, less of an altitude problem, a relationship with the IOC from 2011 session, the Commonwealth Games, and a general sense that this is the city that SASCOC would be targetting for an Olympic bid. What factors other than "politics" do you think will drive this decision?

No, not just politics. There's a huge infrastructure difference. Johannesburg has direct flights to South America, North America, Europe, East Asia and Australia. Durban has, I believe, one intercontinental flight a day - to Dubai. The isn't just the number of flights... it's the fact that those flights exist because people all over the world are flying to Johannesburg. Johannesburg is full of hotels, restaurants, shopping, attractions that appeal to the movers that shakers in the Olympic Family. It's a bigger city with significantly more international fame and appeal.

You keep telling us we're ignoring Durban's negatives. Says the poster keeps telling us Johannesburg's negatives aren't that important.

I *haven't* said they aren't that important. I've said they (1) aren't disqualifying and (2) IMO, less than Durban's.

The thing to keep in mind.. this is not the IOC picking the host. This is SASCOC picking their candidate. Obviously they're going to want to choose the city that gives them the best chance for success, but they seem to have some direction on this one.

I agree the SASCOC is the one that's going to pick. At one point they leaned towards Cape Town... then Durban. They got support from the federal government for the Cape Town bid; they didn't get support for a Durban bid. In the future, I'm guessing they'll get more support from the federal government for Johannesburg than for Durban. If people want to disagree, fine by me.

You say look at other cities that hosted event X. So what?

I only mention that to discredit the notion that hosting event X is an important indication that Durban will be picked as a SOC candidate.

Doesn't change the fact that the focus is on Durban. You say Mexico City got picked in spite of the altitude so why not Johannesburg? Again, another so what argument?

My point is just that altitude doesn't *disqualify* Johannesburg as a possible host.

Durban is not an ideal host city.

Neither is Johannesburg

But it's in Africa where the IOC would like to host an Olympics at some point in the not-too-distant future

So is Johannesburg

Durban, especially once they have a Commonwealth Games under their belt, seems like a better pick than Johannesburg, IMO.

Fine. I think Johannesburg the better pick. People on the internet disagree. Shocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not "shocking" that people on here disagree with one another. What gets tiring though, is when you're telling the majority here on the subject that they're "overrating" Durban's chances "way too much", & your "opinion" must then be the be-all & end-all, while at the same time, you haven't EFFECTIVELY told any of us why we're overestimating.

All of your subjective "points" have been constructively countered by many of us here. Yet you insist on reiterating again & again what has already been addressed. You don't agree with the rest of us here on the matter. The rest of us don't agree with you. It should be case closed already.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there an ignore button on here for individual posters?

Listen Z man, I am South African, I think my knowledge of the political fundamentals at play trumps that of someone that Google's his info for a response.

Politically, a Johanesburg Games has no support. You are stating support for Cape Town way back when means likely support for Joburg now without even comprehending how the political landscape plays out in SA. The main political leaders are from Durban.

The simple fact is you have a hypothesis and are sticking to it regardless. Well done you. But it means nothing since it is rooted in so much conjecture it is flawed.

If you want to be taken seriously, not by the internet but by a South African, then listen. It seems you just filter everything out

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree the SASCOC is the one that's going to pick. At one point they leaned towards Cape Town... then Durban. They got support from the federal government for the Cape Town bid; they didn't get support for a Durban bid. In the future, I'm guessing they'll get more support from the federal government for Johannesburg than for Durban. If people want to disagree, fine by me.

I only mention that to discredit the notion that hosting event X is an important indication that Durban will be picked as a SOC candidate.

2 things here..

1) That was almost 20 years ago with no bid since. So that South Africa picked Cape Town then probably has little bearing on what city they'd pick now. Since then, South Africa has hosted a FIFA World Cup and is going to start getting ready to hold a Commonwealth games. Back then, they were barely emerging out of having banned from the Olympics and perhaps the only significant sporting event they had held was the Rugby World Cup. That last bid seems like ancient history at this point. Keep in mind also the next Olympics on the horizon at that point was Sydney, to be held in September/October.

2) More than that.. again, if South Africa is destined to put forth Johannesburg as their Olympic candidate city, why put Durban out there for the Commonwealth Games. I strongly disagree that isn't any indication that Durban would be picked as an Olympic candidate. I absolutely think it would be. If Johannesburg is that much bigger and better of a city as a potential host for a multi-sport event, why not put them forth for the Commonwealth Games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God. This reminds me the endless discussions with Tony regarding China, Macau and Hong Kong.

No, not just politics. There's a huge infrastructure difference. Johannesburg has direct flights to South America, North America, Europe, East Asia and Australia. Durban has, I believe, one intercontinental flight a day - to Dubai. The isn't just the number of flights... it's the fact that those flights exist because people all over the world are flying to Johannesburg.

Not exactly true. Good part of the passengers in the Johannesburg Airport came to the city as a middle point for another flights in different parts of Southern Africa. Johannesburg Airport is known as a link station for many aereal routes. Good part of the passengers don't stay in the city as visitors. If this is a big standard for getting the SOG, I guess the Germans must not known anything for selecting Hamburg instead Frankfurt or Dubai must be a no. 1 priority of the IOC.

Anyway, Sochi Airport before the WOG was a small airport in close proximity of Durban's condictions. This is exactly an issue than can be solved.

Johannesburg is full of hotels, restaurants, shopping, attractions that appeal to the movers that shakers in the Olympic Family.

And Durban isn't? It seems you don't read anything of the other arguments. Durban is growning in infrastructure since the consolidation of the ANC. Durban has facilities for international bussiness, hotels, restaurants and attractions -Among casinos, conventions centers, national parks-. And Durban has something Johannesburg didn't - Beaches, most of them, internationally known for sports like windsurfing, which brings a plus for aquatic events.

It's a bigger city

Johannesburg metro Population: 4,434,827

Durban metro Population: 3,442,361

Not exactly a huge difference. And if you check the density, Durban is less dense, which can bring more spaces for construction than Johannesburg

significantly more international fame and appeal.

Durban is currently known for sport events and bussiness. And even if you go for the international fame "Cape Town" is still most known (For good or bad reasons). And that doesn't seem Cape Town is more likely either. Or Dubai.

I agree the SASCOC is the one that's going to pick. At one point they leaned towards Cape Town... then Durban. They got support from the federal government for the Cape Town bid; they didn't get support for a Durban bid. In the future, I'm guessing they'll get more support from the federal government for Johannesburg than for Durban. If people want to disagree, fine by me.

When Cape Town was selected it was 1997, 3 years after South Africa eliminated the Apartheid. Cape Town was a compromise choice (Remember than Cape Town is the "cultural crane" of the Afrikaaner nation). Since then, the ANC made politcal changements and some of them was developping Durban as a new metropolis with multicultural population (Symbol of South African federation). And counting the "political angle" you love to guess, which city will be selected?

A city known for the multicultural population, with a past of opposition against the Apartheid and growning economic and cultural development? (Durban)

or

A city with economical ties and dark past based in the explotation of the mines and the biggest confrontations and divisions of the Apartheid? (Johannesburg)

It's not a question of being disagree or now, it's a point of key information for using some cards like the political angle of a government. People was reconsidering putting a German bid in 2036 for exactly these type of sensibilities.

And finally, as dysan said, there's not political will to make Johannesburg as an sporting city as they are doing since 2006 with Durban.

I only mention that to discredit the notion that hosting event X is an important indication that Durban will be picked as a SOC candidate.

Yes, it's not a requisite, but it shows the potential decision of some countries. Example: Brazil could choose Sao Paulo, after all, it's the biggest metropolis of the Southern Hemisphere, it's a modern city, not far away of the beach and the economic motor of Brazil. And still Rio was selected not only for the SOG, but also for many international sport events (Including Pan American Games) and political meetings,

My point is just that altitude doesn't *disqualify* Johannesburg as a possible host.

Doha was in the upper line of the shortlist selection in 2009 and still it was rejected for weather issues. If you don't think geographical issues don't disqualify potential bids you must be blind. The SOG can reject that, because they are other candidates. This was one of the strongest criticism for Johannesburg to having the final of the World Cup for a technical part (The big stadium). People were affected for the altitude issues. Mexico City happened in 1968, before people can study these effects, after that, every host has been in the coastline, or close of it (With the exception of Munich, which was selected before the 1968 SOG Games have started).

Fine. I think Johannesburg the better pick. People on the internet disagree. Shocking.

It would have better saying - "I prefer Jo-burg", period, instead dropping these empty arguments.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an aside Durban has World Routes 2015. The biggest gathering of the aviation industry happening later this year. Expect an announcement or two near that event.

Additionally Durban is Africa's go to place for large scale conventions. Climate summit etc. We have the World Aids conference again in 2016 with over 20000 people.

Yes these ain't sporting events, but they are large scale events that play to the cities stated focus: the sports and events capital of africa. Joburg is the business hub and will remain that for many years.That's it's niche. This is Durbans. Countries play to their strengths. How is that so hard to understand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems you don't read anything of the other arguments.

That's precisely the problem here. It's like trying to have a discussion with a certain poster from 'England' or a certain other one from the land down under.

No matter how much rationale one explains (especially as well as you've done), to these particular individuals, they merely revert back to their meaningless rhetoric.

Countries play to their strengths. How is that so hard to understand?

I guess it's hard to comprehend when you're doing "10 second google searches" from 10,000 miles away. Cuz ya know, the internet is never wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

. So that South Africa picked Cape Town then probably has little bearing on what city they'd pick now.

Um, exactly. Things change. And may change again.

Is there an ignore button on here for individual posters?

Listen Z man, I am South African, I think my knowledge of the political fundamentals at play trumps that of someone that Google's his info for a response.

Politically, a Johanesburg Games has no support. You are stating support for Cape Town way back when means likely support for Joburg now without even comprehending how the political landscape plays out in SA. The main political leaders are from Durban.

The simple fact is you have a hypothesis and are sticking to it regardless. Well done you. But it means nothing since it is rooted in so much conjecture it is flawed.

If you want to be taken seriously, not by the internet but by a South African, then listen. It seems you just filter everything out

Yep. Probably varies by browser, but you should be able to open up "your profile" where you will see the option to manager your ignore list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, exactly. Things change. And may change again.

As you said "may", but still proposing a future change you need to prove the potential interest of the change or logical reason(s) for that change. And that's the point of your proposition of Jo-burg had not real support in reality. Let's recapitulate:

Infrastructure

Both cities are full of hotels, restaurants and atractions. In any case, Durban was more experienced in international events, contrasting Jo-burg.

Poverty

Both have their pros and cons. So, in what sense Jo-burg is better fit for that when both have the same issues?

Geography

Johannesburg is in a dry plateau and is 1,753 m above sea level. Meanwhile Durban is a coastal city with better weather condictions.

Venues

Jo-burg has a bigger stadium (FIFA), meanwhile Durban was equiped with many sporting centers. Considering the defense of the "2020 Agenda" for some posters here, which bid would have been less expensive for the African people? Making white elephants of sporting venues or adequate an international airport and public transport for the other city?

Political Will

Considering most of the core voters of the current government is located in Southeastern South Africa and the ideological values (Mentioned before), it's not brainer how Jo-burg would have been riskier. So next time, when someone declaring how the government would do, it will came with factical reasons.

And it goes for other crazy propositions (Reading previous posts, remember how enthusiasm Z was from a potential Lagos bid?)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to point out, yes Joburg has the bigger stadium that was used for the 2010 world cup, BUT it is completely incompatible for fitting in an athletics track.

Once again, Durban was the only city that ensures it was Olympic compliant when building it's new world cup stadiums. That shows how far in advance they were planning when all other regions were not.

Hence, for Joburg to bid, they (like Cape Town) would have to build a new stadium for track sports and will have little use for their two existing 60000+ seater stadiums.

Um, exactly. Things change. And may change again.

Yep. Probably varies by browser, but you should be able to open up "your profile" where you will see the option to manager your ignore list.

Thanks, I can't be bothered to continue to see intellectually challenged responses

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the weather statistics from the past few years at wunderground.com I would say Johannesburg could host the Games if they'd be able to push them to begin at the last week of August and end during the first week of September. Yes, the nights could be chilly but most outdoor events are held during daytime anyway, when, considering the constant high pressure and lack of rain in the Highveld, the powerful African sun would have a considerable warming effect by late winter-early spring. Cape Town with its Mediterranean winter rain season is climatically the least suitable to be a host of the three major SA cities IMO.

Although I don't think that Jo'burg is the best or most probable choice for South Africa due to reasons stated earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the weather statistics from the past few years at wunderground.com I would say Johannesburg could host the Games if they'd be able to push them to begin at the last week of August and end during the first week of September. Yes, the nights could be chilly but most outdoor events are held during daytime anyway, when, considering the constant high pressure and lack of rain in the Highveld, the powerful African sun would have a considerable warming effect by late winter-early spring. Cape Town with its Mediterranean winter rain season is climatically the least suitable to be a host of the three major SA cities IMO.

Although I don't think that Jo'burg is the best or most probable choice for South Africa due to reasons stated earlier.

Uhmmm . . . some of the important T&F finals are held at night.

The point though is to have a 'summer' (i.e., warm) event. Not a nippy winter event masquerading as a 'summer' event. And the Olympic fan would get the warmer event w/o having to bring gloves and a winter parka, in Durban. Or having TV commentators explain away to viewers why there is frost coming out of the athletes' mouths when it is supposed to be the 'Summer' Olympix. :blink:

Edited by baron-pierreIV
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...