Jump to content

If the IOC picked permanent hosts cities


Recommended Posts

You can't seriously put this to "shady" communism? Do you really think the American brand of neoliberalism is encouraging of an honest and transparent society? Nope - if anything, it is American style capitalism that the Russians have pegged themselves to that is responsible for said Sochi corruption.

Oh SHUT UP!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

But what would Lord David and others do without their precious bid books! Yea, this is a pretty bad idea. Pretty sure we're not supposed to take an article that seriously when it suggests building

This proposal assumes a host city will keep an Olympic Park in stasis forever. The stadium won't be converted to anything or downsized, the village will be left empty and in Olympic-mode ready for 10

Giving a permanent home to the Olympics means that people from the farthest parts of the globe will FOREVER be disadvantaged to attend an Olympics in their lifetime and say, the Swiss or the Greeks, w

I do think there should be a city that is on permanent standby for 3 olympiads, which is awarded by having every sporting federation have their world championships (or *a* world championships, like U17s or whatever for FIFA), so that if a city is as dangerously underprepared as many have been, the standby city can host.

Obviously, Melbourne would be an excellent choice for the 2016-2024 standby city ;)

I guess there is some kind of unofficial arrangement in place for stand by hosts - logically if a host reveals early after winning it would go to the runner up, but more likely I think we'd be looking at the last host city being invited to host again in an emergency situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It probably depends on how far in advance the notice would come. Innsbruck was basically ready for 76 with, I think, just over 4 years in advance, but if - heavens forbid - Rio were to pull out tomorrow, which place could really be ready for Summer Games within 2.5 years? London? Maybe, or they find some other place and the IOC accepts that they must lower their expectations/demands for that emergency host.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine London, Beijing, or Melbourne being the obvious standbys for the summer games, maybe SLC or Lillehammer for the winters. I very much hope it never comes to that though, would be such a shame for the original host :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think Beijing would probably be asked if Rio pulled out between now and 2016. I'm not sure a post-games London would actually be able to do it - indeed one of my main complaints about the whole legacy thing was that hosting another Olympics doesn't seem to be a part of that legacy.

Beijing I assume was less keen to downsize their venues post games. Melbourne would have the stadium ready but despite regularly being voted the greatest sporting city in the world it would be a tough ask for them to go alone - though if they were allowed to share the games with Sydney I'm sure between them it would be covered. I suspect though even in an emergecy situation the IOC would want to avoid that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

uhmmm...LA is the IOC's fall-back city for Summer -- esp now with its new subway system and Staples Center + a few other venues which weren't there in 1984. Seoul and LA were the 2 back-up cities after Sydney said they couldn't do it when Athens was faltering around 2002. LA said that all they need is like 20 months leadtime in order to stage a full SOGs. All they need is one school year in order to rejig the USC/UCLA calendars for those to become Villages again.

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

uhmmm...LA is the IOC's fall-back city for Summer -- esp now with its new subway system and Staples Center + a few other venues which weren't there in 1984. Seoul and LA were the 2 back-up cities after Sydney said they couldn't do it when Athens was faltering around 2002. LA said that all they need is like 20 months leadtime in order to stage a full SOGs. All they need is one school year in order to rejig the USC/UCLA calendars for those to become Villages again.

That was 12 years ago - even in that short time the demands of the games have changed fairly significantly. I would agree though LA is one of the few cities in the world who could host at relative short notice, but I still think Beijing would be more able at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be a dumb question, but it surprises me when I read that just two years after the Sydney games, they indicated they would be unable to host if

Athens had faltered. And some have posted that right now London would be unable to do so. Is this because the venues were put to other uses or removed or is it because of some other issues such as planning events? I often wonder what becomes of these Olympic sites.

In the past thirty years or so, these sites have become mammoth. We're not talking Squaw Valley, Lake Placid or even Montreal here. We're talking in terms of entirely new ski mountains, stadiums, skating centers, housing, highways, rail systems and the like.

So, what really does not happen to Sochi? Will it become a major winter sports destination in spite of the well publicized problems with maintaining snow and the political unrest in the region. Their venues looked so impressive. Will they be utilized or will they simply become obsolete curiosities in twenty years? In four years would Sochi also be unable to host if there was a major problem in South Korea?

This is why the cost of these current games is so mind blowing, Whether the 51 billion was spent on venues or infrastructure connecting venues is not the issue. What becomes of such a vast Olympic empire like we saw in Sochi? It certainly won't host an event as significant as the Olympics in our collective lifetimes. So, what does generally happen with these places? And why is it that just two years after the London games, the city really would be unable to step in if there was a need to do so? What were/are the plans for the Olympic facilities in London today?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was 12 years ago - even in that short time the demands of the games have changed fairly significantly. I would agree though LA is one of the few cities in the world who could host at relative short notice, but I still think Beijing would be more able at the moment.

And what Village would Beijing offer? English (and French) are the two working languages of the IOC; and you think Beijing could do it in a jiffy? Think again...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The London Olympic Village has been sold to private buyers and the swimming venue has been drastically downsized from 17k capacity to about 3k. The basketball venue was temporary and is now gone. The whole Olympic Park is currently being reformatted into and urban park with residential and commercial plots either sold or under construction. So, the Olympic Park as we knew it in 2012 no longer exists. The stadium is being downsized from 80k to 60k and will host the IAAFs in 2017 and there is talk of London bidding for the 2022 Commonwealth games, but essentially there is no scope for London to host another Olympics at short notice using the 2012 facilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And why is it that just two years after the London games, the city really would be unable to step in if there was a need to do so? What were/are the plans for the Olympic facilities in London today?

In short because the state of "heightened alert" when resources are mobilized to an unusual state of readiness for a 2-week event, simply CANNOT be maintained year-round. Life has to return to normal. The "dancing nurses" in London have to go back to nursing or dancing -- you can't have both. It only happened at an Olympic OC. The crux is always the Village. What will function as the housing for 10,500 athletes, 17,000+ press, in a secure mode -- secure being the operative term because of 1972. The previous Village units have already been sold and/or leased to other tenants. They cannot be pushed out of those premises; they now have the right of ownership to those units (Oops...see above...) Plans for tearing down other venues, giving them away, downsizing have all been made after the 27 days (OGs and Paras) which are only meant to happen once. That's why.

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

And why is it that just two years after the London games, the city really would be unable to step in if there was a need to do so? What were/are the plans for the Olympic facilities in London today?

Best place to look is on http://queenelizabetholympicpark.co.uk/

We also have a thread at http://www.gamesbids.com/forums/topic/22012-legacy-mode/

I do think, if a space-rock hit Rio in a few months wiping it off the face of the earth and London was called upon to host 2016 with two years' notice it could host a Games in some form, but the IOC would need to severely compromise with regard to:

  • Capacity e.g. London's Aquatic Centre now holds about 2,500 rather than the 15,500 it held during the Games. I can't see London building a 15,000 seat hockey arena again so the new hockey centre to the north of the Park will probably be used (cap 3000). Some temporary arenas could be rebuilt, others like the basketball venue which were more complex would present difficulties so you'd probably end up having those sports in smaller existing arenas instead.
  • Athlete accommodation - the athlete's village is now private housing. If London were to be an emergency host, athlete comfort and convenience would be one thing which would have to be sacrified. Empty university halls across the city could be used instead maybe? Or do as Wimbledon does and get locals to house athletes.
  • Press/broadcast centre - the huge IBC complex now houses several different businesses. One of those happens to be BT Sport, so there may well be some media facilties there that could be put to use, but in general it's not going to go back to how it was. The Press and Brocasters will have to slum it elsewhere.

There are other issues, like the fact that the huge wide open concourses in the park which were built to cater for hundreds of thousands are being put to a different use now, so you'd have trouble having the numbers in the park that were there in 2012. Also train timetabling etc will need to be looked at, ticketing etc. But the three points above are the main ones I think.

As I say, London could host some sort of Olympics in short notice at a push, but it wouldn't be what we're used to seeing.

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...