GBModerator Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 Krakow’s bid to host the 2022 Olympic Winter Games was shaken Saturday with the resignation of its dynamic President Jagna MarczuÅ‚ajtis-Walczak and a flurry of View the full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 And then there were three...this is getting really sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord David Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 ^^ Which is the perfect reason to make this the 2024 Winter Olympics, as a way to not only avoid conflict with a Qatar World Cup held at the start of 2022, but also as a means of getting more cities to bid because it's the centennial. AND they have 2 more years of preparation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanMUC Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 ^^ Which is the perfect reason to make this the 2024 Winter Olympics, as a way to not only avoid conflict with a Qatar World Cup held at the start of 2022, but also as a means of getting more cities to bid because it's the centennial. AND they have 2 more years of preparation. Dream on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikarus360 Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 Why they don't just give the games to Oslo and save us this whole ordeal? Seriously. This will be the most boring and predictable race in decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanMUC Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 Why they don't just give the games to Oslo and save us this whole ordeal? Seriously. This will be the most boring and predictable race in decades. Well, Oslo has a big fat question mark over its head, too... I'd really like to know what they honestly think in Lausanne about the 2022 race. Probably very different from the public statements by Bach à la "not too worried". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 Wouldn't be the first bid, or even first winning bid, that lost or replaced its bid leader mid stream. It doesn't look good, but it does show a sensitivity to concerns and potential criticism and who know's how this will play out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted April 12, 2014 Report Share Posted April 12, 2014 There have been lots of times in the past where they've only ended up one or two bidders. It wouldn't be unprecedented to end up with Beijing and Almaty being the only two bids to go ahead. The only real difference between this and previous times is that there may not be a western country to move forward with a bid. I don't think you will really see panic until we see a large and vocal opposition to the Olympics in Russia, China, etc. Then the IOC will really be in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 The IOCisnt real good at self inspection and fault finding. I'm sure they view this as a problem in Poland, not an IOC problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 There have been lots of times in the past where they've only ended up one or two bidders. It wouldn't be unprecedented to end up with Beijing and Almaty being the only two bids to go ahead. The only real difference between this and previous times is that there may not be a western country to move forward with a bid. I don't think you will really see panic until we see a large and vocal opposition to the Olympics in Russia, China, etc. Then the IOC will really be in trouble. Not since the early 1980s they haven't. The last time there was only 2 bidders was the 1981 vote for the `88 Olympics when it was just Seoul and Nagoya. So that came on the heels of the Munich disaster in `72, Denver giving back the `76 games, Montreal's financially woeful Olympics, and the boycotts of Moscow `80. It came before LA '84 that restored faith in the Olympic movement and led to a more full field of bidder for the 1992 Summer and Winter Olympics (although most of us know the history behind that). If the IOC is left with only 2 bidders for 2022, that's bad. Really bad. If Oslo and Krakow are both forced to drop out (and that's after Stockholm already dropped out), the IOC is really in trouble and they will start to panic. We've seen the number of bidders steadily decline literally every cycle for over a decade now. That's a pretty disturbing trend that the IOC really needs to take note of. If their only 2 options are Beijing and Almaty meaning their hasn't been a worthy enough European candidate for 3 Olympics in a row, they need to be more than a little concerned about their future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Not since the early 1980s they haven't. The last time there was only 2 bidders was the 1981 vote for the `88 Olympics when it was just Seoul and Nagoya. So that came on the heels of the Munich disaster in `72, Denver giving back the `76 games, Montreal's financially woeful Olympics, and the boycotts of Moscow `80. It came before LA '84 that restored faith in the Olympic movement and led to a more full field of bidder for the 1992 Summer and Winter Olympics (although most of us know the history behind that). I think the current environment is kind of similar, though. We are just beginning to emerge from a global recession and the Sochi games were unprecedented in their cost, somewhat like Montreal's disaster. The cost of $51 was inserted into half the articles on the Olympics this year. If the IOC is left with only 2 bidders for 2022, that's bad. Really bad. If Oslo and Krakow are both forced to drop out (and that's after Stockholm already dropped out), the IOC is really in trouble and they will start to panic. We've seen the number of bidders steadily decline literally every cycle for over a decade now. That's a pretty disturbing trend that the IOC really needs to take note of. If their only 2 options are Beijing and Almaty meaning their hasn't been a worthy enough European candidate for 3 Olympics in a row, they need to be more than a little concerned about their future. Well, I don't disagree that it is bad. I am just pointing out the fact that the IOC has been in bad situations before. My guess is that they think they just need one western country to host a cost effective winter games and the public opinion will turn back in their favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 The cost of $51 was inserted into half the articles on the Olympics this year. Boy, that's one hell of a recession hangover if a mere $51 Winter Olympics is scaring virtually everyone away! lmfao But seriously, how can the IOC even think that they just "need one" western country to host a cost-effective Games when even those are steering right clear from the Games. I'm sure the IOC wants (& needs) that now. And I'm sure that they see that in Oslo, but if that is slipping seemingly right through their fingers. *but even that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikarus360 Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 If the IOC is left with only 2 bidders for 2022, that's bad. Really bad. If Oslo and Krakow are both forced to drop out (and that's after Stockholm already dropped out), the IOC is really in trouble and they will start to panic. We've seen the number of bidders steadily decline literally every cycle for over a decade now. That's a pretty disturbing trend that the IOC really needs to take note of. If their only 2 options are Beijing and Almaty meaning their hasn't been a worthy enough European candidate for 3 Olympics in a row, they need to be more than a little concerned about their future. I don't want to sound rude, but that's what they get for letting the whole Olympics grow out of control :/ specially during Rogge tenure, who did little if anything to solve this issue. The huge costs of the Sochi games are also to blame for this situation and scared much more potential cities to bid (as if there weren't enough scared cities already). Which is why i've become recently a strong supporter of bringing the Olympics back to the basics, trying to lower the costs and make those much more accessible to others who are interested on these. Right now I can't blame Bach much since he has been only half a year as president but he really needs to get a move to regain the trust in the Olympics on and stay to his promises when he sat on the presidential chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 My guess is that they think they just need one western country to host a cost effective winter games and the public opinion will turn back in their favor. Even before Sochi, though, when the IOC stocks should have been quite high in the aftermath of two very well received games in liberal countries like Canada and the UK, we were already seeing the likes of the Swiss, Munich and Stockholm drop out. Just seems to be getting worse since then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Boy, that's one hell of a recession hangover if a mere $51 Winter Olympics is scaring virtually everyone away! lmfao Whoops! That was dumb. Obviously I meant $51 billion, though. But seriously, how can the IOC even think that they just "need one" western country to host a cost-effective Games when even those are steering right clear from the Games. I'm sure the IOC wants (& needs) that now. And I'm sure that they see that in Oslo, but if that is slipping seemingly right through their fingers. *but even that. They likely feel that if they can get a city like Oslo to host, though, it would turn public opinion back in favor of other cities hosting. They just need ONE good western city to win people back, and in the meantime they can knock off a few Olympics in "new frontiers." I'm not suggesting that this is a good thing. I am just saying I don't think they are in panic mode yet. If Oslo hosts and loses a ton of money, or if Beijing also withdraws, then I think they will start thinking about taking measures to reduce costs for the hosts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Even before Sochi, though, when the IOC stocks should have been quite high in the aftermath of two very well received games in liberal countries like Canada and the UK, we were already seeing the likes of the Swiss, Munich and Stockholm drop out. Just seems to be getting worse since then. The recession played a big role in that, though. Look at how many bidders they had during the global depression during the 1930's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donutman88 Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 I'm seriously wondering if the IOC would be willing to "redo" this bidding process if Almaty/Beijing are soon the only two in the game. I don't think this will be the case, and it's not that they are incapable, but there really isn't "much to choose from" there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord David Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Dream on. It was a joke. But if Almaty and Beijing do end up as being the only ones left, it does make one wonder if the IOC might want to put a little incentive like the Centennial to get more interest regardless of Qatar 2022. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 I think the current environment is kind of similar, though. We are just beginning to emerge from a global recession and the Sochi games were unprecedented in their cost, somewhat like Montreal's disaster. The cost of $51 was inserted into half the articles on the Olympics this year. Well, I don't disagree that it is bad. I am just pointing out the fact that the IOC has been in bad situations before. My guess is that they think they just need one western country to host a cost effective winter games and the public opinion will turn back in their favor. Sochi and Montreal are in no way comparable. Montreal's Olympics left that city in debt for 3 decades. The costs of the Sochi Olympics, while extremely excessive, aren't likely to do any long-lasting damage to the country. And yes, the IOC has been in a bad situation before. There were times in the 70s and 80s that people questioned the future of the Olympic movement. But then Los Angeles came along. That's not on the horizon now with the next 2 Olympics in Rio and Pyeongchang. I do agree with your last point, but the problem is that we're at a bare minimum of 8 years from that being possible. Which mean there will be no less than 4 Olympic Games awarded by the next time the Olympics are held in a Western country (and 3 before Tokyo, 2020's safe option, hosts their Olympics). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 The old thought of, "We'll just have a liberal western country host to make up for a bad games" is dead. The fantastic games of Atlanta, Sydney, Salt Lake, Vancouver, and London have all been overshadowed by either events at the games or the games the followed. To me the next 8 years feel like the 2004-2008 season, now 2022 is going to drive the movement down further if they do not do something quick...time for Bach to call the US and cut a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Coast Lions Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 The IOC may have only have 2 bidders left for the 2022 winter race with Almaty Kazakhstan and Beijing China, I think Los Angeles USA will be the city that the IOC will pick in 2024 Summer Games to restore faith in the Olympics Movement and there will be calls for Calgary Canada to bid for the 2026 Winter Games I doubt any city in Europe will make an bid for the 2026 Winter Games by the way things are going in Europe, Barcelona will be going through massive changers looks like they will be independents from Spain so they will be out of action for the next few years in building up the government in Catatonia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanMUC Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 I wonder why there are people apologetic of Bach and expecting him to turn the tide. He was already a key IOC figure during the Rogge reign and didn't stay in mind for progressive ideas about the future of the Olympics during the past decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 I wonder why there are people apologetic of Bach and expecting him to turn the tide. He was already a key IOC figure during the Rogge reign and didn't stay in mind for progressive ideas about the future of the Olympics during the past decade. There all the same eccentric bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 The IOC may have only have 2 bidders left for the 2022 winter race with Almaty Kazakhstan and Beijing China, I think Los Angeles USA will be the city that the IOC will pick in 2024 Summer Games to restore faith in the Olympics Movement and there will be calls for Calgary Canada to bid for the 2026 Winter Games I doubt any city in Europe will make an bid for the 2026 Winter Games by the way things are going in Europe, Barcelona will be going through massive changers looks like they will be independents from Spain so they will be out of action for the next few years in building up the government in Catatonia. Why does it have to be LA? Why not Paris who could show that the games can be hosted in dense cities without the construction of an Olympic Park and in addition get Europe interested. However I agree with you on Calgary, but this still goes much deeper than good cities hosting, it's how the IOC is choosing these cities, it's not right and not working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Coast Lions Posted April 14, 2014 Report Share Posted April 14, 2014 Why does it have to be LA? Why not Paris who could show that the games can be hosted in dense cities without the construction of an Olympic Park and in addition get Europe interested. However I agree with you on Calgary, but this still goes much deeper than good cities hosting, it's how the IOC is choosing these cities, it's not right and not working. Los Angeles has always been an trusted partner to the IOC and Los Angeles saved the Olympics Movement two times with out that city there would be no Olympics Games today Los Angeles is hosting the 2015 Special Olympics World Summer Games and an well loved city by the international city. LA is the same thing as Paris don;t need an Olympics park they got most of the venues in place and they will just need upgrading also Los Angeles is different now back in 1984 they don't have a rail system now they do. France is uncertainty right now the economy there is failing now and looks like the new mayor of Paris is anti Olympics Bid so Paris may not run in 2024 like Rome Italy so the race is between Berlin Germany and Los Angeles USA for the 2024 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.