Jump to content

Norway, IOC To Analyze Oslo's Bid Demise


Recommended Posts

The IOC statement issued after Oslo's "demise" didn't leave me with the impression that a meaningful discussion about the reason could be held between those parties.

The IOC is meeting Norwegian Olympic Officials, not government Officials.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this means the IOC is going to push Norway to bid again in the next cycle. There doesn't seem to be any other obvious reason for such a meeting. Unless they are planning to issue another statement that the Norwegians made a mistake in not bidding to host 2022.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather they talk to the government then, as it seems there would be need to have some real talk clearly.

Norwegian government: "you're all a bunch of pompous divas that want to be catered to at every whim."

IOC: "we prefer the term 'royalty' instead, that merely have an acquired taste for the red-carpet treatment."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that For Fifa, nothing went wrong at all.

They are still very happy with their decisions and don't care about humans rights and worker conditions at all and just want beautiful stadium and lucrative events.

I do not wish to open the debate on an unrelated topic, but you guys should really realized that the only difference between Fifa and IOC is that the IOC has better little ants working for them making them look organised and more democratic than they are.

Just like FIFA, they are just of bunch of spoiled brats, princess and cheicks, most of them having never played any sport at a competition level, full of themselves and having crazy exigences. They don't give a crap about democracy, human rights, they only cared about hotels and how much will be spent on their entertainment.

Fifa is all the same but at least they went to every continents. IOC gave Brezhnev the games in the cold war at a time murders and sweet siberian camps were a reality and China despite terrible human right records and total lack of democracy, is Fifa really worst than them to give two World cups to modern day Russia and Qatar ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this means the IOC is going to push Norway to bid again in the next cycle. There doesn't seem to be any other obvious reason for such a meeting. Unless they are planning to issue another statement that the Norwegians made a mistake in not bidding to host 2022.

As perhaps as this would make sense on the surface, the IOC is so narcissistic most of the time, that I wouldn't be surprised if they have a "screw you" mentality against Notway for a while after bailing out on them for 2022. Especially if they do indeed get more interest in the next round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't your logic that the IOC doesn't forget?

So if Denver is destined to be shamed for a decision from 40+ years ago, surely Oslo faces some kind of repercussion from flaking out after the deadline?

I guess that's directed at me? Well, probably so. But then, the BIG DIFFERENCE is, Oslo's withdrawal is still in the pre-award stages. Denver's "insult" was that they had already been OFFICIALLY awarded the honor, host city contracts signed, and then reneged. Oslo/Norway has already hosted a WOGs twice; is, I guess at this stage, committed to fulfilling WYOG 2016...but has just backed away from any more hostings. So more the scardey-cat creature than the flakey, unreliable one that Denver was...which caused the IOC to scramble for a replacement host. The host for 2022 has YET to be crowned, and the IOC still has two candidates -- so TOTALLY different kettle of fish, as I see it.

If Denver held its referendum BEFORE going in for the vote, then that WOULD equal what Oslo just did. Oslo did it the right way; Denver did it wrong -- doing it AFTERWARDS. What Hanoi did for the 2019 Asian Games, backing out after it had initially accepted the task, equals what Denver did. But then again, the Asian games aren't really that prestigious an event as an Olympic Games. Being a regional event, there are less repercussions on an int'l scale. And Hanoi did so, for seemingly more acceptable reasons -- economics (i.e., we need to feed an clothe out people more than staging another prestige event), rather than the airy-fairy reasons Denver supposedly did -- expense and environment. I mean Denver, Vail and Aspen aren't exactly outposts of Appalachia. And that was before "environmental-consciousness" was fashionable and the cause du jour.

Also, it's not like Oslo is backing out of hosting 2016. PLUS, 1976 was the IOC's unofficial Bicentennial gift to the USA; and those ungrateful tree-huggers of Mile High city sent it back. THAT is insulting in most cultures. The Norwegians are doing no such thing. They are merely saying: we just don't care to host anymore after 2016 under the IOC's present terms.

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

I don't see Norway hosting another WOPG for another 40 years, Sweden wont host another Olympics Games they are turning into an 3rd world country the United Nations are forecasting I think we will see the WOPG going to Western Europe (Barcelona Spain) and Central Europe before going back to Norway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see Norway hosting another WOPG for another 40 years, Sweden wont host another Olympics Games they are turning into an 3rd world country the United Nations are forecasting I think we will see the WOPG going to Western Europe (Barcelona Spain) and Central Europe before going back to Norway.

Care to give the source for that United Nations forecast?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't your logic that the IOC doesn't forget?

So if Denver is destined to be shamed for a decision from 40+ years ago, surely Oslo faces some kind of repercussion from flaking out after the deadline?

This falls more in-line with LD's logic, that if Rome can be "punished" for walking BEFORE the IOC's 'applicant' deadline (merely bcuz a "bid book" was already made), then what less could Oslo face in the aftermath of pulling out of such a dire race AFTER the IOC officially picked out the 'candidates'. The IOC was counting on Oslo. Plus, they had the damn bid logo already, lmfao! :-D

Sweden wont host another Olympics Games they are turning into an 3rd world country the United Nations are forecasting.

Uh huh. This coming from the individual that endorses nothing but third-world countries; Thailand, Peru, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Indonesia, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This falls more in-line with LD's logic, that if Rome can be "punished" for walking BEFORE the IOC's 'applicant' deadline (merely bcuz a "bid book" was already made), then what less could Oslo face in the aftermath of pulling out of such a dire race AFTER the IOC officially picked out the 'candidates'. The IOC was counting on Oslo. Plus, they had the damn bid logo already, lmfao! :-D

This. The IOC is stuck with the realization that their only 2 candidates left are..

925277e6b151350f3612cae9c182b8434c6d66e4

And as noted, they're already hosting the IOC for 2016 Youth Olympics. So it's amusing that the IOC is calling them out so publicly like this when they have to work with them in just a little over a year. I'm guessing Oslo will shy away from bidding for the next cycle or 2. After that, whenever they're back in the running, no reason to think the IOC wouldn't consider a bid from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see Norway hosting another WOPG for another 40 years, Sweden wont host another Olympics Games they are turning into an 3rd world country the United Nations are forecasting I think we will see the WOPG going to Western Europe (Barcelona Spain) and Central Europe before going back to Norway.

Sweden and Norway have much more chance of Hosting the Olympics then Kazakhstan, Peru, Thailand, Indonesia, Anchorage or Perth does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So more the scardey-cat creature than the flakey, unreliable one that Denver was...which caused the IOC to scramble for a replacement host. The host for 2022 has YET to be crowned, and the IOC still has two candidates -- so TOTALLY different kettle of fish, as I see it.

Oslo did it the right way; Denver did it wrong -- doing it AFTERWARDS..

The Norwegians are doing no such thing. They are merely saying: we just don't care to host anymore after 2016 under the IOC's present terms.

The timing of Denver's rejection of the 1976 OWG sets it appart from the withdrawal of Oslo's candidacy for 2022. However, one can make the case that Oslo's rejection was more insulting and more damaging. With Denver, the concerns were cost, first, and environment, second. With Oslo, cost never seemed to be the main issue, in and of itself. Instead, the opposition arguments that seemed to carry the day were fueled by opposition to the IOC and, to some extent, the value of the modern Games. This was not a polite, "maybe another time," reconsideration. This was a rejection based on pointed criticism of the IOC and implicit criticism of the current Olympic concept. It essentially questioned why any right-thinking country would work with the IOC or take on the hosting of the Games. This, moreover, came at a time when it was well appreciated that those criticisms, accompanying the withdrawal of the last western country in the field, would be heard far and wide. A rejection in this manner, when, from all indications, the IOC was showing every willingness to reasonably adjust requirements to accommodate Norwegian concerns, would certainly justify a strong feeling of insult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the IOC should just leave Norway alone for a while- the last thing the Norwegian public want is the IOC in their face at this 'sensitive' time.

Also, I pick the giant douche....

Which one? God it feels like elections in the US just Olympic style.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The timing of Denver's rejection of the 1976 OWG sets it appart from the withdrawal of Oslo's candidacy for 2022. However, one can make the case that Oslo's rejection was more insulting and more damaging. With Denver, the concerns were cost, first, and environment, second. With Oslo, cost never seemed to be the main issue, in and of itself. Instead, the opposition arguments that seemed to carry the day were fueled by opposition to the IOC and, to some extent, the value of the modern Games. This was not a polite, "maybe another time," reconsideration. This was a rejection based on pointed criticism of the IOC and implicit criticism of the current Olympic concept. It essentially questioned why any right-thinking country would work with the IOC or take on the hosting of the Games. This, moreover, came at a time when it was well appreciated that those criticisms, accompanying the withdrawal of the last western country in the field, would be heard far and wide. A rejection in this manner, when, from all indications, the IOC was showing every willingness to reasonably adjust requirements to accommodate Norwegian concerns, would certainly justify a strong feeling of insult.

I posted this article recently, but it bears repeating since it offers some background on why Denver rejected the 1976 Olympics..

The Olympics that weren’t

The concerns were absolutely over the environment and legacy moreso than the costs. That aspect of it was simply a tool to get the public involved and make it easier for them to reject the financing. As much as that was an aspect of all this, the good folks of Colorado didn't want the world descending upon their state at the time (not to mention the venue plan was altered significantly which led to some of the uproar). But I digress..

If you're going to compare Oslo 2022 to Denver 1976, here's the way I look at it.. Denver's rejection put the IOC in a precarious position. They had to scramble to find a replacement host on short notice and settled for Innsbruck who had hosted less than a decade prior. But the IOC did little to deserve that problem that was laid out in front of them.

Flash forward to now. Once again, the IOC is in a precarious position. But they largely put themselves there. Oslo isn't to blame for what they've got left. They're not the only European city to drop out of this race. Yes, the undertone of their actions are that they don't want to work with the IOC, but the same could be said of the others that dropped out. That the IOC responded the way they did, to me, isn't an indictment against Oslo, but more, like you said, about specific criticisms against the IOC. Again, not sure I can lay fault with Oslo for coming to that realization simply because they're the last of the European cities to reject the IOC. And your last statement.. I'm not sure I would agree with that. I think if Oslo had stayed in the race long enough to win the vote, then maybe the IOC would have been more accomodating, but considering the long list of demands in the first place, I'm not so sure they would have been so willing to adjust aside from the back that they would be backed into a corner and might not have any choice.

I think in time, that we originally had a field that included multiple cities from Europe might be a footnote of the 2022 Olympics. It all depends on how the IOC moves forward from this. If Western cities/nations continue to shy away from the Olympics, that's one thing. But is this cycle is an aberration, then what Oslo did is neither insulting nor damaging to the IOC and I believe we might see them again in the not-too-distant future should the IOC decide to take some much needed steps to reform.

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...