Jump to content

Johannesburg 2024


MissEurasia
 Share

Recommended Posts

Chicago did not lose the 2016 games because of the South Side, their bid just wasn't up to par.

Chicago lost because Madrid (JAS) and Rio colluded to get them out of the way early because they had a very sound technical bid. If Chicago got past the opening round, Madrid or Rio would've had a harder fight on their hands. And Rio played its South American card to the hilt. That's what swayed the IOC -- not that Chicago's bid was "sub-par."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chicago lost because Madrid (JAS) and Rio colluded to get them out of the way early because they had a very sound technical bid. If Chicago got past the opening round, Madrid or Rio would've had a harder fight on their hands.

I don't believe for a second these clowns could pull something like that off.

Chicago came in last because there for four technically sound bids, and more people wanted to go to one of the other three cities than they wanted to go to Chicago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whom better to know what 'clowns' are capable/incapable of than an iconoclown themselves. :rolleyes:

If you really wanna 'believe' that it was merely as simplistic of more people wanted to go to x,y & z city rather than city a, & adding to that Rio's bid was somehow "technically sound" over the other three bids, then you really have no clue whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe for a second these clowns could pull something like that off.

Chicago came in last because there for four technically sound bids, and more people wanted to go to one of the other three cities than they wanted to go to Chicago.

How many times over have you told us the IOC voters are a bunch of corrupt weasels? You don't get there by being stupid. Who knows what went on behind the scenes, but I think it's perfectly plausible to think there were voters who wanted to eliminate the competition as early as possible. Yea, maybe they didn't want to come back to the United States, but if you're going to accuse an organization of being corrupt, why would you make the case that this vote was made with good intentions and say they're not capable of something like this?

And what's all of that to do with Joburg 2024?

Absolutely nothing. Why would we be discussing Joburg in a Joburg 2024 thread? That would be very un-Gamesbids-like

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For 2020, JAS was already gone, & Madrid's bid was relatively weak (bad Spanish economy, Operation Puerto, etc) in comparison to their 2016 attempt & especially their 2012 one. And I wouldn't necessarily call JAS & Co. trying to "rig" 2016, but more as a final "plea" from his fellow IOC colleagues to give the Spanish capital the Games as a final farewell.

Even JAS himself told Madrid beforehand that their chances weren't that great after Europe (London) was already going to host 2012. But the Spanish fever prevailed in the end to go on with a 2016 bid anyway. If anything, that plea could've cost enough first-round 'sympathy' votes that the final outcome could've been entirely different without it. At least in the first-round anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For 2020, JAS was already gone, & Madrid's bid was relatively weak (bad Spanish economy, Operation Puerto, etc) in comparison to their 2016 attempt & especially their 2012 one. And I wouldn't necessarily call JAS & Co. trying to "rig" 2016, but more as a final "plea" from his fellow IOC colleagues to give the Spanish capital the Games as a final farewell.

Even JAS himself told Madrid beforehand that their chances weren't that great after Europe (London) was already going to host 2012. But the Spanish fever prevailed in the end to go on with a 2016 bid anyway. If anything, that plea could've cost enough first-round 'sympathy' votes that the final outcome could've been entirely different without it. At least in the first-round anyway.

Just like Doha is going to Bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics and Paralympics even though Asia (Tokyo) will Host the 2020 Summer Olympics and Paralympics.

It was obvious that Rio De Janeiro was going to Host the 2016 Summer Olympics and Paralympics, mainly because of them being the First South American Host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like Doha is going to Bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics and Paralympics even though Asia (Tokyo) will Host the 2020 Summer Olympics and Paralympics.

It was obvious that Rio De Janeiro was going to Host the 2016 Summer Olympics and Paralympics, mainly because of them being the First South American Host.

Doha was in the running for the 2020 Olympics and it didn't even make the shortlist. And if enough cities put in a bid for the 2024 Olympics, the same thing will happen. The IOC will avoid at all costs rewarding the games to Doha.

But also look at the 2022 Winter Olympics, it's currently down to Beijing and Almaty, both Asian cities. They were both least likely to be the host for those games because Pyeongchang will just have hosted 4 years prior, until everyone started dropping like flies. Now they are the only ones standing. It may be farfetched for 2 cities from the same continent to consistently host the Olympics, but it's still possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Johannesburg is the more practical, sustainable and realistic host. It has a larger population, it is in a wealthier area, it is known around the world, and it has the most infrastructure already in place. If the IOC is being serious about creating more sustainable, cost-effective Games that are tailored to the host, they would be communicating to South Africa that Johannesburg is the right choice.

Johannesburg would play a key role in financing a Durban Games, and for transporting people to Durban. The right choice for South Africa would be the IOC accepting a late August/early September date for the Games and allowing South Africa to bid and host with a city that has so many structural and cost-savings advantages over Durban and Cape Town.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doha was in the running for the 2020 Olympics and it didn't even make the shortlist. And if enough cities put in a bid for the 2024 Olympics, the same thing will happen. The IOC will avoid at all costs rewarding the games to Doha.

But also look at the 2022 Winter Olympics, it's currently down to Beijing and Almaty, both Asian cities. They were both least likely to be the host for those games because Pyeongchang will just have hosted 4 years prior, until everyone started dropping like flies. Now they are the only ones standing. It may be farfetched for 2 cities from the same continent to consistently host the Olympics, but it's still possible.

I agree. Doha won't Host the Summer Olympics and Paralympics. I'm just saying, Tokyo (Asia) Hosting the 2020 Summer Olympics and Paralympics, won't stop Doha (Asia) Bidding for the 2024 Summer Olympics and Paralympics, even though we all know that Doha won't be Hosting the Summer Olympics and Paralympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Johannesburg is the more practical, sustainable and realistic host. It has a larger population, it is in a wealthier area, it is known around the world, and it has the most infrastructure already in place. If the IOC is being serious about creating more sustainable, cost-effective Games that are tailored to the host, they would be communicating to South Africa that Johannesburg is the right choice.

Johannesburg would play a key role in financing a Durban Games, and for transporting people to Durban. The right choice for South Africa would be the IOC accepting a late August/early September date for the Games and allowing South Africa to bid and host with a city that has so many structural and cost-savings advantages over Durban and Cape Town.

That's a highly simplistic view. You do know that in august anand sept it is still down to close to zero in johanesburg? You do know it's at altitude. You do know that sports infrastructure wise it is a mess and scattered all over. You do know that massive commutes in heavy traffic would be the norm.

I'm not saying joburg is a bad city. It is not. It is a rapidly improving one in many aspects. But an Olympic city it is not

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I'm sure that for the first African Olympics, the IOC would be willing to make those compromises. Just like they did with Rio (South America).

Exactly. Rio is Brazil's #2 city but has the lay of the land and the mild climate to provide a suitable setting for an Olympics. It's exactly the same for Durban. RSA's 3rd city and really -- as I'm sure the South Africans themselves will attest to, is the far more appropriate Olympic city than either Jo'burg or Capetown.

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

But didn't Rio still have a better sporting infrastructure and global brand then Durban does?

Well, Rio is an iconic city...and it also so happens to have the infrastructure AND climate needed for a SOGs (more so than Sao Paulo which is primarily a business metropolis; not a leisure city as Rio is). Durban might NOT be the most int'lly known South African city but it offers the best climate and has passed muster by the IOC close-up. And Agenda 2020 helps Durban because future hosts will not be required to put on the entire, old slate of sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rio De Janeiro only got to Host the 2016 Summer Olympics and Paralympics because they were the First South American Host. The same will happen with Durban with the 2028 Summer Olympics and Paralympics, being the First African Host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Rio is an iconic city...and it also so happens to have the infrastructure AND climate needed for a SOGs (more so than Sao Paulo which is primarily a business metropolis; not a leisure city as Rio is). Durban might NOT be the most int'lly known South African city but it offers the best climate and has passed muster by the IOC close-up. And Agenda 2020 helps Durban because future hosts will not be required to put on the entire, old slate of sports.

Personally I am fine with either city hosting, I just don't want the IOC to have to repeat Rio again. If I were the IOC I would encourage Durban to build up its image and sporting infrastructure.

Keep in mind another part of Agenda 2020 is using as many existing venues as possible and to me it seems like Durban would have to build most of their venues from scratch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Rio is an iconic city...and it also so happens to have the infrastructure AND climate needed for a SOGs (more so than Sao Paulo which is primarily a business metropolis; not a leisure city as Rio is). Durban might NOT be the most int'lly known South African city but it offers the best climate and has passed muster by the IOC close-up. And Agenda 2020 helps Durban because future hosts will not be required to put on the entire, old slate of sports.

That's a dangerous game to play though. We all know how receptive the IOC would be to an African bid, but if they're cutting off sports, they're losing votes. And I'd think they'd need to be careful about pulling a bait-and-switch where they promise everything, win the bid, and then decide to pare down the list of sports. I know some here look at Agenda 2020 as an open invitation to do that, but I want to see it in practice before we're talking about candidates pulling that off, even if that candidate comes from South Africa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/\/\ Well, if everybody did it, then it's OK. ;):lol:

That's why we need to see Agenda 2020 in practice, not in theory. A lot of people here (yourself included) are using the news as license to come up with regional bid concepts and sports that could be cut to suit your own preferences. This is still the IOC though. We keep talking about how they'll be forced to make changes or else they're headed down a bad path like we have for 2022. So yea, this Agenda 2020 stuff is great, but does it mean that much? We could be walking into a 2024 race where there will be at least 3 or 4 countries whose bids are no different than they might have been pre-Agenda 2020. So that the IOC still has those options to choose from, why would they pick anything else?

The first city, be it a bidder or a chosen host, to use Agenda 2020 to their benefit will be innovative in terms of shaping the Olympic movement. Until that happens though, not only is 'everybody' not doing it, no one is doing it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, yeah, yeah. The cities are stupid if they don't use Agenda 2020 to their benefit.

I still say bid everything that the IOC wants to hear. And when you got the package, just start deleting.

You have to win it first. The element of Agenda 2020 that allows you to tweak the sports program does you no good if you don't get the Olympics in the first place. The IOC may not be the most upstanding organization out there, but they're not idiots. They'll see through a city who is offering empty promises. And to do that might even work against a city's aspirations.. offer up a venue or 2 that is just for show and the public might think you're going overboard if they're not in on the little secret that you have no intention of ever building that venue. ;)

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...