Jump to content

Recommended Posts

QEII is a shithole, would require a lot of work. Wonder if they'll look at proposing Boondall like they did for 1992. I read that it's more of a co-bid between Gold Coast and Brisbane so some of the 2018 Commonwealth games venues could come into use. Additionally they've suggested high speed rail between the Gold Coast and Brisbane for the games.

 

As Rols said, Coates has said Brisbane would likely be the next and that Melbourne sits outside the IOC timeframe with no September games. Can't imagine them going for Sydney this soon either. I think it'd be fantastic to bid and would love to see what they suggest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boondall is no longer an option due to being protected wetlands. It's the ideal location, but doesn't seem viable anymore.  You're better off making it at Belmont-Chandler, where you have the Olympic Park, using the existing venues (Shooting complex, Velodrome, minor arena and Brisbane Aquatic Centre).

You add the Olympic Stadium there, Athletes' Village (or have that at Nudgee), Archery (temporary), BMX (temporary/permanent), a new main pool and perhaps a new arena (or minor one, as you can have a new major arena downtown).

Just need to improve train/transport links to that area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5 August 2016 at 4:32 PM, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

 

As Rols said, Coates has said Brisbane would likely be the next and that Melbourne sits outside the IOC timeframe with no September games. Can't imagine them going for Sydney this soon either. I think it'd be fantastic to bid and would love to see what they suggest. 

I just don't buy that they would not consider Melbourne. It's illogical not to. The city not only has the required climate (albeit outside the preferred timeframe), it is a developed, world-class city, has great infrastructure for an olympics, all the requisite facilities for an olympics, is safe and secure locally, but also as part of a country that is safe, is a stable economy, is widely regarded as the sporting capital of the world (or at least always in the top handful of cities) and so on. A Melbourne Olympics would be 1000x better than a Brisbane bid. I mean, it's not even close.

To exclude it from consideration because it doesn't fall within a desired timeframe makes no sense. No matter where the Olympics is held, there is going to be a strong proportion of the world where it is not ideal because it doesn't match up with their summer. Deal with it. If Qatar can change timeframes for FIFA, Melbourne can change it for the Olympics. 

PS. I am from Melbourne, so the bias is real.... but it doesn't change the fact that I am also right ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LDM said:

 If Qatar can change timeframes for FIFA, Melbourne can change it for the Olympics. 

 

You do know that Doha were booted out of the 2016 bid race because they didn't propose dates within the required time period?

I agree that Melbourne is definitely Olympic calibre. It's an Olympic city in waiting. It and LA are perhaps the only two cities in the world who would never need convincing to go for a bid. But the IOC is now quite firm on the dates, and Coates has stated himself that the dates make a Melbourne games a non goer. I've heard suggestions that if push came to shove, the IOC would make allowances and be flexible for Melbourne. Maybe they might if they had no other alternative. But after ditching Doha, and stating it is for exactly that reason, it would certainly not go down too well in some regions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy that, especially when the IOC specifically specified their hosting window - which is as much about fitting into the international sports calendar and broadcasting requirements (read NBC) as anything else, and the president of the Australian Olympic Committee (and IOC Vice President) says that rules Melbourne (which, let's face it, would otherwise be our logical, best and most likely to succeed candidate) out.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LDM said:

I just don't buy that they would not consider Melbourne. It's illogical not to. The city not only has the required climate (albeit outside the preferred timeframe), it is a developed, world-class city, has great infrastructure for an olympics, all the requisite facilities for an olympics, is safe and secure locally, but also as part of a country that is safe, is a stable economy, is widely regarded as the sporting capital of the world (or at least always in the top handful of cities) and so on. A Melbourne Olympics would be 1000x better than a Brisbane bid. I mean, it's not even close.

To exclude it from consideration because it doesn't fall within a desired timeframe makes no sense. No matter where the Olympics is held, there is going to be a strong proportion of the world where it is not ideal because it doesn't match up with their summer. Deal with it. If Qatar can change timeframes for FIFA, Melbourne can change it for the Olympics. 

PS. I am from Melbourne, so the bias is real.... but it doesn't change the fact that I am also right ;)

 

27 minutes ago, zekekelso said:

Doha was ditched for a ton of reasons. "Outside the dates" was the face saving excuse. If the IOC otherwise wants a city, it won't care too much about the dates. 

I said it then and i'll say it now, the IOC set a dangerous precedent when they rejected Doha and used the climate as the main excuse. Doha had a **** ton of issues, the IOC were too scared to call them on out on the various human rights violations etc and used the climate instead. In doing so, they damaged Melbourne's chances. As Rols said, even IOC vice president John Coates has said Melbourne is out and Brisbane is the next chance. 

 

Bit harsh saying Melbourne would be 1000x better. Brisbane would prepare a fantastic bid and host a great games. And most of what you said about Melbourne can be said about Brisbane + a climate that works in the specified time frame.

 

Anyway, today it was announced that;

Quote

"The Gold Coast will contribute up to $300,000 to support a bid by Brisbane City Council to launch a $2.5 million "south-east Queensland" campaign for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Brisbane City Council will put in the largest sum to prepare the $2 million to $2.5 million feasibility bid.

But a formal vote will not be taken for a fortnight to let Gold Coast's councillors absorb the large amount of information supplied on Tuesday as part of the submission. The 2028 Olympics bid idea was unveiled by Brisbane's Lord Mayor Graham Quirk – as chair of the Southeast Queensland Council of Mayors - in July. All 11 south-east Queensland councils are now formally voting to back, or reject the idea.

Brisbane City councillors have already voted to back preparing a feasibility study to host the Games at a range of venues in south-east Queensland. The Gold Coast City council received a briefing from the Council of Mayors on Tuesday afternoon and afterwards Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate said the Gold Coast would support the bid. "It's a south-east Queensland bid," Cr Tate said. "Brisbane is one bookend of it and we would be a major player."

Cr Tate said supporting a feasibility study made economic sense because a major part of preparing the bid was an audit of infrastructure needed in south-east Queensland. "Whether we win the bid or not at least we will have a whole regional plan for generations to come." If the bid is successful, approaches to the federal and Queensland governments are made for the majority of funding to host the Games.

Local councils would provide around 11 per cent of the total funding, a $1.6 billion figure reported by Fairfax Media last week. Sunshine Coast mayor Mark Jamieson has told reporters their council saw more advantages than disadvantages in backing the bid. "It is easy to focus on what these things cost," Cr Jamieson told reporters in late July.

"But equally we need to focus on what they are worth," he said. The supporting information from the Council of Mayors will now "lay on the council table" for a fortnight before a formal vote by the Gold Coast. That means councillors can read through the information before voting. Cr Tate said he did not believe the Gold Coast would suffer from "Games fatigue" if Southeast Queensland won the right to host the 2028 Olympics, after hosting the Commonwealth Games in 2018.

"Well this one is for a bid for the Olympics in 2028, so it will be 10 years between the Commonwealth Games and the Olympics," he said. "It's about forward planning and there will be major events in between them." However the Gold Coast City Council will concentrate on the 2018 Commonwealth Games, Cr Tate said.

Although Ipswich, Scenic Rim, the Sunshine Coast and Toowoomba mayors, appeared with Brisbane Lord Mayor Graham Quirk when a pre-feasibility study was unveiled, before Tuesday only Brisbane City Council had formally voted to work on preparing a bid for the Games. Redland, Lockyer Valley, Somerset and Sunshine Coast councils vote this week, with the remaining SEQ Councils scheduled to meet over the following three weeks.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/gold-coast-to-pitch-in-300k-for-southeast-queenslands-2028-olympics-bid-20160809-gqonf9.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

 

I said it then and i'll say it now, the IOC set a dangerous precedent when they rejected Doha and used the climate as the main excuse. Doha had a **** ton of issues, the IOC were too scared to call them on out on the various human rights violations etc and used the climate instead. In doing so, they damaged Melbourne's chances. As Rols said, even IOC vice president John Coates has said Melbourne is out and Brisbane is the next chance. 

 

Bit harsh saying Melbourne would be 1000x better. Brisbane would prepare a fantastic bid and host a great games. And most of what you said about Melbourne can be said about Brisbane + a climate that works in the specified time frame.

 

Anyway, today it was announced that;

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/gold-coast-to-pitch-in-300k-for-southeast-queenslands-2028-olympics-bid-20160809-gqonf9.html

When I say Melbourne would be a 1000x, I don't mean that to be a slight on Brisbane's bid - as much as I know it sounds like it. It's just based on the pure fact that Melbourne is so well positioned to deliver a truly exceptional games that if Australia was to bid and use Brisbane, I feel like it would be a waste using a sceptical bid as opposed to an absolute home run for a country that will only ever get the chance to host the games once every 40 years at best. It just doesn't make any sense.

Whilst I am not suggesting that this would be the main driver for lodging a bid for Brisbane, that given Australia relies on a heavy tourism industry, having a joint bid between one of our main tourist destinations in the Sunshine Coast and GC and having that given global exposure through a olympic candidacy, it would probably offset a lot of the expense as indirect/direct tourism marketing and maybe justify having a crack. But also with the intention of winning, obviously. The sheer global exposure for them is just a consolation prize.

RE: Sir Rols - of course Coates is going to tow the party line. I wouldn't expect the IOC VP to go against protocol given his standing in the organisation, but in reality (which is very different to the public optics presented, the dates would be flexible. At least they would be for Melbourne. Using Doha, whilst an applicable example, is really comparing apples to oranges. The IOC has to be diplomatic, and so they won't call them out on their million other issues (when, if they had any spine, they probably should).



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, LDM said:

RE: Sir Rols - of course Coates is going to tow the party line. I wouldn't expect the IOC VP to go against protocol given his standing in the organisation, but in reality (which is very different to the public optics presented, the dates would be flexible. At least they would be for Melbourne. Using Doha, whilst an applicable example, is really comparing apples to oranges. The IOC has to be diplomatic, and so they won't call them out on their million other issues (when, if they had any spine, they probably should).

Coates is nothing if not a pragmatist and an effective lobbyist for Australia and the Australian team. He has given encouragement for a Brissie bid, while, as noted, put the kibosh on Melbourne as a bidder.

Best case I could see would be the IOC might be flexible if they had no other choice - ie, it was the ONLY bidder and it therefore had the power to call the shots. And, admittedly, that's not an inconceivable scenario these days.

Otherwise, if it faced competition, it would be required to submit dates within the time range the IOC now specifies as mandatory. It could try to offer dates more conducive to Melbourne's climate, but would likely then be asked by the IOC evaluation team to at best reconsider and resubmit. If it then resubmitted with acceptable dates, then it hands a handy criticism point and advantage to its rivals. C'mon, even as a proud Melburnian, would you really want it to try and host a summer games and all it implies in your winter?

And don't discount the risks of political fallout to the IOC if it reneged on what it told Doha in favour of a core western nation. It's pretty well agreed by many here that stripping Qatar of the 2022 WC, even for all the many points against it, is almost totally politically impossible. And as mentioned, much of the IOC's schedule window is dictated by the international sports calendar and broadcasting requirements. Yet anybody who ever suggests a Southern Hemisphere winter games here is always quickly reminded it's impossible because of the international sports calendar and broadcasting requirements.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Coates is nothing if not a pragmatist and an effective lobbyist for Australia and the Australian team. He has given encouragement for a Brissie bid, while, as noted, put the kibosh on Melbourne as a bidder.

Best case I could see would be the IOC might be flexible if they had no other choice - ie, it was the ONLY bidder and it therefore had the power to call the shots. And, admittedly, that's not an inconceivable scenario these days.

Otherwise, if it faced competition, it would be required to submit dates within the time range the IOC now specifies as mandatory. It could try to offer dates more conducive to Melbourne's climate, but would likely then be asked by the IOC evaluation team to at best reconsider and resubmit. If it then resubmitted with acceptable dates, then it hands a handy criticism point and advantage to its rivals. C'mon, even as a proud Melburnian, would you really want it to try and host a summer games and all it implies in your winter?

And don't discount the risks of political fallout to the IOC if it reneged on what it told Doha in favour of a core western nation. It's pretty well agreed by many here that stripping Qatar of the 2022 WC, even for all the many points against it, is almost totally politically impossible. And as mentioned, much of the IOC's schedule window is dictated by the international sports calendar and broadcasting requirements. Yet anybody who ever suggests a Southern Hemisphere winter games here is always quickly reminded it's impossible because of the international sports calendar and broadcasting requirements.

As a proud Melburnian I would want the games at any cost (but that is just me being selfish)! Maybe having it in our winter could be an advantage - athletes can witness Australia's four seasons in one day!

I think it was you that wrote in a previous topic (LA2024?) when picking apart a point by Lord David that the idea of having a strong technical bid is not the be all and end all because IOC members views on bid quality takes in so many factors. What I am saying is that due to my view that Melbourne is an exceptionally strong option as a host city, that they would be one of the few cities in the world that could command flexibility if they really wanted to bid. But that is just pure speculation, obviously. There are always exceptions to the rule, you just need to know who/what they are.

Besides, it is kind of a moot point talking about Melbourne as an option anyway at this stage because we are not likely to be a serious option for a games until 2032 at the earliest, with those games to be decided in 2025. A lot can change in 9 years and perhaps the IOC may change their criteria even more so by that stage to allow it to bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Olympic Fan Darcy said:

I said it then and i'll say it now, the IOC set a dangerous precedent when they rejected Doha and used the climate as the main excuse. Doha had a **** ton of issues, the IOC were too scared to call them on out on the various human rights violations etc and used the climate instead. In doing so, they damaged Melbourne's chances. As Rols said, even IOC vice president John Coates has said Melbourne is out and Brisbane is the next chance. 

Unless Patagonia & the Sahara are going to become strong contenders anytime soon, & by perhaps alienating ONE good option in the future, so they can tell Doha just to go away, I don't see how the IOC has set a "dangerous precedent" whatsoever. 

Like Rols said, if push came to shove, the IOC would make the immediate accomadations to accept a Melbourne bid outside the time window. And they wouldn't necessarily have to be the only bidder, either. Put them in with the likes of Baku-koo & Doha-hah (even with their inadequate "calendar"), & guess what.. that hypothetical election goes Melbourne's way. 

5 hours ago, LDM said:

I think it was you that wrote in a previous topic (LA2024?) when picking apart a point by Lord David that the idea of having a strong technical bid is not the be all and end all because IOC members views on bid quality takes in so many factors. 

For starters, Rols was "picking apart a point" by Lord David, well, bcuz quite frankly, it needed to be lmfao! 

LD really thinks, bcuz he's so in love with them, that technical bid books are indeed the be-all & end-all of ALL Olympic bids. And that there's no room for anything else to determine the outcome.

The topic of that conversation to start with, had to do with "compelling" bids, such as Beijing & Rio, that when on to win it, despite their bids not being technically "the best". There were other strong factors that influenced those decisions, like taking the Games for the time to the World's most populous nation, China (over "technically superior" Toronto), or to the continent of South America (with just a technically adequate enough bid. In which the IOC EB deemed technically worthy enough to be taken on to the 2016 short-list). 

But in saying all that, in lacking in one of the most important elements of the Summer Olympics (i.e. an actual *summer* climate - 60F degrees during the day & a very, very chilly 45F degrees at night in Melbourne in August, doesn't sound that inviting really. Even Rio right now is much, much warmer than that being south of the equator, too), in a relatively small country that's already hosted the Olympics twice, does not fall into the category in respective to how that conversation that you're talking about was taking place. That's comparing 'apples & oranges', to say the least.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LatinXTC said:

What is the earliest time frame that Melbourne can realistically host a summer Olympics without it being too chilly for outdoor events like open water swimming or the triathlon?

I'm no expert, but I don't think open water swims are the issue. Those folks to in much cooler water. I would most athletes would be perfectly happy with cooler temperatures. Maybe it's the VIP's who care. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Melbourne has one big advantage that Brisbane does not. They have a stadium large enough for athletics and ceremonies. Brisbane does not unless they somehow can make the QEII Park work. I cannot envision either Brisbane or Gold Coast building a 70-80,000 seat athletics stadium that gets no use post-Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LatinXTC said:

What is the earliest time frame that Melbourne can realistically host a summer Olympics without it being too chilly for outdoor events like open water swimming or the triathlon?

October would have to be the earliest they could propose. Even, IMO, that's not ideal - I've frozen in Melbourne in October, but they couldn't propose any later and expect any accomodation by the IOC (November would otherwise be just about perfect, before it gets too hot).

Sydney got away with late September (which it wouldn't be allowed to now). That's also about the earliest we could have done it - 90 per cent of the time it's really a perfect time for Sydney, really lovely spring time of the year, my favourite time of the year. But there was admittedly a slight chance it could have been a washout. We made an informed gamble on the weather (as all hosts do) and won. Even then, in the pre-games training camps before the games, we had teams complaining it was too bloody cold for them (late Aug-early Sept).

We've had a very mild winter this year - yesterday was balmy in Sydney, real shorts and t-shirts weather. And July was our warmest average in decades. As all over the world - isn't 2016 going down as a record warm year? Maybe that's Melbourne's saving grace - count on global warming. Then it could also propose a drawcard like rowing down the centre of Collins Street.

1 hour ago, stryker said:

Melbourne has one big advantage that Brisbane does not. They have a stadium large enough for athletics and ceremonies. Brisbane does not unless they somehow can make the QEII Park work. I cannot envision either Brisbane or Gold Coast building a 70-80,000 seat athletics stadium that gets no use post-Olympics.

Well, actually on the proposal they're looking at, they are indeed proposing a 60,000 seat multi-use stadium in central Brisbane. I don't think that's unreasonable for a city like Brisbane, but that's up for debate, as we Aussies have already done so here in this thread.

10 hours ago, LDM said:

Besides, it is kind of a moot point talking about Melbourne as an option anyway at this stage because we are not likely to be a serious option for a games until 2032 at the earliest, with those games to be decided in 2025. A lot can change in 9 years and perhaps the IOC may change their criteria even more so by that stage to allow it to bid.

Okay, I know I've been down on Melbourne's chances, but that's not to say I think Brisbane's chances are good at the moment. Firstly, as you say, there's timing - 2028 is just too soon after Sydney IMO. I really think Oz should wait till the 2040s before it can reasonably start thinking "it's about time". For all we fancy ourselves a great sporting nation who've staged some of the best games, I don't think the world is just salivating for the chance to go back to us again as soon as humanly possible.

Then, yeah, it is Brisbane. If for 2028 it was to face off against (as many here peredict) LA and maybe throw a Toronto or any other number of high profile international cities in the mix, who are you gonna pick? It doesn't exactly fi into an international line up like Beijing, London, Rio, Tokyo, Paris and... Brisbane???:wacko::wacko::wacko:

Maybe Sydneysiders like me and Melburnians like you are arrogant and biased, but I guess we still consider Brisbane to be an oversized country town. SE Queensland is growing and developing - I've often said I can envisage it as a future host, but only IF it actually does grow its stature to match its projections and ambitions. 

Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Maybe Sydneysiders like me and Melburnians like you are arrogant and biased, but I guess we still consider Brisbane to be an oversized country town. SE Queensland is growing and developing - I've often said I can envisage it as a future host, but only IF it actually does grow its stature to match its projections and ambitions. 

It is probably this! :lol:

By 2040 I do believe that a SEQ bid would be a quality one and a justifiable host city. I just feel it is a shame to have such a ready-made host like Melbourne that would 100% deliver a games that would be on par with London and Sydney (I have no doubt) miss there opportunity to do so because they hosted one in 1956! In an age where so many cities are shirking the Olympics because they can't justify it financially, or that they don't have the domestic support to do it, we have one right here ready to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In truth, I do think the scheduling factor that could prevent a Melbourne games in the future is indeed unfair. Otherwise, of course, Melbourne would be a perfect, high quality almost ready made host. But the IOC rule as it stands is what it is. And it's not just us it disadvantages - it's a hurdle for any aspiring cities in NZ, Argentina our South Africa as well. Actually, talking about South Africa, it's exactly that reason (the timing and the climate) that makes Durban the most likely South African candidate, rather than perhaps a more obvious contender like Capetown or Jo-burg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, FYI said:

Unless Patagonia & the Sahara are going to become strong contenders anytime soon, & by perhaps alienating ONE good option in the future, so they can tell Doha just to go away, I don't see how the IOC has set a "dangerous precedent" whatsoever. 

Like Rols said, if push came to shove, the IOC would make the immediate accomadations to accept a Melbourne bid outside the time window. And they wouldn't necessarily have to be the only bidder, either. Put them in with the likes of Baku-koo & Doha-hah (even with their inadequate "calendar"), & guess what.. that hypothetical election goes Melbourne's way. 

They made their bed, now they have to lie in it. You might think the IOC can just go **** Qatar around and backflip and say nah guys we will accept a bid out of our selected time frame, just not for you guys. But I don't buy that they'll allow Melbourne suddenly. The flipping IOC Vice President is still saying Melbourne isn't an option and that Brisbane looks great.

 

I do agree with you on the push came to shove part but we are seeing Paris and Rome and LA and Brisbane want the games. Melbourne has bidding competition from it's own nation, throw in on top of that the competition from other world class cities (not Doha or Baku), they have no chance. The IOC have closed the books on Melbourne for now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said earlier, alienating ONE "viable" city (i.e. Melbourne) by more or less telling Doha to shove it cuz of the dates, hardly qualifies in "they made their bed, now they have to lay in it". Bcuz seriously, the calendar is probably one of the last hurdles that the next Australian bid would have to face, cuz you just said yourself that some major cities still want the Games (for right now in this race, though), so I don't see Brisbane fairing any better than Melbourne would in the international arena, especially if they're big name, global Alpha cities like those on the 2024 list you just named. Nevermind the domestic Australian competition, cuz that's not really the point here, cuz I see the outcome as pretty much the same depending on who the competition is.

The Doha-hah & Baku-koo reference was mainly tongue in cheek, cuz some around here like to make the argument that democratic countries are slowly shying away from bidding for the Olympics (i.e. Oslo, Stockholm & Munich 2022. And recently, Hamburg 2024 & perhaps maybe Rome 2024 could be next). So it was mainly theoretical since the IOC is sailing through some rough seas ATM (& seeing many desirable locales disappear from their maps) & at some point may just have to sail directly to the first sight of land they see that looks viable enough to sail into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing Australia should get credit for are dedicated fans. If somebody put together an index of actual/expected fans, where expected fans is based on population and distance, Australia* would be off the charts. You see the fans everywhere, even though it's a relatively small country on the other side of the globe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zekekelso said:

I don't know... based on this detailed analysis, why not back to Sidney?

https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/more-like-melbuuuuuurne?utm_term=.efNrP6PXl#.kaPJdldLX

We got lucky once. Don't wanna tempt fate.

Plus I've had my hometown games in my lifetime. I'm not greedy.

Anyway, the Melburnians would be taking to us with pitchforks if we got another before them again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it really that big of a deal hosting an Olympics in Melbourne during August? Yes it gets a bit nippy, but its not like a true Northern Hemisphere winter. The only sports it would be particularly problematic for are triathlon and open water swimming (hardly marquee events) and I suppose beach volleyball (which they could compromise and host indoors). It wouldn't have a major impact on local attendance, except for street events if it rained (the average rainfall in Melbourne in August is comparable to London and Rio but significantly less than Beijing).

Sure, it doesn't quite fit with the "Summer" moniker, but who cares about that technicality? I doubt that would be a determining factor. I think Melbourne's coolness is far less of a serious risk for the IOC to contemplate than the potential unreliability of Athens and Rio.

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...