Jump to content

Sports Vote in Singapore


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ebb Posted on April 25 2005,01:28

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Generally or just the pros?

Generally...making it an amateur event would lower the significance of the sport within the Olympics, plus throw up some ridiculous results (like China's gold in tennis), and if it were pro then we'd see arguments over the merits of the Olympics contrasted with the US Open, PGA, Masters and British Open, plus all the same crap you hear round the time of the Ryder Cup. Can anyone truly believe that Tiger Woods would stay in the Olympic village? We've seen what pro sports like baseball, basketball, ice hockey and tennis mean when the pros fick around with the games...don't expect golf to be any different.

And yes..I do play golf  :laughlong:

This question may be ridiculed here, but wasn't a Canadian the last Olympic champion in golf, when it used to be an Olympic sport?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like Rogge has got the IFs REALLY riled up (see today's G'Bids news item).

Indeed, this could be the big test of Rogge's leadership. I hope he stands firm, but I think he's got a real fight on his hands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks like Rogge has got the IFs REALLY riled up (see today's G'Bids news item).

Indeed, this could be the big test of Rogge's leadership. I hope he stands firm, but I think he's got a real fight on his hands.

You think he is going to have a fight in this manner, what about Pound? He's the one that could finalize which sports/events stays or goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mexico1968 Posted on April 24 2005,10:28

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote (ryan04 @ April 23 2005,20:08)

i also think they can add sports without dropping them (maybe after Rogge that will happen) i can see golf being added but IMO it is so boreing but it is becoming so populat i mean in the USA we have a Golf channel on the TV for cable viewers

golf is not important in 60% of the world...and thats a big mayority...so you can have a channel in cable..but Golf wont become an olympic sport.

Rogge will be in power at least 6 or 10 years more..and thats a lot of time...too much time if you ask me..and he is too liberal and severe..i can see him dropping more sports

(Jacques) Rogge...is too liberal and severe?? Sorry mexico1968, but what does this mean? How can he be liberal and severe at the same time? If you mean he is too liberal with allowing sports to stay on in the programme, or too severe in wanting cuts, can you quote some evidence? I honestly believe that Rogge is being sensible in floating concerns about the current size of the games, and showing a willingness to review the position of sports. But ultimately, like the selection of the host city for an Olympic Games, the selection of the sports programme for the games is decided by the IOC membership, and it is they that can be considered too 'liberal and severe'.

i was talking about liberal by the fact that he wants to drop sports (and make changes in the IOC)..and severe about what he has done in dopping and brive scandals.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks like Rogge has got the IFs REALLY riled up (see today's G'Bids news item).

Indeed, this could be the big test of Rogge's leadership. I hope he stands firm, but I think he's got a real fight on his hands.

You think he is going to have a fight in this manner, what about Pound? He's the one that could finalize which sports/events stays or goes.

It seems like Pound's been cut out of the loop after the failure last time to get some individual sports cut and by Rogge's attempt to outmaneouvre the IFs in Singapore.

The formula now is, EVERY sport currently at the Olympics is going to be put up for an individual vote for continuation at Singapore, and those that don't get more than 50 per cent are out and will be replaced from those on the list of five (rugby, golf, squash, roller sports and, err, whatever the other one was) that get a two-thirds vote from the IOC members.

It seems this is Rogge's attempt to divide and conquer _ he knows that targetting individual sports for replacement will likely not succeed again because if they are forewarned, they will just mount a huge lobbying effort and support from other IFs to ensure their survival. By putting EVRY sport up for grabs, he figures the individual IFs won't be able to do that because all of them will be too concerned with maintaining their own survival..

The thing is, this has put him on a collision course with the IFs as a whole, and this could be a fight that impacts his chances to stay on in the leadership if he decides to run again for nanother four years in 2009. It sure makes him vulnerable if another leadership contender crops up who tries to champion the IFs. It would be a bit similar to what happened at FIFA _ Blatter managed to secure his position by championing the lesser  confederations (Asia, Africa, Oceania) against the entrenched power of the Europeans and South Americans.

To me, this is shaping up as a developing that will be just as interesting to watch at Singapore as the actual 2012 bid vote. It's the first real bit of steel that I've seen in Rogge's leadership and I hope he comes through at the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

But then again, that would have been too simple -- and they never asked me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

But then again, that would have been too simple -- and they never asked me.

Yeah, that would have been a lot simpler and was probably the original plan. This new thing, though, seems to be ba power play between Rogge and the IFs. He's probably counting on the fact that by the time the members have gone through a dozen or so votes on sports, they'll start to get bored and their minds will wander and next thing you know, they;ll have voted something off. He'll probably load it so that the blue riband sports _ athletics, swimming, gymnastics etc get voted on first, and things like modern pentathlon and softball etc come in at the tail end.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Roltel, if Pound is really out of the loop, then what was the whole purpose of his role here? I don't want to think his role was just "ceremonial." With Canada about to host its third Olympic Games and he's the only IOC member, some Canadians may see this as "another slap in the face", compliments of the IOC.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Roltel, if Pound is really out of the loop, then what was the whole purpose of his role here? I don't want to think his role was just "ceremonial." With Canada about to host its third Olympic Games and he's the only IOC member, some Canadians may see this as "another slap in the face", compliments of the IOC.

Oh no, his (Pound's) role was quite serious, and as with everything he does for the Olympic movement, he was really trying to do what he saw as best.

This whole change of to voting on each sport is only just a recent thing, only announced a week or two ago, and I really read it as Rogge realising it was the only chance they had of maybe actually getting some sports dropped and some rationalisation happening. I think Rogge's really IS keen on getting rid of some of the dead wood sports and getting some others like Rugby in, but he's seen how remote the chances of that are in a conventional sense after the mutiny last year over the attempts to give the shaft to modern Pentathlon etc.

Pound's role in all this was never just ceremonial. It's just that now they are changing tactics and taking the IFs head-on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay. However, how do we know that Pound won't get "stabbed in the back" in that row between Rogge and the IFs? To me, his role just got complicated by that decision.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay. However, how do we know that Pound won't get "stabbed in the back" in that row between Rogge and the IFs? To me, his role just got complicated by that decision.

Pound is too valuable for the IOC to lose. Reports suggested that he already tried to resign (or at least try to resign from some of his commissions) when Rogge got elected, but Rogge did some fast talking to keep him on side. Sure, he has his enemies, but I think it's well recognised that he's one of the most capable and effective IOC members.

I think most of his focus is on WADA now, anyway (and that's a tough enough role to be in on its own).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pound is too valuable for the IOC to lose. Reports suggested that he already tried to resign (or at least try to resign from some of his commissions) when Rogge got elected, but Rogge did some fast talking to keep him on side. Sure, he has his enemies, but I think it's well recognised that he's one of the most capable and effective IOC members.

I think most of his focus is on WADA now, anyway (and that's a tough enough role to be in on its own).

That's what I mean. Some IOC people didn't like the idea that WADA is based in Montreal (in which Pound is from). Of course, some of them say that he was the catalyst to making the Olympic Movement worthy in its international role and having the Games very tempting to have in some cities' resumes. Makes me wonder if he would want to go for the IOC Presidency again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pound is too valuable for the IOC to lose. Reports suggested that he already tried to resign (or at least try to resign from some of his commissions) when Rogge got elected, but Rogge did some fast talking to keep him on side. Sure, he has his enemies, but I think it's well recognised that he's one of the most capable and effective IOC members.

I think most of his focus is on WADA now, anyway (and that's a tough enough role to be in on its own).

That's what I mean. Some IOC people didn't like the idea that WADA is based in Montreal (in which Pound is from). Of course, some of them say that he was the catalyst to making the Olympic Movement worthy in its international role and having the Games very tempting to have in some cities' resumes. Makes me wonder if he would want to go for the IOC Presidency again.

He'd probably like to have another shot, and personally I think he would make a great IOC prez, but I think for all his intellectual gifts, his abrasiveness and habit of not suffering fools gladly will always work against him in the race for the top job.

He's probably one member, also, who couldn't make any advantage out of any anti-Rogge sentiment stemming from the campaign to drop some sports _ Pound;s too personally aligned himself with that campaign to make any mileage.

If Rogge fails in his quest to cut the deadwood sports in Singapore, I see him then reverting to another plan _ don't be surprised if you start seeing some suggestions then to move some of the Summer Games sports (weightlifting? indoor sports?) to the Winter Games to make way for some new ones in the Summer extravaganza.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It hasnt really occurred to me how much Rogge wants these sports out until now. He has certainly got a bee in his bonnet about it and will manipulate the procedure to get his own way.

I think this will severly damage his chances for re-election.

I dread the thought that Summer sports will be moved to the winter games - they would have to change the constitution - as it currently states for a sport to be admitted to the WOG it must take place on ice or snow. I would hate for this to occur.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

CORRECTION of myself:  I forgot that it will not be 33 rounds of voting for our esteemed IOC members, but 37 in actuality for most of them -- because there will probably 4 rounds of the 2012 Host City vote.  

God, I wonder how many of them will claim "metacarpal tunnel syndrome" and then seek disability benefits afterwards.   :suspect:

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

CORRECTION of myself:  I forgot that it will not be 33 rounds of voting for our esteemed IOC members, but 37 in actuality for most of them -- because there will probably 4 rounds of the 2012 Host City vote.  

God, I wonder how many of them will claim "metacarpal tunnel syndrome" and then seek disability benefits afterwards.   :suspect:

And that's not all! Apparently any new sport vying to be included has to pass through TWO votes _ one where it has to get a two-thirds majority for Olympic acceptance, and then a simple majority to be included in 2012. So that's bringing it up into the 40+ votes.

Oh the suffering!

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

CORRECTION of myself:  I forgot that it will not be 33 rounds of voting for our esteemed IOC members, but 37 in actuality for most of them -- because there will probably 4 rounds of the 2012 Host City vote.  

God, I wonder how many of them will claim "metacarpal tunnel syndrome" and then seek disability benefits afterwards.   :suspect:

And that's not all! Apparently any new sport vying to be included has to pass through TWO votes _ one where it has to get a two-thirds majority for Olympic acceptance, and then a simple majority to be included in 2012. So that's bringing it up into the 40+ votes.

Oh the suffering!

what if the electronic voting system breaks down halfway?   :wwww:   Then they're going to obviously have to WRITE down their choices or worse, vote by "butterfly ballot" from discarded Florida machines???  It could end up in the Int'l Court of Justice.  

Mercy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

CORRECTION of myself:  I forgot that it will not be 33 rounds of voting for our esteemed IOC members, but 37 in actuality for most of them -- because there will probably 4 rounds of the 2012 Host City vote.  

God, I wonder how many of them will claim "metacarpal tunnel syndrome" and then seek disability benefits afterwards.   :suspect:

Not forgetting the votes on Slakov & Un Yong's membership! I was a room at OAKA watching an AOB link to the session in Athens, just before the Games. It seems they are voting on things every few minutes, though most votes are a show of hands - only secret balloted votes will use the electronic voting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, for Singapore, including the big 2012 vote -- the IOC members will be casting votes 33 times?  28 old sports; 5 new ones, and the 2012 host?  Boy, those nabobs are really going to have to work for all their perks come July, huh?  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to say: OK, vote for the 5 sports you think should be dropped AND would you like any of the new ones to replace it?  That would not give the IOC'ers electoral  overload.

CORRECTION of myself:  I forgot that it will not be 33 rounds of voting for our esteemed IOC members, but 37 in actuality for most of them -- because there will probably 4 rounds of the 2012 Host City vote.  

God, I wonder how many of them will claim "metacarpal tunnel syndrome" and then seek disability benefits afterwards.   :suspect:

Not forgetting the votes on Slakov & Un Yong's membership! I was a room at OAKA watching an AOB link to the session in Athens, just before the Games. It seems they are voting on things every few minutes, though most votes are a show of hands - only secret balloted votes will use the electronic voting.

Probably so.  But a show of hands isn't really good documentation for anything as important as keeping/booting out various sports, etc.  

They really need consultants to streamline their m.o.'s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He'd probably like to have another shot, and personally I think he would make a great IOC prez, but I think for all his intellectual gifts, his abrasiveness and habit of not suffering fools gladly will always work against him in the race for the top job.

He's probably one member, also, who couldn't make any advantage out of any anti-Rogge sentiment stemming from the campaign to drop some sports _ Pound;s too personally aligned himself with that campaign to make any mileage.

If Rogge fails in his quest to cut the deadwood sports in Singapore, I see him then reverting to another plan _ don't be surprised if you start seeing some suggestions then to move some of the Summer Games sports (weightlifting? indoor sports?) to the Winter Games to make way for some new ones in the Summer extravaganza.

In the history of the IOC, there has only been one non-European IOC President. We all know him as Avery Brundage of the USA. Also, like the way people commented on who the new Pope should be then, there is "pressure" to get one from Asia, Africa, Oceania, and South America, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not forgetting the votes on Slakov & Un Yong's membership! I was a room at OAKA watching an AOB link to the session in Athens, just before the Games. It seems they are voting on things every few minutes, though most votes are a show of hands - only secret balloted votes will use the electronic voting.

Oh, yeah. I would love to find out what their fates will be, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Not forgetting the votes on Slakov & Un Yong's membership! I was a room at OAKA watching an AOB link to the session in Athens, just before the Games. It seems they are voting on things every few minutes, though most votes are a show of hands - only secret balloted votes will use the electronic voting.

Oh, yeah. I would love to find out what their fates will be, too.

Kim is gone. Slavkov is still hanging on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...