Jump to content

Brisbane 2032


AustralianFan
 Share

Recommended Posts

AUSTRALIA PLANS TO BID FOR WORLD CUP - Sen -  Click To Read More - 12 August 2021

Government officials and Football Australia are beginning to work through plans to bid for either the 2030 or 2034 men’s football World Cup according to The Australian. 

It is believed to be part of a strategy to bring a host of major events to Australia both prior to and post the Brisbane 2032 Olympic Games.

The decision comes roughly a decade after the last attempt to secure the men’s World Cup in 2022 - a bid that attracted just one vote and a process that raised eyebrows after Qatar was controversially awarded the tournament. 

Australia’s claims for the world’s premier sporting event are sure to be bolstered by FIFA’s decision to send the 2023 women’s World Cup down under to Australia and New Zealand. 

Hosting a successful tournament in 2023 would certainly put Australia in much better contention than the last bid which fell flat on its face.

Canada have shown that hosting a women’s World Cup can result in landing the men’s. After staging a successful tournament in 2015, Canada put in a joint bid with the United States and Mexico to become hosts of the 2026 men’s World Cup.

eJuR8Kw.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a shame that these games will always be in the shadow of such blatant corruption.   Rewriting the bidding process to favour a city in your own country, then closing it before other cities have even had chance to formally consider putting in a bid (4 years ahead of the usual schedule), and then doing that thing which all good democracies do - have a vote with just one candidate.   Frankly it all just stinks.

 

Although personally I've been longing for the games to return to a smaller city for a long time Brisbane stands out like a sore thumb when you look at the host of recent games.   That said I'm sure they'll do a great job, but the Commonwealth Games of 2018 in neighbouring Gold Coast were hardly an inspiring event - with the closing ceremony so bad that Channel 7 actually apologised at the end of it.    If they'd won it fair and square maybe the prospect of the games returning to Australia would be something to get really excited about - but for me at the moment it is all so tarnished.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brekkie Boy said:

Just a shame that these games will always be in the shadow of such blatant corruption.   Rewriting the bidding process to favour a city in your own country, then closing it before other cities have even had chance to formally consider putting in a bid (4 years ahead of the usual schedule), and then doing that thing which all good democracies do - have a vote with just one candidate.   Frankly it all just stinks.

 

Although personally I've been longing for the games to return to a smaller city for a long time Brisbane stands out like a sore thumb when you look at the host of recent games.   That said I'm sure they'll do a great job, but the Commonwealth Games of 2018 in neighbouring Gold Coast were hardly an inspiring event - with the closing ceremony so bad that Channel 7 actually apologised at the end of it.    If they'd won it fair and square maybe the prospect of the games returning to Australia would be something to get really excited about - but for me at the moment it is all so tarnished.

 

 

I disagree. Voting in the past have been corrupt too! Just look at Atlanta. Barcelona 92 was the hometown of the IOC President at the time. Let’s not pretend there isn’t any smoke there. How about 2028? No city had the chance to bid. 2032 there were multiple cities bidding but Brisbane was so far ahead that the IOC recommended them to the session! Let’s keep in mind when Brisbane was discussed, Mr Coates who you refer to was out of the room to avoid these allegations and for fairness and integrity. 
 

If the members disagreed with the new election system, they had the option to vote NO! But they didn’t! 
 

To me, this sound like people are a bit salty that Brisbane is hosting the Olympics. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, there’s a lot not to like about the new process, and transparency is a pretty vital factor that seems to have been thrown out the window. It’s no wonder there’s a bit of a backlash. That said, I agree there does seem to be a sprinkling of saltiness colouring some of the reactions.

The test will be when the next one gets chosen under these new rules. Not so much winter - the IOC are going to be stuck with whoever they can get to the final line - but are people still going to be grumbling when a Madrid or Mumbai get pre-anointed without having to put up anything like a competitive campaign.

One thing I’m also a bit ambivalent about is the new time spans. 2028 and 2032 have both been chosen with 11-year lead-ups. Now, that can be good in order to give the hosts more time to put together a long term preparation for their games, and I guess it helps the IOC get more peace of mind, but 11 years also gives a lot more time for hosts’ complexions to change. Even at seven years, Sochi might have seemed reasonable or even applaudable in 2007 but started going sour through Putin’s ambitions by 2014. And Beijing, while not even appealing then in 2015 was at least borderline acceptable, whereas now it’s a travesty of Berlin 1936 proportions (Berlin itself another that changed dramatically between choice and execution). Now I’m not saying the US or Australia are likely to turn fascist by the time of their hostings (though, let’s admit it, surely all of us have a nagging unease at what Trump might unleash in 2024), but the old saying is a week is a long time in politics. A decade plus can unleash all sorts of demons.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Now I’m not saying the US or Australia are likely to turn fascist by the time of their hostings (though, let’s admit it, surely all of us have a nagging unease at what Trump might unleash in 2024), 

Uh, it came pretty close though, with what he nearly unleashed in 2020, ugh.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, awarding the Games 10+ years ahead really means only SUPER SAFE cities/ countries need to apply... which is  bit sad, as countries like Indonesia/ India/ all of Africa/ Turkey etc are due the Games sometime in the next 50 years.

 

As for Brisbane, as Victorian said "If the members disagreed with the new election system, they had the option to vote NO!"...no one held a gun to their head to vote for Brisbane at the Tokyo IOC session...they could have voted NO and said they would like to come back in 2 more years to see if any other bids were deemed acceptable to proceed to a vote along with Brisbane. But they didn't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, sure. Like it was that simple for the members to "simply" vote against their high & mighty executive board. That would've looked real good in the world's sport media. Bach, & especially Coates, would've hung all those naysayers out to dry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

but are people still going to be grumbling when a Madrid or Mumbai get pre-anointed without having to put up anything like a competitive campaign.

If JAS jr. was pulling all those strings, then I suspect that people would also still be "grumbling". If the Chinese VP moved heaven & earth to make Chongquing/Chendu 2032 happen instead, these boards would've been filled in an uproar. Including in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FYI said:

If JAS jr. was pulling all those strings, then I suspect that people would also still be "grumbling". If the Chinese VP moved heaven & earth to make Chongquing/Chendu 2032 happen instead, these boards would've been filled in an uproar. Including in this thread.

Oh, I agree. I probably should have worded it to say that people likely will still be grumbling whoever is chosen. There’s always going to be a vestige of us who think the end game should be put to a test of competition, that there should be transparency and publicly released bid books etc, and of course there’s always going to be people with salt that their preferred host didn’t get the call-up or who aren’t enthused by who gets the seal of approval.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

and of course there’s always going to be people with salt that their preferred host didn’t get the call-up or who aren’t enthused by who gets the seal of approval.

That's always been par for the course for this website, though. But the main difference this time around, which even other Aussies have attested to, that Brisbane never would've won in a 'real contest', like the 2012 race was, for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FYI said:

That's always been par for the course for this website, though. But the main difference this time around, which even other Aussies have attested to, that Brisbane never would've won in a 'real contest', like the 2012 race was, for example.

I wouldn’t be quite so sure about that if the “real” contest shaped up as it was was heading towards - against Chengdu, Jakarta, Mumbai, Budapest and the Ruhr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FYI said:

What's wrong with Rhine Ruhr (you mean maybe referendum wise)? 

As someone who values “glamour” locations, you know you’re talking about the German Rust Belt. 

Personally, as one of half-German ancestry and a desire for Olympic evolution, I think it’s an interesting and promising idea. But I think SE Queensland has it beat on appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FYI said:

If JAS jr. was pulling all those strings, then I suspect that people would also still be "grumbling". If the Chinese VP moved heaven & earth to make Chongquing/Chendu 2032 happen instead, these boards would've been filled in an uproar. Including in this thread.

That actually brings up the question: Why didn‘t Bach pull all the strings to get it back to his home country? Some unpleasant answers for both him and German officials are hidden somewhere I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

To be fair, there’s a lot not to like about the new process, and transparency is a pretty vital factor that seems to have been thrown out the window. It’s no wonder there’s a bit of a backlash. That said, I agree there does seem to be a sprinkling of saltiness colouring some of the reactions.

The test will be when the next one gets chosen under these new rules. Not so much winter - the IOC are going to be stuck with whoever they can get to the final line - but are people still going to be grumbling when a Madrid or Mumbai get pre-anointed without having to put up anything like a competitive campaign.

One thing I’m also a bit ambivalent about is the new time spans. 2028 and 2032 have both been chosen with 11-year lead-ups. Now, that can be good in order to give the hosts more time to put together a long term preparation for their games, and I guess it helps the IOC get more peace of mind, but 11 years also gives a lot more time for hosts’ complexions to change. Even at seven years, Sochi might have seemed reasonable or even applaudable in 2007 but started going sour through Putin’s ambitions by 2014. And Beijing, while not even appealing then in 2015 was at least borderline acceptable, whereas now it’s a travesty of Berlin 1936 proportions (Berlin itself another that changed dramatically between choice and execution). Now I’m not saying the US or Australia are likely to turn fascist by the time of their hostings (though, let’s admit it, surely all of us have a nagging unease at what Trump might unleash in 2024), but the old saying is a week is a long time in politics. A decade plus can unleash all sorts of demons.

Hadn't thought of that. My hypothetical concern over such a big lead time and no competitive bid process is that you could see cities handing the Games back. If you have a government change 3/4 years into an eleven year build up and there's no momentum, just looming costs, a city might think there's plenty of time to make a u-turn (you could even, conceivably, see elections fought on scrapping or keeping the Games). The euphoria of winning a bid against a competitive field also inoculates against that too (e.g. we beat Paris to this, we've got to do it and do it well!).

A sudden market crash in a host nation three years after a Bachian annointment....well....

Edited by Rob.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

As someone who values “glamour” locations, you know you’re talking about the German Rust Belt. 

Personally, as one of half-German ancestry and a desire for Olympic evolution, I think it’s an interesting and promising idea. But I think SE Queensland has it beat on appeal.

Sure, but as someone who values Olympic "evolution", you know that sometimes trumpets over glamor. It's not like Beijing, pre-2008, Seoul 1988 or even the highly-esteemed Barcelona 1992 Games, were somekind of glamour capitals before their awardings. Particularly in China's case, it was more about the 'evolution' part.

But Germany, a country of 85 million, hasn't hosted since 1972. Meanwhile, Australia, a nation of merely 25 million in comparison, will have hosted twice just this century alone. No Olympic evolution there.

And what about Budapest (a locale you yourself have championed before)? An Olympic sporting prowess that's never hosted before. Surely that could've been ideal for Olympic evolution's sake.

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...