Jump to content

John Coates and Olympic corruption - damning article... from 1999.


Recommended Posts

The arrogant words which confirm scale of corruption in Olympics

Ian Wooldridge

Last updated at 00:00 10 March 1999

 

ONE sentence uttered in a devastating Australian television documentary has openly confirmed the corruption and chicanery rife in the International Olympic Committee. 

It was: 'They have to have a sense of obligation to you when they go into that room.' The room referred to is that to which IOC members retire in secret session to determine which city will host the Olympic Games six years hence. 'They' are the IOC members whose votes will decide it. 

The man who spoke those words in brusque arrogance to an astute woman interviewer will live to regret them. He is John Coates, president of the Australian Olympic Committee and a major player in the campaign which won next year's Olympics in Sydney. 

What he was unmistakably referring to, and seemingly attempting to justify, was the amount of bribery, palm-greasing and extravagant 'gifts' that now have to be lavished upon visitors from the IOC's vastly over-bloated membership to elicit their support. 

'You have been described as a Machiavellian figure. Are you?' asked his interrogator. Coates smirked and enigmatically replied: 'Whatever it takes.' 

Whatever it takes. I can assure Mr Coates that his smart alec response will come under far less than enigmatic scrutiny when discussed at the International Olympic Committee's cauterising meetings in Lausanne this week. 

Openly he has blown the gaff on Olympic malprac-tices known to Sportsmail readers for the past decade. 

There is no doubt that the Sydney Olympics will take place on schedule and probably be an enormous success. Whether or not John Coates will be a hero figure then is another matter. He has assumed despotic control in alliance with a political party anathema to the Olympic movement when it still had principles and has elbowed into oblivion anyone who stood in his path. Those not elbowed, including several prominent Australian businessmen and lawyers, have already resigned in order to duck the shrapnel that will fly after this week's explosive meeting in Switzerland. 

With his usual equanimity, Juan Antonio Samaranch, the Spanish IOC president, has striven to diminish its significance by poo-pooing the entire scandal. 'The accusations against nine of the 10' (IOC members accused of graft and accepting back-handers) 'have scant foundation and the remaining one has hardly done anything wrong.' In a speech to his countrymen, he blamed the Press for 'overreacting' to the underhand tactics, including the hire of prostitutes, employed by Salt Lake City to host the next Winter Olympics. 

Adroitly, Samaranch sidestepped any reference to the tactics employed by Sydney to stage the Millennium Summer Games. 

The following are alleged: that Sydney paid for minimally 12 IOC members and their wives to holiday on Australia's Gold Coast, that others were helicoptered out to the Barrier Reef, that two African delegates were entrusted with $35,000 to 'encourage' impoverished athletes in their home countries and, most bizarre of all, that they arranged for another African IOC member to witness an operation performed in a major Sydney hospital. 

Though Olympic rules stipulate that no IOC member may visit a candidate city more than once, one so enjoyed himself that he went back to Sydney to be royally entertained on three further occasions. 

Another allegation that will surface this week is that Phillip Coles, an Australian IOC member for the past 17 years, set up a headquarters in Paris where, for five months, he entertained European fellow IOC colleagues too old, infirm or idle to take the long flight to Australia. 

As I said, little of this will surprise regular Sportsmail readers. I have been writing about this Olympic voting scandal for years. It was in these pages that the Princess Royal, an IOC member since 1988, first revealed that much of her time was wasted by returning valuable and unsolicited gifts that arrived at Buckingham Palace or her home at Gatcombe Park from bidding cities wishing to ingratiate themselves and obtain her vote. 

She sent them back by return of post or courier. 

It is massively disappointing that, as an incorruptible witness, she is now on an official tour of Japan instead of being in Lausanne, preparing to shred the flimsy veneer that cloaks the corruption long endemic in the International Olympic Committee. 

She is a maverick, of course, and may have Plan B up her sleeve. She knows where the bodies are buried, who has sold whom down the river and what the going price is to obtain a crucial vote. But the British royals are not supposed to embroil themselves in politics, especially, at the moment, in Australia, where a referendum on republicanism is shortly to be conducted. 

Pity. That famously corruscating tongue of hers could have done much to bring the Olympic movement back from the brink of ridicule and, ultimately, disband-ment. 

In his defiant arrogance Mr John Coates of Australia - so clever that he didn't anticipate the softly-softly question cleverly posed by a woman he felt he could walk all over - has finally opened the can of worms. 

Whether Coates survives the imbroglio is a matter of small consequence. 

Whether Juan Antonio Samaranch retains the International Olympic Committee presidency after this weekend is altogether a different matter. 

The man has betrayed almost every Olympic principle entrusted to him since the day of what he regards as no less than enthronement. 

Do you know something? I believe he is so surrounded by lickspittle sycophants and those to whom he has imparted the art of luxurious freeloading that he will survive. 

Clearly he will never speak to me again. This will not disturb my sleep at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The New Norm: It’s a Game Changer - click here to read - IOC -  6 Februrary 2018

The New Norm: It’s a Games changer

2aypVrn.jpg

 

“The New Norm”, an ambitious set of 118 reforms that reimagines how the Olympic Games are delivered, was presented to the membership of the International Olympic Committee (IOC)at its 132nd Session. 

The plan, which focuses on six recommendations of Olympic Agenda 2020 related to the organisation of the Games, will provide cities with increased flexibility in designing the Games to meet long-term development goals, and will ensure that host cities receive more assistance from the IOC and the wider Olympic Movement. 

Having redesigned the Candidature Process and adopted a strategic approach to legacy last year, the IOC presented updated services and requirements that will lead to maximum savings of hundreds of millions of dollars in the delivery of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. 

“These are the biggest savings in the history of the Olympic Games,” IOC President Thomas Bach said. “It is a fundamental rethinking of the organisation of future Games. This will lead to a new norm – from the candidature for and the delivery of the Games through to their legacy.” 

See what The New Norm looks like.

Conducted in close collaboration with partners and industry experts, the Olympic Games Delivery Executive Steering Committee analysed every function of operations, including venues, energy, broadcasting, accommodation, transport and technology, and also looked at the Paralympic Games. The IOC will work with cities every step of the way to ensure that the Games are affordable, beneficial and sustainable.

“The modifications presented in “The New Norm” address many challenges associated with bidding for and hosting the Olympic Games,” said IOC Member John Coates, who serves as the Chair of the Executive Steering Committee. “We examined if the right services and products were provided, if timing of delivery was optimal, and where we can provide additional expertise. What resulted is a robust plan that reduces complexity and costs, while maximising flexibility and partnership.”

By examining the seven-year journey with former Organising Committees (OCOGs), more than 80 of the 118 solutions that have been proposed would result in cost efficiencies without compromising the Olympic experience. The plan invites opportunities to reduce venue sizes, rethink transport options, optimise existing infrastructure and reuse the field of play for various sports.

It was also determined that enhanced integration of Olympic stakeholder expertise, combined with adjusted workflows, would unlock greater value for hosts and partners alike. For example, a joint coordination process between national and regional government, the IOC and Tokyo 2020 has already assisted in reducing Tokyo’s revised venue budget by USD 2.2 billion. 

Meanwhile, a “3+4 year” approach to staffing an Organising Committee would streamline production and decrease human resource needs in the first three years – when engagement, planning and communication would be the primary focus – before shifting to detailed operational planning, readiness and delivery mode in the last four years. 

To provide better support to cities, activities will also be delivered by the Olympic family – in particular IFs, NOCs and TOP Partners. The events industry can also supply ready-made solutions, simplifying the scope of work and knowledge needed by an OCOG. 

A prime example of this was the creation of Olympic Broadcasting Services in 2001 to serve as the permanent host broadcaster for the Olympic Games, Olympic Winter Games and Youth Olympic Games, eliminating the need to continually rebuild the broadcast operation for each new edition.

In a similar fashion, starting in PyeongChang, the IOC has taken over the Olympic Information Service, which provides vital information to thousands of media at the Olympic Games to assist them with their reporting. “The New Norm” presents a number of additional turnkey solutions, such as providing website and ticketing solutions, that would result in less work and lower costs for a host city. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C’mon @AustralianFan, this ongoing grudge and demonisation of Coates is a bit over the top, but so is your constant spamming of the “New Normal” as if it’s the Holy Writ Of God, the solution to all the ills of the world and NOT to be questioned.

It’s a policy, in it’s infancy, with issues of its own within it. It’s likely to get tweaked and changed along the way as has everything been under Bach’s stewardship. If there’s one hallmark of Bach’s presidency, it’s been his willingness to change or bend any rule on the fly if he can see some short or long term benefit to it.

So, I guess I’ve pissed off everyone there…

Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

C’mon @AustralianFan, this ongoing grudge and demonisation of Coates is a bit over the top, but so is your constant spamming of the “New Normal” as if it’s the Holy Writ Of God, the solution to all the ills of the world and NOT to be questioned.

It’s a policy, in it’s infancy, with issues of its own within it. It’s likely to get tweaked and changed along the way as has everything been under Bach’s stewardship. If there’s one hallmark of Bach’s presidency, it’s been his willingness to change or bend any rule on the fly if he can see some short or long term benefit to it.

So, I guess I’ve pissed off everyone there…

Absolutely.    You’re entitled to post.

….. as am I.

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

20 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

 

Last updated 10 March. 1999

ONE sentence uttered in a devastating Australian television documentary has openly confirmed the corruption and chicanery rife in the International Olympic Committee. 

It was: 'They have to have a sense of obligation to you when they go into that room.' The room referred to is that to which IOC members retire in secret session to determine which city will host the Olympic Games six years hence. 'They' are the IOC members whose votes will decide it. 

The man who spoke those words in brusque arrogance to an astute woman interviewer will live to regret them. He is John Coates, president of the Australian Olympic Committee and a major player in the campaign which won next year's Olympics in Sydney. 

What he was unmistakably referring to, and seemingly attempting to justify, was the amount of bribery, palm-greasing and extravagant 'gifts' that now have to be lavished upon visitors from the IOC's vastly over-bloated membership to elicit their support. 

'You have been described as a Machiavellian figure. Are you?' asked his interrogator. Coates smirked and enigmatically replied: 'Whatever it takes.' 

Whatever it takes. I can assure Mr Coates that his smart alec response will come under far less than enigmatic scrutiny when discussed at the International Olympic Committee's cauterising meetings in Lausanne this week. 

Openly he has blown the gaff on Olympic malprac-tices known to Sportsmail readers for the past decade. 

There is no doubt that the Sydney Olympics will take place on schedule and probably be an enormous success. Whether or not John Coates will be a hero figure then is another matter. He has assumed despotic control in alliance with a political party anathema to the Olympic movement when it still had principles and has elbowed into oblivion anyone who stood in his path. Those not elbowed, including several prominent Australian businessmen and lawyers, have already resigned in order to duck the shrapnel that will fly after this week's explosive meeting in Switzerland. 

With his usual equanimity, Juan Antonio Samaranch, the Spanish IOC president, has striven to diminish its significance by poo-pooing the entire scandal. 'The accusations against nine of the 10' (IOC members accused of graft and accepting back-handers) 'have scant foundation and the remaining one has hardly done anything wrong.' In a speech to his countrymen, he blamed the Press for 'overreacting' to the underhand tactics, including the hire of prostitutes, employed by Salt Lake City to host the next Winter Olympics. 

Adroitly, Samaranch sidestepped any reference to the tactics employed by Sydney to stage the Millennium Summer Games. 

The following are alleged: that Sydney paid for minimally 12 IOC members and their wives to holiday on Australia's Gold Coast, that others were helicoptered out to the Barrier Reef, that two African delegates were entrusted with $35,000 to 'encourage' impoverished athletes in their home countries and, most bizarre of all, that they arranged for another African IOC member to witness an operation performed in a major Sydney hospital. 

Though Olympic rules stipulate that no IOC member may visit a candidate city more than once, one so enjoyed himself that he went back to Sydney to be royally entertained on three further occasions. 

Another allegation that will surface this week is that Phillip Coles, an Australian IOC member for the past 17 years, set up a headquarters in Paris where, for five months, he entertained European fellow IOC colleagues too old, infirm or idle to take the long flight to Australia. 

As I said, little of this will surprise regular Sportsmail readers. I have been writing about this Olympic voting scandal for years. It was in these pages that the Princess Royal, an IOC member since 1988, first revealed that much of her time was wasted by returning valuable and unsolicited gifts that arrived at Buckingham Palace or her home at Gatcombe Park from bidding cities wishing to ingratiate themselves and obtain her vote. 

She sent them back by return of post or courier. 

It is massively disappointing that, as an incorruptible witness, she is now on an official tour of Japan instead of being in Lausanne, preparing to shred the flimsy veneer that cloaks the corruption long endemic in the International Olympic Committee. 

She is a maverick, of course, and may have Plan B up her sleeve. She knows where the bodies are buried, who has sold whom down the river and what the going price is to obtain a crucial vote. But the British royals are not supposed to embroil themselves in politics, especially, at the moment, in Australia, where a referendum on republicanism is shortly to be conducted. 

Pity. That famously corruscating tongue of hers could have done much to bring the Olympic movement back from the brink of ridicule and, ultimately, disband-ment. 

In his defiant arrogance Mr John Coates of Australia - so clever that he didn't anticipate the softly-softly question cleverly posed by a woman he felt he could walk all over - has finally opened the can of worms. 

Whether Coates survives the imbroglio is a matter of small consequence. 

Whether Juan Antonio Samaranch retains the International Olympic Committee presidency after this weekend is altogether a different matter. 

The man has betrayed almost every Olympic principle entrusted to him since the day of what he regards as no less than enthronement. 

Do you know something? I believe he is so surrounded by lickspittle sycophants and those to whom he has imparted the art of luxurious freeloading that he will survive. 

Clearly he will never speak to me again. This will not disturb my sleep at all.

   22 YEARS AGO was the article that you posted.

Have a read about the reforms that have happened since then, and, as Sir Rols rightly says, have just started.

The New Norm: It’s a Game Changer - click here to read - IOC -  6 Februrary 2018

“The New Norm”, an ambitious set of 118 reforms that reimagines how the Olympic Games are delivered, was presented to the membership of the International Olympic Committee (IOC)at its 132nd Session.”

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

Absolutely.    You’re entitled to post.

….. as am I.

 

But you’re not posting opinions, you’re just more often than not cutting and pasting IOC press releases on their “New Norm” without comment as if it’s the answer to everything. It’s the equivalent of a Christian fundamentalist holding aloft the Bible, or Taliban flashing the Koran, to anything they find challenging. And you’re tending to spam it everywhere - give credit, most of us here do well know how this “New Norm” is supposed to operate. I’m far from the only one finding it a tad overkill and annoying - even when I’m often sympathetic to what you’re trying to argue. 

49 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

 

   22 YEARS AGO was the article that you posted.

Have a read about the reforms that have happened since then, and, as Sir Rols rightly says, have just started.

The New Norm: It’s a Game Changer - click here to read - IOC -  6 Februrary 2018

 

“The New Norm”, an ambitious set of 118 reforms that reimagines how the Olympic Games are delivered, was presented to the membership of the International Olympic Committee (IOC)at its 132nd Session.”

 

 

And how is this “New Norm” supposedly a cure for corruption or opportunism? If anything, the fact it hands the power from a large body into a smaller, closed and more tightly knit group with no transparency or need for public oversight feeds the opportunity, or perception of opportunity, for secretive back room misdeeds. Yes, it’s just started, but that’s what’s happening already. With Brisbane’s win, we’re already seeing people claim Coates rigged the whole process just to get Brisbane the games. For the record, I don’t believe it’s that simple - more that Coates put together a process to achieve what Bach wanted - giving more control of host selection to the executive committee while being seen to be doing something to address concerns about the bidding process - and then advised Brisbane very early on how best to take advantage of the new process and steal the march on any other rivals.

For the “New Norm” to gain warm acceptance it needs to win trust that it’s fair, and that those wielding the power are above reproach. Between the IOC’s past misdeeds and the lack of transparency or oversight in the “New Norm” it’s going to be all to easy to fuel suspicions about any host decision, warranted or not. 

 

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

A "tad" overkill & annoying is clearly an understatement! :lol:

21 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

With Brisbane's win, we're already seeing people claim Coates rigged the whole process just to get Brisbane the games. For the record, I don’t believe it’s that simple - more that Coates put together a process to achieve what Bach wanted - giving more control of host selection to the executive committee while being seen to be doing something to address concerns about the bidding process - *and then advised Brisbane very early on how best to take advantage of the new process and steal the march on any other rivals*.

*Well, precisely. So how is that being "neutral" on the process, like so many of the Brizzy enthusiasts claim, when Coates clearly was giving Brisbane the edge, over any other candidate, in that dept. It's contradictory at best, & a total farce at worst. But 'neutral', it was not.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FYI said:

*Well, precisely. So how is that being "neutral" on the process, like so many of the Brizzy enthusiasts claim, when Coates clearly was giving Brisbane the edge, over any other candidate, in that dept. It's contradictory at best, & a total farce at worst. But 'neutral', it was not.

That’s a far cry from the notion that “the whole process was devised to deliver or favour one candidate”. It’s in line with how any IOC members from bidding countries have always been allowed to operate - step out of the room when votes are taken or short lists decided etc, but otherwise feel free to support and campaign for your candidate, offer advice on how best to approach us or structure your bid, recommend strategies and who could be sympathetic etc. IOC members have never been banned from being home bid cheerleaders, facilitators or advisors. Was it an advantage? Of course it was. Was it underhand or corrupt? I’d say no. 

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

That’s a far cry from the notion that “the whole process was devised to deliver or favour one candidate”. It’s in line with how any IOC members from bidding countries have always been allowed to operate - step out of the room when votes are taken or short lists decided etc, but otherwise feel free to support and campaign for your candidate, offer advice on how best to approach us or structure your bid, recommend strategies and who could be sympathetic etc. 

The main difference in those other scenarios, though, is that many of those IOC members were not part of the Exco. And then not chair of the now infamous "Future Host Committee". So that's a MAJOR conflict of interest right there. It's one thing to advocate for a bid city, but it's quite another to be steering the ship in the direction that one so desires. 

14 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

IOC members have been banned from being home bid cheerleaders or advisors. Was it an advantage? Of course it was. Was it underhand or corrupt? I’d say no. 

Would you still be saying that if the 2032 outcome was Chongqing/Chendu & the Chinese IOC VP was the one orchestrating the whole "new process" in Bach's behalf? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FYI said:

The main difference in those other scenarios, though, is that many of those IOC members were not part of the Exco.

Anita DeFrantz - exco 2013-217, VP 2017-2021, for one. The fact is, it’s always been advantage for a bidder to have an effective or influential IOC member on board.

1 hour ago, FYI said:

Would you still be saying that if the 2032 outcome was Chongqing/Chendu & the Chinese IOC VP was the one orchestrating the whole "new process" in Bach's behalf? 

And that’s precisely the point I was trying to make to AustralianFan - the “New Normal” process has been far too opaque to the point of giving people ammunition, real or not, to cast aspersions. Like yourself in the case of Brisbane or, indeed, possibly myself in your hypothetical scenario. 

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Anita DeFrantz - exco 2013-217, VP 2017-2021, for one. The fact is, it’s always been advantage for a bidder to have an effective or influential IOC member on board.

Anita DeFrantz never oversaw anything though in the bidding process. So I don't see how that's similar. Of course having an influential IOC member in the past was beneficial, I never said that it wasn't. But again, 'most' of those members weren't behind commissions dictating the rule of law, nor were they VP's (at the time of respective bids), in a 'new process' that mostly happened behind closed doors & coincidentally (to say the least) produced a new host whose VP just happened to be from that same country. 

59 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

And that’s precisely the point I was trying to make to AustralianFan - the “New Normal” process has been far to opaque to the point of giving people ammunition, real or not, to cast aspersions. Like yourself in the case of Brisbane or, indeed, possibly myself in your hypothetical scenario. 

Precisely. So how can it still be not under-handed or corrupt, or at the very least shady? Because it still produced an outcome that you could live with, & not one so dastardly like another Chinese Olympics, or the likes of Doha? Because I've seen that type of response from a few others on here, too, that since this so-called new process produced a somewhat commendable host, despite the questionable procedures to get there, then "so be it". That still doesn't necessarily make it right & that we should give the IOC a pass on this for it, simply because some liked the end result anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FYI said:

Anita DeFrantz never oversaw anything though in the bidding process.

No, you said:

2 hours ago, FYI said:

The main difference in those other scenarios, though, is that many of those IOC members were not part of the Exco.

And she’s just one. Another I can say off the top of my head is Kevin Gosper, VP at time of Sydney’s election. I’m pretty sure there’s more than a few others - Vitaly Smirnov? Not to mention the great JAS himself, or even Baron Pierre come to that.

1 hour ago, FYI said:

Precisely. So how can it still be not under-handed or corrupt, or at the very least shady? Because it still produced an outcome that you could live with, & not one so dastardly like another Chinese Olympics, or the likes of Doha? Because I've seen that type of response from a few others on here, too, that since this so-called new process produced a somewhat commendable host, despite the questionable procedures to get there, then "so be it". That still doesn't necessarily make it right & that we should give the IOC a pass on this for it, simply because some liked the end result anyway.

Fine, let’s also throw into the discussion then Barcelona and Lillehammer as tainted, corrupt hosts (Lillehammer - there’s one JAS changed the rules to get to even further ease the path for Barcelona). Are those now invalid hosts?

And who’s giving the IOC a pass? I’ve certainly been pretty vocal on my misgivings and dislike of the “New Normal”. For all that it might have some good intents, I’ve been jumping down the throat of the likes of AustralianFan for his blind, unswerving faith in it. I have tempered my, I won’t even say happiness - more approval, of Brisbane with disquiet at the process that got it there. And again, when it comes to Coates, I don’t for a second deny that his influence smoothed the way. But I don’t go as a far as saying he corruptly rigged it.

On Coates himself (ostensibly the reason for this thread), my opinion is: Melburnians will never forgive him for engineering that Sydney would bid for 2000, rather than Melbourne again. I can understand their reaction, even if I think he was right to do so for all sorts of objective and very subjective reasons. As an IOC Member, he has by an order of magnitude been our most effective and successful member. Ditto as head of the AOC. He delivered us Sydney, fought tooth and nail to ensure continuing funding from the Government for sports development here, and he’s delivered us Brisbane. He’s a political fighter, ruthless and not scared of getting blood on his hands. He’s known o be very abrasive. As a lawyer, he knows how to test boundaries without stepping over the line. He’s become the IOC’s resident head-kicker. He’s basically the successor to Dick Pound. I was always a bit surprised by how many people here also detested Dick Pound. To me, he was my favourite IOC member of all time - I respected him for all his own abrasiveness  and feistiness. I don’t hold Coates in the same affection as I did Dick, but I respect his similar abilities and achievements.

Sheesh! I was originally gonna ignore this thread - didn’t wanna get dragged into the type of exchange I did get sucked into. I only ventured in to admonish AustralianFan for his excessive “New Normal” propaganda spam.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

C’mon @AustralianFan, this ongoing grudge and demonisation of Coates is a bit over the top, but so is your constant spamming of the “New Normal” as if it’s the Holy Writ Of God, the solution to all the ills of the world and NOT to be questioned.

It’s a policy, in it’s infancy, with issues of its own within it. It’s likely to get tweaked and changed along the way as has everything been under Bach’s stewardship. If there’s one hallmark of Bach’s presidency, it’s been his willingness to change or bend any rule on the fly if he can see some short or long term benefit to it.

So, I guess I’ve pissed off everyone there…

A long article was very first post in this thread.

It brought an equally long article from me with all the points in it that I agreed with.

Sir Rols,  you can choose how you post, including articles, links and/or personal opinions.

Sorry mate, but you it’s not up to you to edit or dictate how others post or the content of what they post.  Mate, did you get out of bed on the wrong side today?

If something hurts your eyes, you can choose to look away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Sheesh! I was originally gonna ignore this thread - didn’t wanna get dragged into the type of exchange I did get sucked into. I only ventured in to admonish AustralianFan for his excessive “New Normal” propaganda spam.

Admonish away.

I will ignore away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fantastic to see the pressing issues of 1993 getting a vital new thread, and just as good to see the IOC's new processes in 2021 have fixed them.

I was honestly panicking for a minute there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Rob. said:

Fantastic to see the pressing issues of 1993 getting a vital new thread, and just as good to see the IOC's new processes in 2021 have fixed them.

That remains to be seen.

Actions speak louder than words, and the actions have started.  We’ll see how it goes ….

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

A long article was very first post in this thread.

It brought an equally long article from me with all the points in it that I agreed with.

Yet the press release you posted addressed nothing in the original post. It was totally irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Yet the press release you posted addressed nothing in the original post. It was totally irrelevant.

Did you notice that in the article was a link to a document titled The Plan.  Click on that link and it leads to a 58 page document Olympic Games: The New Norm

Corruption was one of many problems the Olympic Movement was having which lead to these changes.

Not only is it directly relevant, it represents the biggest change in the history of the modern era of the Olympic Games.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/25/2021 at 10:05 PM, Victorian said:

You have had it in for him and Brisbane since we won the rights to the 32 games. Brighten up!

You are right - I do have it in for Coates. I don't like corrupt, entitled old men who have a well documented history of brazen poor conduct without consequence. Not to mention his contempt towards resolving serious 'cultural' matters within the AOC regarding bullying and sexual harassment.

I firmly believe that his ego got the better of him and he (by stealth) took advantage of the Agenda 2020 reforms to spoon feed intel to the Australian bid with the goal of giving it an unbeatable advantage. He's a smart cookie with an ego.

As for Brisbane - I don't have it in for the city. It will give the world an incredible and refreshing Games in 2032. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

C’mon @AustralianFan, this ongoing grudge and demonisation of Coates is a bit over the top, but so is your constant spamming of the “New Normal” as if it’s the Holy Writ Of God, the solution to all the ills of the world and NOT to be questioned.

It’s a policy, in it’s infancy, with issues of its own within it. It’s likely to get tweaked and changed along the way as has everything been under Bach’s stewardship. If there’s one hallmark of Bach’s presidency, it’s been his willingness to change or bend any rule on the fly if he can see some short or long term benefit to it.

So, I guess I’ve pissed off everyone there…

Without setting things on fire even more (I truly just thought it was an interesting article given recent conversations around here) - I don't think its demonisation. Its not like he's the only member of the IOC who has been pulled over the coals. As much as I love the Olympics I loathe the IOC. Its difficult to embrace the Agenda 2020 when its first application has from one of the Old Boys to secure their own interests. As I've said elsewhere, if this was Kazan 2032 the world would be going mad about it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

 

And how is this “New Norm” supposedly a cure for corruption or opportunism? If anything, the fact it hands the power from a large body into a smaller, closed and more tightly knit group with no transparency or need for public oversight feeds the opportunity, or perception of opportunity, for secretive back room misdeeds. Yes, it’s just started, but that’s what’s happening already. With Brisbane’s win, we’re already seeing people claim Coates rigged the whole process just to get Brisbane the games. For the record, I don’t believe it’s that simple - more that Coates put together a process to achieve what Bach wanted - giving more control of host selection to the executive committee while being seen to be doing something to address concerns about the bidding process - and then advised Brisbane very early on how best to take advantage of the new process and steal the march on any other rivals.

 

 

Bang on here . This is precisely what I've tried to articulate. Its plain as day this is what has been happening over the past few years. Its a basic conflict of interest how close he has been to the process. My intent in posting this article from 1999 was that it provides a fairly interesting take on the man himself and what motivates him. I'm not convinced of his ethics. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

 

On Coates himself (ostensibly the reason for this thread), my opinion is: Melburnians will never forgive him for engineering that Sydney would bid for 2000, rather than Melbourne again. I can understand their reaction, even if I think he was right to do so for all sorts of objective and very subjective reasons.

Victorian here - I don't think 2000 selection of Sydney is the historic problem with Melbourne and Coates (Sydney was the right choice).

It was kind of the opposite-- he was frustrated that in 1988 the AOC endorsed Melbourne over Brisbane marginally for 1996 and consequently white-anted the Melbourne bid from the inside. 

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...