Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Just came upon this thread  . . . 

I've seen a couple of posts like this recently from long-time members.

The "new" forum software has been in place for quite a while ... are some still unaware of the "activity streams" functionality that replicates the old "latest posts" page?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

No, you said:

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.

Sure, but yet again, in none of those instances were any of them directly involved, & actually applying the rules, in a commission (in this case, the Future Host Commission) to dictate who the next host city was going to be, like Coates was - virtually in the drivers seat. 

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

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?

Uh, but those are past misgivings, aren't they? Should we have another SLC bribery scandal, too, since it also happened before? Isn't that what the 'new norm' is supposed to eliminate? The shortcomings of the old process that led JAS to do what he did. But yet that doesn't seem to be what has happened here. Other than business as usual at the good 'ole' IOC.

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

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.

I didn't mean you. I meant more the Brizzy cheerleading squad, & especially the one you just mentioned, which as you said, you can't even question the decision of 2032 without having them bombard the board with their confirmation bias-spamming of the "new norm" rhetoric (as if an organization that makes up their own rules as they go along [with no oversight whatsoever other than their own] & can change them at their whim when it suits them, actually means anything). And the ones that say that questioning the tactics that got us here, are merely being 'salty' (which is bull, since if we were talking about a China or Russia election with this "new process", they'd be the first ones crying foul) & telling others (even fellow Aussie compatriots who think otherwise) that they "have it in" for Coates. Well, if the pants fit, then wear them. 

9 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

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.

Really? I don't see that. I like Dick Pound, too (because of his tell it like it is attitude). But I don't see him anything like Coates. I actually find Pound to be more subtle than Coates. I'm sure we can ask Anastasia P. what she thinks, though. :lol:

9 hours 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.

Why? That's certainly your prerogative, but if we're gonna be dragged to the other extreme, then this board will be become the ghost town again it once was. But like our newbie said last month (which it looks like he's already disappeared lol), we posters are what we make the forums. Which would be to engage, discuss & of course 'argue' one's POV's. It's what made GB's in the past. 

That said, though, I can understand sometimes how you feel. I know I've taken breaks from here at times, or ignored threads when it becomes at times a bit much (especially when it comes to one of my favorite all time poster on here :D)! But other times, I feel I have to chime in, particularly when it comes to certain misguided "observations" by certain individuals from a dozen years ago! :lol:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

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. 

Precisely why this has left a bad aftertaste in general overall. But since it wasn't Kazan nor Chongqing, it's okay then, for the ones who are happy with the actual result. 

4 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

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. 

It's a 'major' conflict of interest, as I mentioned last night. Conflicts that other IOC members that were named in retort, didn't have.

4 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

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.

It's interesting to see this description of Coates. While at the same time, others describe him as a ruthless, political fighter. Good twin, bad twin, perhaps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

The fact is, it’s always been advantage for a bidder to have an effective or influential IOC member on board.

 

Unless that bidder comes from a country whose influential IOC member wants to become President of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StefanMUC said:

Unless that bidder comes from a country whose influential IOC member wants to become President of course.

 

3.5 years ago:

The New Olympic Host Selection Rules were passed by the IOC 132nd IOC Session at the PyeongChang Winter Games

  • The Olympic selection host selection rules were passed on 6 February 2018 by the IOC at the 132nd IOC Session at the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in PyeongChang.
  • During the last 3.5 years, several interested cities/regions entered the inaugural Continuous Dialogue (non-edition specific) with the IOC for Olympic Games.
  • Brisbane was one of several interested.
  • Three years later on 24 February 2021, Brisbane was elevated by the IOC Executive Board to the Targeted Dialogue phase as Preferred for the 2032 Games.
  • 3.5 years after the New Rules were passed by the IOC, Brisbane was elected 2032 Host by the 138th IOC Session in Tokyo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

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. 

Let me reassure you, Kazan was not one of those in the Continuous Dialogue phase with the IOC - but several others were.

———————————————————————

3.5 years ago:

The New Olympic Host Selection Rules were passed by the IOC 132nd IOC Session at the PyeongChang Winter Games

  • The Olympic selection host selection rules were passed on 6 February 2018 by the IOC at the 132nd IOC Session at the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in PyeongChang.
  • During the last 3.5 years, several interested cities/regions entered the inaugural Continuous Dialogue (non-edition specific) with the IOC for Olympic Games.
  • Brisbane was one of several interested.
  • Three years later on 24 February 2021, Brisbane was elevated by the IOC Executive Board to the Targeted Dialogue phase as Preferred for the 2032 Games.
  • 3.5 years after the New Rules were passed by the IOC, Brisbane was elected 2032 Host by the 138th IOC Session in Tokyo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what happened back in 1999, I stated in another thread that both John Coates and Thomas Bach should have been shown the door a long time ago. Both of them are directly responsible for the mess the Olympics are in as well as the toxic reputation that the IOC has in the eyes of western democracies. Coates and Bach also oversaw the most expensive Olympics in history with Tokyo. They'll be quick to blame it on Covid but the reality is the costs were getting out of control before Covid. When the Tokyo governor stepped in calling to use existing venues for sports like volleyball, aquatics, and rowing, Bach and Coates both stepped in and interfered instead calling for so-called "cost savings" on the construction of venues that now are a total waste. This cost savings promoted by Coates was the equivalent of paying full price for a Rolls Royce then getting told by the dealership that they'll pay for 12 months of Sirius XM radio. In other words, it's chump change. Add onto that Coates and Bach stuck all the extra costs incurred due to Covid with Tokyo.

This New Norm thing is like a turnaround plan a struggling business, but it hasn't born any fruit yet. The election of Brisbane means nothing other than a mid-sized that might not have had a chance before now gets the big show. Look at it more closely, and it was the only option. New frontiers are out for the foreseeable future and the German bid, the only real threat to Brisbane, had the threat of a referendum hanging over it (same reason Milan beat out Stockholm). Brisbane still has to deliver an Olympics within budget and the budget being proposed is ridiculously low. Speaking of the WOGs, both Bach and Coates have nearly allowed them to die on the vine, all the while proclaiming how many wonderful candidates they have. Coates showed up in Calgary and proclaimed "the Games will cost you nothing." That's gasoline on a fire for a city facing a referendum. Dialogue means absolutely nothing unless there is a firm commitment with government support for a bid. Right now, the IOC is relying on Salt Lake to come to the rescue for 2030 when they clearly prefer 2034. But hey, they have lots of cities in the dialogue phase. As I said in a previous thread, Donald Trump should deliver his classic "You're fired" to Coates and Bach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stryker said:

Regardless of what happened back in 1999, I stated in another thread that both John Coates and Thomas Bach should have been shown the door a long time ago. Both of them are directly responsible for the mess the Olympics are in as well as the toxic reputation that the IOC has in the eyes of western democracies. Coates and Bach also oversaw the most expensive Olympics in history with Tokyo. They'll be quick to blame it on Covid but the reality is the costs were getting out of control before Covid. When the Tokyo governor stepped in calling to use existing venues for sports like volleyball, aquatics, and rowing, Bach and Coates both stepped in and interfered instead calling for so-called "cost savings" on the construction of venues that now are a total waste. This cost savings promoted by Coates was the equivalent of paying full price for a Rolls Royce then getting told by the dealership that they'll pay for 12 months of Sirius XM radio. In other words, it's chump change. Add onto that Coates and Bach stuck all the extra costs incurred due to Covid with Tokyo.

This New Norm thing is like a turnaround plan a struggling business, but it hasn't born any fruit yet. The election of Brisbane means nothing other than a mid-sized that might not have had a chance before now gets the big show. Look at it more closely, and it was the only option. New frontiers are out for the foreseeable future and the German bid, the only real threat to Brisbane, had the threat of a referendum hanging over it (same reason Milan beat out Stockholm). Brisbane still has to deliver an Olympics within budget and the budget being proposed is ridiculously low. Speaking of the WOGs, both Bach and Coates have nearly allowed them to die on the vine, all the while proclaiming how many wonderful candidates they have. Coates showed up in Calgary and proclaimed "the Games will cost you nothing." That's gasoline on a fire for a city facing a referendum. Dialogue means absolutely nothing unless there is a firm commitment with government support for a bid. Right now, the IOC is relying on Salt Lake to come to the rescue for 2030 when they clearly prefer 2034. But hey, they have lots of cities in the dialogue phase. As I said in a previous thread, Donald Trump should deliver his classic "You're fired" to Coates and Bach.

In the meantime, the new norm processes will roll on.

They’ve only just started and, like any major organisational reforms, they will be reviewed tweaked/changed as more time passes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

 

Let me reassure you, Kazan was not one of those in the Continuous Dialogue phase with the IOC - but several others were.

———————————————————————

3.5 years ago:

The New Olympic Host Selection Rules were passed by the IOC 132nd IOC Session at the PyeongChang Winter Games

  • The Olympic selection host selection rules were passed on 6 February 2018 by the IOC at the 132nd IOC Session at the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in PyeongChang.
  • During the last 3.5 years, several interested cities/regions entered the inaugural Continuous Dialogue (non-edition specific) with the IOC for Olympic Games.
  • Brisbane was one of several interested.
  • Three years later on 24 February 2021, Brisbane was elevated by the IOC Executive Board to the Targeted Dialogue phase as Preferred for the 2032 Games.
  • 3.5 years after the New Rules were passed by the IOC, Brisbane was elected 2032 Host by the 138th IOC Session in Tokyo.

 

You really don't get it, do you? You can bold, up size font and bullet point all you wish but none of the above resolves the question at hand - did Coates give Brisbane a significant advantage by providing it with intel above and beyond what Germany or any other applicant nation was provided? The fact that others were blind sided by the announcement and expressed dissatisfaction with the process is a significant red flag that it was not an even playing field. 

As an applicant city without the support of a powerful insider like Coates the proposition of Agenda 2020 would be far too risky because the water is murky. The fact that Kazan is powering up as a potential interested party for 2036 speaks for itself. Welcome to your New Rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q  did Coates give Brisbane a significant advantage by providing it with intel above and beyond what Germany

 

Thomas Bach is German....did he not know what was going on? 

However, I am totally against this new system, it neither transparent or fair. To play 'the bidding game' there has to be rules....now it seems like a secret free-for-all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Australian Kiwi said:

You really don't get it, do you? You can bold, up size font and bullet point all you wish but none of the above resolves the question at hand - did Coates give Brisbane a significant advantage by providing it with intel above and beyond what Germany or any other applicant nation was provided? The fact that others were blind sided by the announcement and expressed dissatisfaction with the process is a significant red flag that it was not an even playing field. 

As an applicant city without the support of a powerful insider like Coates the proposition of Agenda 2020 would be far too risky because the water is murky. The fact that Kazan is powering up as a potential interested party for 2036 speaks for itself. Welcome to your New Rules. 

Total nonsense.  You and your conspiracy theores.

No-one was blind-sided, that’s absolute bs.

The world was told at the same time when New Norm was passed and announced.

3 full years then passed before Brisbane was elevated.  No-one was bloody blind-sided.

You can thrash around and stay stuck in this conpiracy theory world you’re all you want.

But it aint going to change anything.  

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TorchbearerSydney said:

Q  did Coates give Brisbane a significant advantage by providing it with intel above and beyond what Germany

 

Thomas Bach is German....did he not know what was going on? 

However, I am totally against this new system, it neither transparent or fair. To play 'the bidding game' there has to be rules....now it seems like a secret free-for-all.

Another conspiracy theorist, ffs.

Neither Thomas Bach nor John Coates are members of the Future Hosts Commission.

Kristen Kloster Aasen is the Chair of the Future Hosts Commission.

Bach and Coates are not members of this Commission.

For the conspiracy theorists out there,  draw long bows all you like, but it’s a lot of wasted oxygen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another conspiracy theorist, ffs

 

I am not a conspiracy theorist ffs...

In order to have maximum transparency and fairness in any race or election - EVERYONE must know the rules of the competition in advance.....and have equal opportunity in the race. In the new system, no one knows exactly the dates for consideration, not everyone has an IOC member with inside knowledge of discussions and what they are up to. That is not fair.

The system may work well, but it needs tweaking.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

 

3.5 years ago:

The New Olympic Host Selection Rules were passed by the IOC 132nd IOC Session at the PyeongChang Winter Games

  • The Olympic selection host selection rules were passed on 6 February 2018 by the IOC at the 132nd IOC Session at the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in PyeongChang.
  • During the last 3.5 years, several interested cities/regions entered the inaugural Continuous Dialogue (non-edition specific) with the IOC for Olympic Games.
  • Brisbane was one of several interested.
  • Three years later on 24 February 2021, Brisbane was elevated by the IOC Executive Board to the Targeted Dialogue phase as Preferred for the 2032 Games.
  • 3.5 years after the New Rules were passed by the IOC, Brisbane was elected 2032 Host by the 138th IOC Session in Tokyo.

 

You should only quote and reply me if you understood what point I was trying to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

You should only quote and reply me if you understood what point I was trying to make.

Oh really?   Are you seriously now trying to control who and when should post what ?

You’ll have more luck trying to control when the sun sets and rises.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

30 minutes ago, TorchbearerSydney said:

In order to have maximum transparency and fairness in any race or election - EVERYONE must know the rules of the competition in advance.....and have equal opportunity in the race. In the new system, no one knows exactly the dates for consideration, not everyone has an IOC member with inside knowledge of discussions and what they are up to. That is not fair.

The system may work well, but it needs tweaking.

What on God’s earth could make you possibly think that everyone didn’t know the rules in advance ?

It was announced to the world 3 years ago.

Let me repeat that ………    it was announced to the world 3 years ago.    

3 years in advance of the point in time when the Candidature from Brisbane was elevated.

I fully agree with you that the system will very likely need tweaking at some point because the changes have been so major.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

Oh really?   Are you seriously now trying to control who and when should post what ?

You’ll have more luck trying to control when the sun sets and rises.

 

I call that my personal New Norm: telling trolls what I think of them in full transparency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

I call that my personal New Norm: telling trolls what I think of them in full transparency.

That makes a lot of sense ……. not.

Sounds more like you don’t like it when someone disagrees with you

……. and that, sunshine, is your problem, not mine.

 

Just so you can hold a mirror up to your own behaviour, here is your post from today trying to control the content.

42 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

You should only quote and reply me if you understood what point I was trying to make.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that was a subtle way of pointing out that you sometimes reply with non-sequiturs. I don't think he was literally telling you not to post. ;)

Honestly....I don't regard you as a troll. You're hardly the first slightly-defensive supporter of a recently elected host city we've had here (hey Rob c 2005!), but you border on trolling when your responses in a conversation are just copy and pastes from IOC press releases/documents as if they're Holy Writ. Just fyi.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rob. said:

I think that was a subtle way of pointing out that you sometimes reply with non-sequiturs. I don't think he was literally telling you not to post. ;)

Honestly....I don't regard you as a troll. You're hardly the first slightly-defensive supporter of a recently elected host city we've had here (hey Rob c 2005!), but you border on trolling when your responses in a conversation are just copy and pastes from IOC press releases/documents as if they're Holy Writ. Just fyi.

I hear what you’re saying and I appreciate your candour.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
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...