UK Bid in 2040s - Glasgow, Manchester or Birmingham

[AustralianFan]

This ITG report is of the UK Government interested in a bid for a 2040s Games from outside London, such as Glasgow or Manchester or Birmingham.

 

[AustralianFan]

Some reports about this ….

 

Britain wants to launch audacious bid to host the Olympics again, but it’s not as soon as you might like - 2Feb2022 - Thesun.co.uk

“BRITAIN could launch an audacious bid to host the Olympics again, minister revealed today.”

“The UK is considering a bid for one of the Games to level up the country in the 2040s - most likely in a city outside of London.”

[AustralianFan]

Here’s another one …..

Britain wants to host the Olympics again - 2Feb2022 - Uber Turco News

[Rob2012]

This is all very vague and who knows whether anything serious will happen or whether this is just headline-grabbing politicking from a government that desperately needs good headlines at the moment, particularly with regard to its "levelling up" agenda*

What seems more certain is this has almost certainly ended any prospect of another London Games in next couple of vacant cycles. Not that I ever thought government support would be forthcoming for that (see my posts in the London 2036 thread).

The big elephant in the room as always is the athletics venue. (actually the elephant in the room at the moment is which city are we talking about!)

Let's just say there's A LOT that needs working out.

 

*

 

Edited February 5, 2022 by Rob.

[munichfan]

Well, if Europe gets 2036 as expected and the UK won't be part of the mix for that edition, finding a suitable city and athletics venue is a discussion for another decade altoghether.

[stryker]

25 minutes ago, munichfan said:

Well, if Europe gets 2036 as expected and the UK won't be part of the mix for that edition, finding a suitable city and athletics venue is a discussion for another decade altoghether.

Well that's the Achilles heel of any northern bid involving either Manchester or Birmingham. No football team is currently in the market for a new stadium so building one with an athletics track is completely unfeasible. I brought this up in the London 2036 thread but if the UK is serious about this then perhaps the bulk of events are hosted in northern England and athletics gets held in London at the Olympic Stadium

[Scotguy II]

I can see the UK Government offering up Glasgow for a bid to bribe the Scottish people into voting no to independence just like their, vote NO to remain in the EU lies from 2014.

The current UK government Dictatorship is an absolute shambles and with referendum plans currently being drawn up by the Scottish Government, hopefully by the 2040's we will have broke free form Boris and his gang of lies, hypocrisy and utter vile leadership.

[AustralianFan]

… or even Liverpool

 

[stryker]

On 2/7/2022 at 7:55 AM, AustralianFan said:

… or even Liverpool

 

Liverpool lost out to Birmingham for the CWGs. Forget the Olympics.

[AustralianFan]

2 minutes ago, stryker said:

Liverpool lost out to Birmingham for the CWGs. Forget the Olympics.

Whoever the UK Government gets behind will be who they get behind in this new norma era.

It may be across more than one region or city outside of London,  eg Milano-Cortina 2026

[stryker]

1 minute ago, AustralianFan said:

Whoever the UK Government gets behind will be who they get behind in this new norma era.

It may be across more than one region or city outside of London,  eg Milano-Cortina 2026

You're still forgetting the elephant in the room when any bid outside of London is proposed, the albatross known as the Olympic Stadium. Now if the UK wants to hold a nation-wide bid with London hosting athletics it could work, but neither Birmingham, Manchester, or Liverpool have a need for an athletics stadium and none of the local football teams are likely to consent to a stadium with a track. Using what you have is and should be the preferred option, but there seems to be a stigma about the SOGs that the main Olympic stadium has to be in the host city and this is why viable Olympic hosts such as Madrid, Hamburg, and New York are on the outside looking in.

[AustralianFan]

17 minutes ago, stryker said:

You're still forgetting the elephant in the room when any bid outside of London is proposed, the albatross known as the Olympic Stadium. Now if the UK wants to hold a nation-wide bid with London hosting athletics it could work, but neither Birmingham, Manchester, or Liverpool have a need for an athletics stadium and none of the local football teams are likely to consent to a stadium with a track. Using what you have is and should be the preferred option, but there seems to be a stigma about the SOGs that the main Olympic stadium has to be in the host city and this is why viable Olympic hosts such as Madrid, Hamburg, and New York are on the outside looking in.

Sorry, that’s incorrect.

Birmingham and Manchester have suitable venues for Olympic track and field and ceremonies pictured below (and I haven’t begun to look up the other two).

Don’t forget tha the IOC had already approved for the 2032 Olympics Track and Field/Ceremonies the Gold Coast Stadium used for the 2018 CW Games before the Queensland Govenrment decided to upgrade the Gabba to keep it more central and train station, etc.

This is the New Norm era.   No longer is a spanking monster purpose-built stadium required.  Adding temporary grandstands to an existing stadium is absolutely fine.

 

Birmingham 2022 Stadium

 

Manchester 2002 Stadium

 

 

 

[stryker]

10 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

Sorry, that’s incorrect.

Birmingham and Manchester have suitable venues for Olympic track and field and ceremonies pictured below (and I haven’t begun to look up the other two).

Don’t forget tha the IOC had already approved for the 2032 Olympics Track and Field/Ceremonies the Gold Coast Stadium used for the 2018 CW Games before the Queensland Govenrment decided to upgrade the Gabba to keep it more central and train station, etc.

This is the New Norm era.   No longer is a spanking monster purpose-built stadium required.  Adding temporary grandstands to an existing stadium is absolutely fine.

 

Birmingham 2022 Stadium

 

Manchester 2002 Stadium

 

 

 

The Manchester photo is old. The Etihad Stadium has since been reconfigured where it can no longer accomodate an athletics track and there's no way Manchester City's oil sheiks who now own the stadium are going to let it be gutted just so the Olympics can come to town (this was discussed in the London 2036 thread). Alexander Stadium's capacity, even with temporary seating, is capped at 40,000 for the CWGs (the surrounding area would not allow for any further expansion than that). If the IOC is willing to accept 40,000 for an Olympics then that's great. Even Brisbane's Gabba only tops out at 50,000 and the IOC likes their money for their marquee events so I don't see them accepting a capacity lower than that.

[AustralianFan]

5 minutes ago, stryker said:

The Manchester photo is old. The Etihad Stadium has since been reconfigured where it can no longer accomodate an athletics track and there's no way Manchester City's oil sheiks who now own the stadium are going to let it be gutted just so the Olympics can come to town (this was discussed in the London 2036 thread). Alexander Stadium's capacity, even with temporary seating, is capped at 40,000 for the CWGs (the surrounding area would not allow for any further expansion than that). If the IOC is willing to accept 40,000 for an Olympics then that's great. Even Brisbane's Gabba only tops out at 50,000 and the IOC likes their money for their marquee events so I don't see them accepting a capacity lower than that.

The IOC no longer mandates minimum capacities at Olympic venues.  That was another of the New Norm reforms.

Temporary grandstands at an Olympic Stadium is not something we have seen yet  (I don’t think (?)

But there will not be a problem finding a venue outside London which can be adapted with temporary grandstands to host the Olympics.

Just because we have not seen it yet does not mean it’s not possible.

This added flexibility to save money and avoid unused white elephant venues is what the New Norm reforms are all about.

[AustralianFan]

14 minutes ago, stryker said:

The Manchester photo is old. The Etihad Stadium has since been reconfigured where it can no longer accomodate an athletics track and there's no way Manchester City's oil sheiks who now own the stadium are going to let it be gutted just so the Olympics can come to town (this was discussed in the London 2036 thread). Alexander Stadium's capacity, even with temporary seating, is capped at 40,000 for the CWGs (the surrounding area would not allow for any further expansion than that). If the IOC is willing to accept 40,000 for an Olympics then that's great. Even Brisbane's Gabba only tops out at 50,000 and the IOC likes their money for their marquee events so I don't see them accepting a capacity lower than that.

 

1 minute ago, AustralianFan said:

The IOC no longer mandates minimum capacities at Olympic venues.  That was another of the New Norm reforms.

Temporary grandstands at an Olympic Stadium is not something we have seen yet  (I don’t think (?)

But there will not be a problem finding a venue outside London which can be adapted with temporary grandstands to host the Olympics.

Just because we have not seen it yet does not mean it’s not possible.

This added flexibility to save money and avoid unused white elephant venues is what the New Norm reforms are all about.

A 40,000 seat Olympic Stadium is not a problem for the International Olympic Committee.

They already approved the Gold Coast Stadium as the 2032 Olympic Stadium and whose capacity was extended from 25,000 to 40,000 with the addition of the temporary grandstands.

2018 Gold Coast CW Games Stadium - capacity 40,000 with additional temporary seating

[stryker]

5 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

 

A 40,000 seat Olympic Stadium is not a problem for the International Olympic Committee.

They already approved the Gold Coast Stadium as the 2032 Olympic Stadium and whose capacity was extended from 25,000 to 40,000 with the addition of the temporary grandstands.

2018 Gold Coast CW Games Stadium - capacity 40,000 with additional temporary seating

I know Metricon was proposed but where was it stated it was accepted? If it really was, then yes, perhaps Alexander Stadium could work. At the same time, while venue capacities have been relaxed, neither the IOC or World Athletics is going to accept any capacity. I brought this up with Hayward Field (30,000 for next year's worlds) arguing if was acceptable for the worlds then it should be acceptable for an Olympics. The flip side is the lower in capacity you go the fewer seats there are for the general public when you consider the large allottment for the IOC, VIPs, and the media.

As for temporary grand stands, this is an oft-proposed but yet to work concept. The closest one came was London and we all know what happened there. Failed examples are Incheon`s Asiad Stadium and the Qatar WC stadiums (remember when they said they'd nearly all have temporary grandstands that would be shipped off to poorer countries after the tournament). It sounds like an easy concept but consider London built a 12,000 seat temporary arena and Paris initially considered the same and determined it was too expensive. If you can't repurpose a 12,000 seat arena how can you repurpose temporary stadium grandstands? Now if the IOC and World Athletics are willing to allow 40,000 or even 30,000 for an Olympics then you have a true game changer.

As for the northern UK, by this concept the best option is Hampden Park.

[Chris_Mex]

23 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

 

A 40,000 seat Olympic Stadium is not a problem for the International Olympic Committee.

They already approved the Gold Coast Stadium as the 2032 Olympic Stadium and whose capacity was extended from 25,000 to 40,000 with the addition of the temporary grandstands.

2018 Gold Coast CW Games Stadium - capacity 40,000 with additional temporary seating

I'd rather say brisbane election was a unique exception for IOC to improve it PR, but i wouldn't consider going after "small" stadiums the new rule, specially when right now you are going against istanbul 76k stadium, egypt 90k, seoul 70k, jakarta 77k,  putin willing to build a new 80k for an eventual russian olympics, not mentioning india 132k masterpiece. 2036 bids as for now all have big main stadiums on their plans, olympics are olympics after all. Even if you play the venue reuse card, you got a seoul, egypt* or moscow that will have most of the venues already in place for the event, so if GB goes serious on a bid it MUST present LONDON again

*egypt its already bulding an olympic size park for an eventual olympics/world cup in its new capital (it can end up being madrid 2.0 indeed)

[AustralianFan]

21 minutes ago, stryker said:

I know Metricon was proposed but where was it stated it was accepted? If it really was, then yes, perhaps Alexander Stadium could work. At the same time, while venue capacities have been relaxed, neither the IOC or World Athletics is going to accept any capacity. I brought this up with Hayward Field (30,000 for next year's worlds) arguing if was acceptable for the worlds then it should be acceptable for an Olympics. The flip side is the lower in capacity you go the fewer seats there are for the general public when you consider the large allottment for the IOC, VIPs, and the media.

As for temporary grand stands, this is an oft-proposed but yet to work concept. The closest one came was London and we all know what happened there. Failed examples are Incheon`s Asiad Stadium and the Qatar WC stadiums (remember when they said they'd nearly all have temporary grandstands that would be shipped off to poorer countries after the tournament). It sounds like an easy concept but consider London built a 12,000 seat temporary arena and Paris initially considered the same and determined it was too expensive. If you can't repurpose a 12,000 seat arena how can you repurpose temporary stadium grandstands? Now if the IOC and World Athletics are willing to allow 40,000 or even 30,000 for an Olympics then you have a true game changer.

As for the northern UK, by this concept the best option is Hampden Park.

The IOC wrote on p.25 of IOC Feasibility Assessment - Brisbane - Feb2021 - click to read more:

• ”Consider using existing Carrara Stadium (40,000) in Gold Coast for Athletics”
• ”Consider using The Gabba (40,000) for ceremonies”

 

 

[AustralianFan]

8 minutes ago, Chris_Mex said:

I'd rather say brisbane election was a unique exception for IOC to improve it PR, but i wouldn't consider going after "small" stadiums the new rule, specially when right now you are going against istanbul 76k stadium, egypt 90k, seoul 70k, jakarta 77k,  putin willing to build a new 80k for an eventual russian olympics, not mentioning india 132k masterpiece. 2036 bids as for now all have big main stadiums on their plans, olympics are olympics after all. Even if you play the venue reuse card, you got a seoul, egypt* or moscow that will have most of the venues already in place for the event, so if GB goes serious on a bid it MUST present LONDON again

*egypt its already bulding an olympic size park for an eventual olympics/world cup in its new capital (it can end up being madrid 2.0 indeed)

This is not about 2036.

This is about the UK Government interested in a Games sometime in the 2040s.

[AustralianFan]

… outside London.

[AustralianFan]

10 minutes ago, Chris_Mex said:

I'd rather say brisbane election was a unique exception for IOC to improve it PR, but i wouldn't consider going after "small" stadiums the new rule, specially when right now you are going against istanbul 76k stadium, egypt 90k, seoul 70k, jakarta 77k,  putin willing to build a new 80k for an eventual russian olympics, not mentioning india 132k masterpiece. 2036 bids as for now all have big main stadiums on their plans, olympics are olympics after all. Even if you play the venue reuse card, you got a seoul, egypt* or moscow that will have most of the venues already in place for the event, so if GB goes serious on a bid it MUST present LONDON again

*egypt its already bulding an olympic size park for an eventual olympics/world cup in its new capital (it can end up being madrid 2.0 indeed)

 

1 minute ago, AustralianFan said:

This is not about 2036.

This is about the UK Government interested in a Games sometime in the 2040s    outside London.

The New Norm is not a PR stunt.   

Brisbane’s selection as 2032 was no PR stunt as the first Host elected under the IOC’s radical New Norm changes.

New Norm is the biggest change in Olympic Games Host Selection in over 100 Years.

Everything we know in the past about Olympic Host selection is turned on it’s head from Brisbane onwards.

It’s all changed.

Here is the link about the New Norm:  The New Norm: it’s a Games Changer - International Olympic Committee - 6 February 2018

New Norm is exactly why an Olympic in a city or across regions outside of London can now be a reality.

You need to forget this bigger is better mentality about the size of Olympic Stadiums and other venues.  That thinking has gone.

Check it out, it’s an interesting read.

[stryker]

17 minutes ago, Chris_Mex said:

I'd rather say brisbane election was a unique exception for IOC to improve it PR, but i wouldn't consider going after "small" stadiums the new rule, specially when right now you are going against istanbul 76k stadium, egypt 90k, seoul 70k, jakarta 77k,  putin willing to build a new 80k for an eventual russian olympics, not mentioning india 132k masterpiece. 2036 bids as for now all have big main stadiums on their plans, olympics are olympics after all. Even if you play the venue reuse card, you got a seoul, egypt* or moscow that will have most of the venues already in place for the event, so if GB goes serious on a bid it MUST present LONDON again

*egypt its already bulding an olympic size park for an eventual olympics/world cup in its new capital (it can end up being madrid 2.0 indeed)

Istanbul, Jakarta, India, and Egypt are all no gos. The IOC isn't going to consider any developing countries for a long time. They want safe hosts. All of them have substantial issues that essentially disqualify them for hosting a SOGs and the lists are quite long. London does have the stadium though and that's there ace in the deck. While a northern UK bid is interesting, the logistics would be far more difficult than if London had it again.

While the IOC might accept a smaller capacity stadium, it's by no means a guarantee. If another reputable candidate (Russia, China, Rome to name a few) come along with an 80,000+ capacity Olympic Stadium that's going to give them an advantage over a 40,000 seater such as Alexander Stadium in Birmingham or Hampden Park in Glasgow.

Money talks. It's a fact that having 70-80,000 fans at an Olympics athletics competition yields more cash than the same competition in a stadium at half the capacity.

[TorchbearerSydney]

Q: You need to forget this bigger is better mentality about the size of Olympic Stadiums and other venues.  That thinking has gone.

It is interesting that in Tokyo they had negligible crowds (ie they could have had much smaller venues) and the competition and the Olympics were great. That actually reinforced the New Norm message.

There is every indication that Brisbane and surrounds will do a great budget job with the Games, and I suspect it will motivate more smaller, regional bids.

 

 

[stryker]

34 minutes ago, TorchbearerSydney said:

 

It is interesting that in Tokyo they had negligible crowds (ie they could have had much smaller venues) and the competition and the Olympics were great. That actually reinforced the New Norm message..

 

 

No doubt Tokyo  put on a great Olympics but the real issue is the financial losses. Think about it for a moment. Venues like the aquatics center were built for this and saw no crowds and will end up being scaled down completely. Same goes for the rowing venue and the Olympic Gymnastics Arena. Purpose built for the games and had no spectators. Big waste imof money and that's likely to be what puts the stake in the Sapporo bid. Taxpayers remember all the cash that went in to this. 

[Chris_Mex]

19 minutes ago, stryker said:

No doubt Tokyo  put on a great Olympics but the real issue is the financial losses. Think about it for a moment. Venues like the aquatics center were built for this and saw no crowds and will end up being scaled down completely. Same goes for the rowing venue and the Olympic Gymnastics Arena. Purpose built for the games and had no spectators. Big waste imof money and that's likely to be what puts the stake in the Sapporo bid. Taxpayers remember all the cash that went in to this. 

Wasn't tokyo's fault tho, TOGOC wanted to delay the event until 2032, but IOC wanted their event during an emergency state and ended up screwing it