Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We’re all getting used to the new way, or the New Norm way that Olympic Hosts are selected.

The first Summer Games Host election under New Norm occurred on 21 July 2021 in Tokyo with Brisbane 2032.

The first Winter Games Host selection and election under New Norm is expected sometime in 2022 or 2023, as a guess.

This thread is to have in one spot where members can learn about or fact check how these biggest Host selection changes in Olympic history actually work = New Norm.

This thread, will be gradually updated with links to the source documents on the IOC website with a brief explanation with each link.

This New Norm Library may be useful to quickly check what is fact, what is a myth or a guess.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New Norm: It’s a Games changer - 5 February 2018 - IOC - click to learn more

  • “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.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future Host Commission for the Games of the Olympiad - IOC

The responsibilities of the Future Host Commission for the Games of the Olympiad include:

  • Reporting regularly to the IOC Executive Board
  • Advising and providing recommendations to the Executive Board in regard to future hosts, to enable the Executive Board to react to various developments and opportunities pertaining to Future Host Elections
  • Respecting a strict neutrality
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future Host Commission for the Olympic Winter Games - IOC - click to learn more

The mission of the Future Host Commission for the Olympic Winter Games is to explore, create and oversee interest in future Olympic Winter Games and Winter Youth Olympic Games. 

The responsibilities of the Future Host Commission for the Olympic Winter Games include:

  • Reporting regularly to the IOC Executive Board
  • Advising and providing recommendations to the Executive Board in regard to future hosts, to enable the Executive Board to react to various developments and opportunities pertaining to Future Host Elections
  • Respecting a strict neutrality
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olympic Agenda 2020+5 - IOC - 15 February 2021 - click to learn more

  • Consisting of 15 recommendations, it builds on the results of Olympic Agenda 2020 and act as the roadmap for  the IOC and the Olympic Movement for the next five years.
  • The title, Olympic Agenda 2020+5, has been chosen to reflect the fact that this new roadmap is the successor to Olympic Agenda 2020 and will determine the direction of the IOC and the Olympic Movement until 2025.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OLYMPIC CHARTER - 8 August 2021 - IOC - click to learn more

  • Modern Olympism was conceived by Pierre de Coubertin, on whose initiative the International Athletic Congress of Paris was held in June 1894.
  • The International Olympic Committee (IOC) constituted itself on 23 June 1894.
  • The first Olympic Games (Games of the Olympiad) of modern times were celebrated in Athens, Greece, in 1896.
  • In 1914, the Olympic flag presented by Pierre de Coubertin at the Paris Congress was adopted. It includes the five interlaced rings, which represent the union of the five continents and the meeting of athletes from throughout the world at the Olympic Games.
  • The first Olympic Winter Games were celebrated in Chamonix, France, in 1924
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IOC Executive Board - click to learn more

  • The Executive Board, founded in 1921, consists of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) President, four Vice-Presidents and ten other members.
  • All the members of the Executive Board are elected by the Session, by secret ballot, by a majority of votes cast, for a four-year term.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coordination Commissions - IOC - click to learn more

“The IOC President shall establish a Coordination Commission for each edition of the Olympic Games. The Coordination Commission includes representatives of the IOC, the IFs, the NOCs the athletes and experts.”

As defined in the Olympic Charter, the Coordination Commission’s mandate is to:

  • Monitor the progress of, and provide guidance to the OCOG, with respect to the planning, organisation, staging and financing of the Olympic Games, including in relation to collaborating with the relevant public authorities;
  • Conduct on-site inspections of competition, training venues and other facilities;
  • Report to the IOC Executive Board on the status of preparation of the Olympic Games, particularly with regard to progress, challenges and risks.
  • After the Olympic Games, to produce a report relating to the organisation of the Olympic Games for the IOC Executive Board and IOC Session.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I want to read IOC PR, I go to the IOC directly.

In the meantime, I‘m not letting myself showered with all that bs which anyone with a sense of reality knows will be thrown out of the window again when Fencing 1976 and his mates see fit.

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

TIMELINE TO FIRST NEW NORM HOST ELECTION - BRISBANE 2032

2016

2017

 

2019

 

2020

23 May 2020 - CANDIDATURE PAUSED DUE TO COVID

7 December  2020 - CANDIDATURE RESUMES

 

2021

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^

The 2032 result may have been solid, but the process was very flawed and highly criticised.

Which goes to the heart of this “new norm”. What it all boils down to is - “We’ve eliminated all transparency and accountability from the host selection process and just put it in the hands of the executive committee to do what is their whim behind closed doors”. Not even JAS could get the IOC membership to ever agree to that.

Sure, the old system also had its problems. But this is underhand and more potentially corruptable. 

 

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

3 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

The 2032 result may have been solid, but the process was very flawed and highly criticised.

Which goes to the heart of this “new norm”. What it all boils down to is - “We’ve eliminated all transparency and accountability from the host selection process and just put it in the hands of the executive committee to do what is their whim behind closed doors”. Not even JAS could get the IOC membership to ever agree to that.

Sure, the old system also had its problems. But this is underhand and more potentially corruptable. 

 

Actually the Future Host Commission does most of the work, not the IOC Executive Board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

Actually the Future Host Commission does most of the work, not the IOC Executive Board.

Which is appointed by the EB, reports to the EB, and it’s the EB that has the final say and approves it’s “preferred candidate” to take on to rubber stamping at the next IOC session.

And as for all the “sustainability”, “flexibility” and “closer partnerships with cities” stuff. That’s just common sense. It’s what the IOC is forced to do, indeed had already long begun to do, if it was to have any hope of ensuring it could attract viable hosts in the future. It was simple common senses necessity for survival. It did not require a new process that goes behind closed doors in “targeted dialogue” and eliminates any transparency in order to succeed. It’s the old pea and thimble trick - throw in some laudable, nice sounding aims to cover the fact they are taking away all transparency - publicly available bid books, public evaluation scores, public q&as with journalists and IOC members - and substituting it with total EB control.

It’;s just a bad, bad “reform”

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Which is appointed by the EB, reports to the EB, and it’s the EB that has the final say and approves it’s “preferred candidate” to take on to rubber stamping at the next IOC session.

And as for all the “sustainability”, “flexibility” and “closer partnerships with cities” stuff. That’s just common sense. It’s what the IOC is forced to do, indeed had already long begun to do, if it was to have any hope of ensuring it could attract viable hosts in the future. It was simple common senses necessity for survival. It did not require a new process that goes behind closed doors in “targeted dialogue” and eliminates any transparency in order to succeed. It’s the old pea and thimble trick - throw in some laudable, nice sounding aims to cover the fact they are taking away all transparency - publicly available bid books, public evaluation scores, public q&as with journalists and IOC members - and substituting it with total EB control.

It’;s just a bad, bad “reform”

That’s your opinion to which you are entitled.

In the end, opinions are not evidence.

There has been one only Host selected under New Norm so far and that was for 2032.  That first New Norm candidature assessment and selection process was conducted in accordance with the New Norm rules and ideals.

There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

There will soon be a second for 2030 and then further down the track  a third and fourth for 2034 and 2036 respectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AustralianFan said:

There has been one only Host selected under New Norm so far and that was for 2032.  That first New Norm candidature assessment and selection process was conducted in accordance with the New Norm rules and ideals.

Which was highly criticised by a number of established and respected Olympic commentators and journalists, including the owner of this site, Rob Livingstone.

2 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

There’s no smoking gun, but any process that’s results in a very widespread assumption that “this was rigged by John Coates” obviously has some serious flaws.

I get it. You’re happy Brisbane won. So am I. But the process that got it there has clouded it’s win in suspicion and innuendo, both here and the wider media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sir Rols said:

Which was highly criticised by a number of established and respected Olympic commentators and journalists, including the owner of this site, Rob Livingstone.

There’s no smoking gun, but any process that’s results in a very widespread assumption that “this was rigged by John Coates” obviously has some serious flaws.

I get it. You’re happy Brisbane won. So am I. But the process that got it there has clouded it’s win in suspicion and innuendo, both here and the wider media.

That’s your opinion to which you are entitled.

In the end, opinions are not evidence.

There has been one only Host selected under New Norm so far and that was for 2032.  That first New Norm candidature assessment and selection process was conducted in accordance with the New Norm rules and ideals.

There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

There will soon be a second for 2030 and then further down the track  a third and fourth for 2034 and 2036 respectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

In the end, opinions are not evidence.

There has been one only Host selected under New Norm so far and that was for 2032.  That first New Norm candidature assessment and selection process was conducted in accordance with the New Norm rules and ideals.

There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

There will soon be a second for 2030 and then further down the track a third and fourth for 2034 and 2036 respectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AustralianFan said:

In the end, opinions are not evidence.

Isn’t that the whole point of the GamesBids.com forums? To post and debate opinions? What’s the problem?

1 hour ago, AustralianFan said:

.There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary.

 

We have the evidence under our belts of one controversial and criticised host decision

I’m actually glad you started this thread. It’s a pity we lost a lot of the led discussions of the “New Normal”. It’s exactly what should be discussed, scrutinised, debated and picked apart on a board dedicated to bids for the Olympics.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

It’s a pity we lost a lot of the led discussions of the “New Normal”. It’s exactly what should be discussed, scrutinised, debated and picked apart on a board dedicated to bids for the Olympics.

The thing is, this has already been discussed, scrutinized, debated & picked apart last summer in various threads (including the Brisbane 2032 thread that you accidentally deleted & you-know-who had a fit about a few months back), when the 2032 coronation officially got rubber-stamped. 

All of those pieces from reputable Olympic web sources that you linked above, were presented back then, too. And were all conveniently debunked with the same broken-record style rebuttal, & then some. But instead of calling them ‘opinions’ back then, they were labeled as “conspiracy theories being thrashed around”. So obviously, there’s no sense of debate to be had with radical mentality like that. 

Most on this site (& obviously in the media at large) with an objective mind knows exactly how this all went down. Anyone else who thinks otherwise, is just kidding themselves because their ‘preferred candidate’ got elected this way. And looking at it in any other light, taints that view perfect new-norm delusion for them. 

  • Like 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...