Jump to content

Dakar 2026 - 4th Youth Olympic Games


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, FYI said:

You’re bordering on trollish behavior.

Yeah sure, I will start complaining on ceremonies needing choirs and flagpoles, just because I'm putting on the table bids in a bidding forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Chris_Mex said:

Yeah sure, I will start complaining on ceremonies needing choirs and flagpoles, 

No, you're more like the "it's called the New Norm/it's a Game changer" complainer who complains, bemoans & belittles cause not everyone else see's the nearly 200 NOC's of the Olympic Movement hosting the Olympics (like you do). :P

25 minutes ago, Chris_Mex said:

just because I'm putting on the table bids in a bidding forum

Uh huh, yeah, sure. And what does "if it wasn't understood, this is the type of 'user' I was referring to" - from your last post - have to do with "just because I'm putting on the table bids in a bidding forum", besides absolutely nothing, other than being a trollish remark. Which btw, aren't you the one that said not that long ago, that "bids" were a thing of the past anyway, so there's nothing left to talk about in that respect? So which is it then! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, FYI said:

No, you're more like the "it's called the New Norm/it's a Game changer" complainer who complains, bemoans & belittles cause not everyone else see's the nearly 200 NOC's of the Olympic Movement hosting the Olympics (like you do). :P

Uh huh, yeah, sure. And what does "if it wasn't understood, this is the type of 'user' I was referring to" - from your last post - have to do with "just because I'm putting on the table bids in a bidding forum", besides absolutely nothing, other than being a trollish remark. Which btw, aren't you the one that said not that long ago, that "bids" were a thing of the past anyway, so there's nothing left to talk about in that respect? So which is it then! :lol:

They're a thing of the ´past, yet bids existed right so? If we're gonna go around having to accept bids like brisbane as the new norm, at least imagine weird scenarios. Yet every bid has their cons, even the perfect ones. And my remark is that effectively each time a middle east country is put on the table you put the same timeframe timeframe timeframe argument as if it was enough reason to dismiss half of the current proposals. If im the new norm complainer troll you're just the timeframe troll applying the same logic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris_Mex said:

They're a thing of the ´past, yet bids existed right so? If we're gonna go around having to accept bids like brisbane as the new norm, at least imagine weird scenarios. Yet every bid has their cons, even the perfect ones. 

You should know, as almost nearly everyone else here, why/how Brisbane got elected. That was a one-off, & not really a ‘new norm’, other than the IOC just being their new-norm-self when it comes to their self interests. Only they’re the ones who can imagine weird scenarios. Us, not so much.

1 hour ago, Chris_Mex said:

And my remark is that effectively each time a middle east country is put on the table **you** put the same timeframe timeframe timeframe argument as if it was enough reason to dismiss half of the current proposals. If im the new norm complainer troll you're just the timeframe troll applying the same logic

Don’t make it sound like I’m the only one presenting “the same timeframe, timeframe, timeframe argument” here, when there’s literally like half-a-dozen OTHER posters who were also presenting that same logical argument to you. So don’t just solely try to pin this on me. Did you not read this same thread? You’re in there too, so you must have.

So is that enough reason to dismiss some of those proposals? Well, yes. Yes it is. Cause guess what, it’s the IOC who are the “timeframe trolls” since it’s THEIR RULE that the Summer Olympics can only be hosted in July/Aug. So it’s NOT an “as if” scenario. It IS what it is. 

Yeah, no bid is perfect, but if one of the IOC’s *major* criteria can’t be met by right off the bat by certain countries, than it’s a total non-starter. That’s just a simple logical fact, that can’t be simply overlooked just because you want to “imagine weird scenarios”.

If you don’t like it, why don’t you fly over to Lausanne & bang on the IOC’s door, as loudly as Qatar is doing, & demand the REAL ‘timeframe trolls’ to *change* THEIR timeframe rule. Cause yes, until then, it can just be dismissed. So don’t accuse the messenger just because you don’t like the message.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Chris_Mex said:

They're a thing of the ´past, yet bids existed right so? If we're gonna go around having to accept bids like brisbane as the new norm, at least imagine weird scenarios. Yet every bid has their cons, even the perfect ones. And my remark is that effectively each time a middle east country is put on the table you put the same timeframe timeframe timeframe argument as if it was enough reason to dismiss half of the current proposals. If im the new norm complainer troll you're just the timeframe troll applying the same logic

Ostensibly, the main purpose of this board is to discuss Olympic bids. Which can mean a bit of fun speculating about offbeat bids that might be possible in an imaginary sort of way. But generally, when it comes down to real life bids, it means some serious probing of flaws and weaknesses in the proposed plans to assess whether it is really possible or likely to be awarded. And like it or not, the Timeframe constraint is a very real and very important factor nowadays as to whether a bid is viable.

Now, you mention Brisbane. You DO realise that the main reason it was even proposed was BECAUSE of the Timeframe issue. Quite simply, as has been posted many times on his board since the IOC mandated the summer games MUST be staged in either July or August, Brisbane is the only Australian city that has the climate to comfortably host in those months. The days of date flexibility that allowed Sydney and Melbourne to host in September-November are gone - they were lucky to host when they did. Similarly, Doha has already once been rejected by the IOC for shortlisting specifically because of the Timeframe issue (well, there may have been other reasons, but the Timeframe was the reason publicly cited by the IOC). It was also to FIFA’s chagrin that they realised they had no alternative but to change the date of this year’s WC, despite it really pleasing no-one.

It’s not trolling to bring up the Timeframe issue, it’s just pure plain consideration of reality. And, yes, the Timeframe problem really does narrow down the lists of possible hosts and means many otherwise well-credentialed cities are locked out of hosting. I can agree that in some respects that is unfair. But it’s hard commercial reality. We have to live with it, and accept and factor that into our discussions. Unfortunately, the conditions at present aren’t there for any serious attempts to change the Timeframe rule. Possibly the best chance in the future is that maybe, just perhaps, changes in broadcasting and the rise of streaming platforms like Netflix,. Amazon and Apple over traditional broadcasters MIGHT change the Olympics TV rights landscapes and allow some flexibility. But we’re not at that point yet, and maybe never. 

Also, elsewhere you’ve complained of members only favouring only “G7” countries, and snubbing developing countries. The Olympics are a massive and expensive undertaking, even for developed and rich countries and cities with many facilities already in place. Even then many developed countries, and their citizens, baulk at the cost of staging a games. Many proposals from “rich” countries also get highly scrutinised and rejected here because of the cost or unviability of just simply having all the pieces in place to stage a games. It also means that bids from developing countries, however exciting their proposals might be to many people, have to face the same scrutiny. And it also has to be factored in that they may not have the same economic resources others have to make their plans a reality. While I think it’s important that places like Brazil have had the chance to host, I think that they staged a good games and that much post-games criticism has been exaggerated, it’s understandable and important that we also question the cost of them doing so. The Olympics should sometimes be given to developing nations, and they sometimes are.  But it’s been rare for the IOC to make that leap because it can only responsibly happen when conditions are just right to do so, and the citizens of such countries aren’t made to shoulder an unacceptable burden and aren’t being denied other more important needs in order just to stage an expensive sports festival. 

  

Edited by Sir Rols
  • Thanks 2
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...