Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sir Rols

Melbourne - Sports Capital Of The World

Recommended Posts

I must admint. Dubai has the potential. It offers a unique position (esspecially for us Australian's) half way between Europe and Australia. Ideal for our internations teams, esspecially when a lot of the competition takes place in Europe (ie; football, cricket, rugby).

I'm expecting to see more Australian football internationals in Dubai, and slowly less and less in London. (Esspecially with our invoolvement in the Asian Cup).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes- Melbourne host lots of sporting events. But at the end of the day it dosen't matter how this is presented, whether it is in the form of tables, pie charts, bar graphs, or just by world of mouth- the bottom line is it counts for very little indeed. It carries little/ no significance. Melbourne is not big news around the world.

Hosting sporting events does not translate in world profile/ international status/ impotance. Outside of Australia, on the world satge, Melbourne has very little importance. It is a 3rd/ 4th tier city in terms of world status. It has similar status to places like Seattle, Munich, Atlanta. It is not even a match for regional cities such as Sydney, Sinagapore, Bangkok.

There is no such rule that states "hosting sporting events makes one city more important than another," or that "the more sporting events you host, the more world-famous and impotant a city is."

There is much evidence to support this:

Fukuoka (hosted 2001 world swimming), Yokohama (hosted 2002 WC final), Nagano (hosted 1998 WOG), are less impotant/ less world famous compared to Tokyo.

Salt Lake city (hosted 2002 WOG), Atlanta (hosted 1996 SOG), are less important/ less world famous compared to New York, Washington, Chicago, San Francisco.

Barcelona (hosted 1992 SOG), Munich (hosted 1972 SOG), are less important/ less world famous compared to the major European capitals like London, Paris, Rome, Berlin.

So yes- Melbourne hosts sporting events, lots of them - but so what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hosting sporting events does not translate in world profile/ international status/ impotance.

Well, actually it can do but that's not the point. This is a list of the sporting cities of the world, and hosting sporting events is obviously one of the most important factors in making a sporting city. I don't see why you're reading into this list something it doesn't even pretend to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a list of the sporting cities of the world, and hosting sporting events is obviously one of the most important factors in making a sporting city.

So why did an international sporting body- the IOC, choose London over Paris to host the 2012 olympics?

According to this list, Paris is more of a sports city, compared to london. Paris is no.2 on this list, compared to London in 5th place. However the IOC chose london, a "lesser-sporting city," according to this list.

Bangkok hosted the asian games 4 times but was not shortlisted for 2008. KL hosted a great commonwealth games in 1998, but was not shortlisted for 2008. Seville hosted the 1999 world athletics championships, but was not shortlisted for 2008.

Even in the sporting world, having hosted lots of events on your CV/ Resume- does not carry that much importance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So why did an international sporting body- the IOC, choose London over Paris to host the 2012 olympics?

According to this list, Paris is more of a sports city, compared to london. Paris is no.2 on this list, compared to London in 5th place. However the IOC chose london, a "lesser-sporting city," according to this list.

Bangkok hosted the asian games 4 times but was not shortlisted for 2008. KL hosted a great commonwealth games in 1998, but was not shortlisted for 2008. Seville hosted the 1999 world athletics championships, but was not shortlisted for 2008.

Even in the sporting world, having hosted lots of events on your CV/ Resume- does not carry that much importance

But again, that's not the point. It's just a report that tries to put some objective measures in place to measure the notion of various cities being more sporting than others. Nothing more and nothing less. What bothers you about that? The old "who are the sports capitals" is always a good debating topic.

Anyway, now that such a study exists, I expect you will see cities that score well on it in particularly categories quote the report as part of their bidding books and statements for various events in the near future. It'll be as valid an argument and tactic as any other reasons they'll put forward as being good host material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, now that such a study exists, I expect you will see cities that score well on it in particularly categories quote the report as part of their bidding books and statements for various events in the near future. It'll be as valid an argument and tactic as any other reasons they'll put forward as being good host material.

Incorrect. Having a high score/ position on this table/ report (which means a city has hosted lots of sporting events and has lots of experience), will not be a valid argument in future olympic bidding. It will not help cities to win olympic bids.

Lets have a look at the 2012 race- In the IOC technical report/ short list/ response to questionaire document, published in summer 2004, London scored 3rd highest. Paris had 8.5, Madrid had 8.3 and London had 7.6. London didn't score that well on the section about experience in hosting sports events. Paris scored very well, as they had hosted the 1998 world cup final and the 2003 IAAF world athletics.

However despite this fact, the IOC still picked London.

Hosting lots of sporting events, having lots of existing facilites already in place does not win olympic bids. All it does it get you extra "browny points," and helps you to get a higher IOC evalation score. But as we've seen cities with the highest score don't win olympic bids. In the 2008 race, Toronto scored more highly than Beijing, but lost the bid. In 2012, the same thing happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hosting lots of sporting events, having lots of existing facilites already in place does not win olympic bids. All it does it get you extra "browny points," and helps you to get a higher IOC evalation score. But as we've seen cities with the highest score don't win olympic bids. In the 2008 race, Toronto scored more highly than Beijing, but lost the bid. In 2012, the same thing happened.

Oh right! As if any city in a bid race doesn't care about as many brownie points or higher evaluation scores as they can get. And in the bid book chapter about Experience and Support they'll just write: "We've hosted quite a lot of regular and one-off events but can't be bothered listing them or show you how they always bring in big crowds. Take our word for it, and it's not important anyway."

Modern bid campaigns will fart out any endorsement from any quasi-audited source they can lay their hands on. This one will be picked to pieces in the campaign literature of the next few years.

Why are you so obtuse about it? It's like you are outraged that such a report and rankings even exists. Nobody mentioned anything about this being a survey of the "greatest metropoli in the world" until you came in. It's just a ranking with some figures to back it up a bit on the the classic pub argument, occasional tabloid topic and popular multiple previous GamesBids debate topic.

Jeez, in the international dick-size comparing debates we have here about which city has the prettiest landmarks or is the most multicultural, this is a bit more relevant than most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bangkok hosted the asian games 4 times but was not shortlisted for 2008.

Despite the military coup that seems to be still going on, Bangkok is still on its way to host the 2007 Summer Universiade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You’re making a mess of this. Since when is an Olympic host decided purely on experience and support?

You personally may rank Melbourne as a third tier city simply because of your exposure to it. It’s a city with a sporting culture unique to any other city in the world (because of its strong AFL background) and that is why it has scored highly.

Its diverse range of sports and its unbelievable support puts it at the top of this table and in the top level of world sports. However this doesn’t put it in the position to host further Olympic Games, major world events or claim to be the worlds greatest sporting cities. This survey simply rates it among the best destinations to enjoy sporting culture.

Melbourne’s support for events is almost unrivalled, but as you mention, this does not make it a top ranking sports city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modern bid campaigns will fart out any endorsement from any quasi-audited source they can lay their hands on. This one will be picked to pieces in the campaign literature of the next few years
Yes- they will try and use it, and they will try and use it a lot, just like a miser may try and squeeze as much tea out of a teabag, that he can possibly get. Good luck to them I say- because its gonna continue to fall on deaf ears....The traditional arguments that cities like Paris and Melbourne keep on spurting out such as "we've hosted so many events," and "we have so many facilities already built," are dead. These are dead arguments. The response from the IOC time and time again has been "so what?"
Jeez, in the international dick-size comparing debates we have here about which city

If we're taking about dick-sizes, then surely the African bids are unbeatable. I mean aren't black men supposed to have the biggest co.ck.s? In which case Cape Town would hammer somewhere like Tokyo or Kuala Lumpar. Abuja would win the 2014 commonwealth games bid in round 1. But i'm sure the Canadians and scottish people on this forum would strongly dispute this.

has the prettiest landmarks
Landmarks? Melbourne has no landmarks. What Melbourne has on offer is nothing more than a list of non-entities, which get little/ no recognition around the world. Things like Rialto Towers, Flinder station, Federation square, Victorian Arts Spire are unknown around the world.

Examples of landmarks are things like Big Ben, London Bridge, Eiffel Tower, Sydney Opera House, Sydney Harbour Bridge, Statue of Liberty, Empire State Building, Great Wall of China, Taj Mahal, Kremilin, Pyramids of Eygpt.

have little or is the most multicultural, this is a bit more relevant than most

Relevent? I don't think this table of sporting cities is particularly relevent. One city hosting lots of sporting events is not gonna affect the daily lives of millions/ billions of people around the world.

An example of a very important and relevent survery/ table would be a list of world financial/ economic centres- which would be lead by cities like New York, London, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Frankfurt, Singapore, Shanghai, Los Angeles.

Important because stocks and shares, trading etc..... in these cities may affect the price of gas/ petrol that you pump into your car everyday and the price of bread and milk on people's dinner table.

Whoever has spent days/ weeks/ months producing this table has wasted their time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You personally may rank Melbourne as a third tier city simply because of your exposure to it

Well no......it's not really a personal opinion.

I think that most people would pretty much agree with the following:

Premier League/ 1st tier cities are places like: New York, London, Tokyo, Paris. (known by many as the Big Four)

Tier 2 would comprise of cities like Berlin, Rome, Athens, Los Angeles, Hong Kong, Sydney, Beijing, Rio De Janeiro, Moscow.

It is after this that you have places like Melbourne, Munich, Chicago etc. This is why on the world stage, in terms of importance/ world status/ power and influence, Melbourne is a 3rd/ 4th tier city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when does a landmark have to be world famous to make it a landmark? PLease not the quote siad "prettiest". I think you detracting from the real purpose of the report. It's not to say Melbourne is the most influential sporting city, rather to recognise it for its sporting sub-culture and its affects on its own society, rather then that world wide.

I cannot believe you rank Sydney and Rio so highly. These are very much one sport cities. They have no sports culture at all. Rugby and Soccer captials yes, nothing more. How can you justify these above a diverse city like Melbourne (which has large support for a range of sports and events)

Melbourne is indeed the sports captial of Australia. That is its trademark. Its claim to fame. Australia is one of the biggest sports crazed nations in the world. It makes sense that the sport captial of a sporting nation ranks so highly.

Ask yourself this. What is the world record capacity for a baseball game? and in what city was it set? Dont read into this to much. I am not trying to suggest crowd number mean everything. Rather showing that a true sports city can embrace any sport, rather then those it is costum to (eg; London-football)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I cannot believe you rank Sydney and Rio so highly. These are very much one sport cities. They have no sports culture at all. Rugby and Soccer captials yes, nothing more. How can you justify these above a diverse city like Melbourne (which has large support for a range of sports and events)
You've misinterpreted my last post. I wasn't ranking according to sport though. I was ranking according to something far more important - power, influence, international status, fame. etc.

This is why New York, London, Tokyo are out on top. They are the 3 most important world financial centres. NYC is the world's No.1 financial centre, as the USA is currently the world's No.1 economy and superpower. It is home to the united nations.

Tokyo is the no.2 financial centre, Japan's economy is No.2 in the world. An earthquake in Tokyo could well lead the world into a recession, who knows?

London is Europe's No.1 financial centre (more trading volume compared to frankfurt). Heathrow is the world's busiest international airport. It is hoem to things like Big Ben, London Bridge, Buckingham Palace, London Eye, The Tower of London- some of the most well known buildings/ icons around the world.

Paris is a world famous international capital. It has the most tourists in the world. It is also home to some of the world's most famous and recognised buildings- Eiffel Tower, Arc De triomphe, Louvre, Notre Dame. Young children around the world will tell you that they to visit the city and see these buildings, have thier pictures taken outside them.

Melbourne is indeed the sports captial of Australia. That is its trademark. Its claim to fame. Australia is one of the biggest sports crazed nations in the world. It makes sense that the sport captial of a sporting nation ranks so highly.

I'm not disupting that Melbourne hosts lots of sporting events. It should be at the top of this table, of course. Infact the first sentence of my first post was " Yes- Melbourne host lots of sporting events.." Yes I completely agree with the No.1 ranking Melbourne has got in this table.

What I don't understand is why are people are supposed to be impressed/ amazed by this? It's just a bunch of statistics, which has no relevance really. As mentioned earlier, even the IOC don't take stuff like this too seriously.

It's like publishing a list of cities with most lamposts in the world- irrelevant, just a bunch of statistics.

If Paris had beaten London in the 2012 race (after they hosted the 1998 world cup final, 2003 athletics), and if Kuala Lumpar and Seville had been shortlisted for 2008 (after hosting the 1998 CWG's and 1999 world athletics)- believe me- I would take this list/ table very seriously indeed. Becasue then it would be important, and of great relevance to a site where we discuss future olympic bids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My interpretation:

Which city in the world -all taken into account is the best place to host a sporting event regardless of what it is, taking into account many factors that are needed to host a sporting event, with a heaving weighting given to larger sports events. maybe..ignoring tv revenue melbourne is prob the best place? or not?i dunno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My interpretation:

Which city in the world -all taken into account is the best place to host a sporting event regardless of what it is, taking into account many factors that are needed to host a sporting event, with a heaving weighting given to larger sports events. maybe..ignoring tv revenue melbourne is prob the best place? or not?i dunno

What about time zone? Australia is not the best time zone for the rest of the world. A good time zone would be somewhere like Rio De Janiero which would suit Europe/ Africa and both American continents.

Time of the year? Melbourne 1956 was in November and the 2006 Commonwealth games were in March. Both are out of season for the Northern Hemisphere (where the majority of the world lives) and not great timing for athletes in terms of their training programmes.

Why should the IOC make such adjustments when they can have an in-season games in Rome, Berlin, San Francisco, Tokyo and many other cities/ countries around the world?

The IOC is spoilt for choice. More and more countries are planning bids eg Qatar, India, Taiwan etc. In 1956 not many countries had the capacity to host a summer olympics.

So a Melbourne olympics woul have to be held sometime between June- September maybe even early October which is the Australian winter. Even though winter in Melbourne is no where near as cold as a European or North American winter- Why should the IOC go there instead of a very sunny San Francisco or Rome?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why should the IOC make such adjustments when they can have an in-season games in Rome, Berlin, San Francisco, Tokyo and many other cities/ countries around the world?

The IOC is spoilt for choice. More and more countries are planning bids eg Qatar, India, Taiwan etc. In 1956 not many countries had the capacity to host a summer olympics.

So a Melbourne olympics woul have to be held sometime between June- September maybe even early October which is the Australian winter. Even though winter in Melbourne is no where near as cold as a European or North American winter- Why should the IOC go there instead of a very sunny San Francisco or Rome?

People will read this and think "what about London then?" Why was London given the 2012 games? The weather in the UK is bad !!

The 2012 olympics will take place between 27th July-12th August. The UK just had it's hottest July on record in 2006.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5193486.stm

The weather in July/ August in London is overall better than it is in Melbourne. People will spot that London has more precipitation than Melbourne overall in July/ August. But London has less days of heavier rainfall (+0.25 mm) compared to Melbourne (12 and 11 comapred to 17 and 17)

Have a look at the following links:

London: http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/city_gu...tml?tt=TT003790

Melbourne: http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/city_gu...tml?tt=TT003020

What about other Southern hemisphere cities like Cape Town and Rio De Janeiro?

Well they do better than Melbourne also not to mention they have brilliant reasons for hosting the olmypics like: the entire continent of Africa/ South America has never hosted before.

Rio De Janeiro: http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/city_gu...tml?tt=TT001730

Cape Town: http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/city_gu...tml?tt=TT000580

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe it's to do with the fact it hasn't had a home NFL team for a while.

San Diego isn't on the list either. This survey seems to be anti-SoCal. It picks on Chicago and NYC..heck even San Francisco isn't on the list.

(By the way, Hachiko is back. Look for a new av and sig on the way.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about time zone? Australia is not the best time zone for the rest of the world. A good time zone would be somewhere like Rio De Janiero which would suit Europe/ Africa and both American continents.

Time of the year? Melbourne 1956 was in November and the 2006 Commonwealth games were in March. Both are out of season for the Northern Hemisphere (where the majority of the world lives) and not great timing for athletes in terms of their training programmes.

Why should the IOC make such adjustments when they can have an in-season games in Rome, Berlin, San Francisco, Tokyo and many other cities/ countries around the world?

The IOC is spoilt for choice. More and more countries are planning bids eg Qatar, India, Taiwan etc. In 1956 not many countries had the capacity to host a summer olympics.

So a Melbourne olympics woul have to be held sometime between June- September maybe even early October which is the Australian winter. Even though winter in Melbourne is no where near as cold as a European or North American winter- Why should the IOC go there instead of a very sunny San Francisco or Rome?

as for time zone i said ignoring tv revenue...this isnt all about the olympic games...why u making it all about that?..melbourne is an excellent sports city for most sports, it has the facilities and the infrastructure, why the need to analyze it in terms of what the IOC wants or even in Olympic terms???????melbourne wont be getting the games anytime soon but thats not the point of the table of scores/rankings....wow...maybe think outside the olympic box for just a few moments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
San Diego isn't on the list either. This survey seems to be anti-SoCal. It picks on Chicago and NYC..heck even San Francisco isn't on the list.

(By the way, Hachiko is back. Look for a new av and sig on the way.)

Hachiko, long time no see. It has been a long while, since I last saw a post from you. Besides, you are not the only one that has some major doubts on how this "study" was conducted. But, I guess I have to eat what was in it and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is everyone going off topic. This isn’t about weather Melbourne would make a good Olympic candidate. Its about its sports credentials and culture (along with every other city on the list).

By the way San Diego.. I never expected it to be on the list. San Francisco maybe slightly more, however it lacks major support. It doesn’t have a basketball franchise and has been unsuccessful in Olympic bids. Sure it has good support for baseball and to a degree football, but rarely do I here of SF ever embracing more world wide sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recognise the Sydney Games were in September and the weather was perfect. Just because it’s winter here doesn’t mean its colder then a London summer! As long as a possible games wern't scheduled for December or January there would be no problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is everyone going off topic. This isn’t about weather Melbourne would make a good Olympic candidate. Its about its sports credentials and culture (along with every other city on the list).

By the way San Diego.. I never expected it to be on the list. San Francisco maybe slightly more, however it lacks major support. It doesn’t have a basketball franchise and has been unsuccessful in Olympic bids. Sure it has good support for baseball and to a degree football, but rarely do I here of SF ever embracing more world wide sports.

thanks. finally someone sane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who live in Melbourne like myself know what the city's sporting legacy is all about. I for one have been to events this year that people in the most famous cities in the world can not match. This summer is shaping up for a hot summer of sporting events in Melbourne as well.

I won't go over the amazing start to 2006 with the Commonwealth Games and just refer to the last few months and upcoming sprorting feasts.

After the great AFL grand Final in September and the Melbourne Cup in November (hosted virtually in my backyard), this is what I have to look forward to in the next four months.

1. December : The ASHES boxing day test, the greatest Cricket tradition, where close to 100,000 will watch Shane Warne mesmerise Engaland in front of his home crowd.

2. January: Australian Tennis Grand Slam - The only grand slam of tennis that is never interrupted by the weather.

3. International Air Show Avalon that attracts amazing crowds.

4. March: Australian F1 Grand Prix (this year I am going with a newly settled Brazilian friend who lived in London for the last three years is going to go to his first Grand prix.)

5. March: World Swimming Championships (the whole family is going on three days)

6. March: AFL Football Season starts - attracting about 250,000 fans to watch AFL football in Melbourne every week.

In terms of the volume of world class tournaments hosted regularly and the overwhelming support by the public for these events, Melbourne deserves the sporting capital title.

I almost forgot the Soccer - previously eclipsed by other sports over 50,000 attended the game against Sydney last week - a new record. And so a new sporting tradition is born... again in Melbourne.

Our sporting facilities are designed for mulltipurpose use that makes it an attractive place to host these events... and regarding transport, well what can I say, every major sporting facility in Melbourne is serviced by Trains or trams so thousands can attend events occuring simultaneously. You could easily have 50,000 at the telstra dome, 15,000 at the Rod Laver Arena, 10,000 at the Vodaphone arena, 20,000 at Olympic park and 100,000 at the MCG all at the same time... all within walking distance from each other. There are just not many places in the world that this can occur.

You can debate it all you like but I haven't got too much time because there is just so much happening in town. All this during one of the hottest and driest summers ever... so it is time I hit the beach- only a 10 minute tram trip from the city. Have a great Christmas and new year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who live in Melbourne like myself know what the city's sporting legacy is all about. I for one have been to events this year that people in the most famous cities in the world can not match. This summer is shaping up for a hot summer of sporting events in Melbourne as well.

I won't go over the amazing start to 2006 with the Commonwealth Games and just refer to the last few months and upcoming sprorting feasts.

After the great AFL grand Final in September and the Melbourne Cup in November (hosted virtually in my backyard), this is what I have to look forward to in the next four months.

1. December : The ASHES boxing day test, the greatest Cricket tradition, where close to 100,000 will watch Shane Warne mesmerise Engaland in front of his home crowd.

2. January: Australian Tennis Grand Slam - The only grand slam of tennis that is never interrupted by the weather.

3. International Air Show Avalon that attracts amazing crowds.

4. March: Australian F1 Grand Prix (this year I am going with a newly settled Brazilian friend who lived in London for the last three years is going to go to his first Grand prix.)

5. March: World Swimming Championships (the whole family is going on three days)

6. March: AFL Football Season starts - attracting about 250,000 fans to watch AFL football in Melbourne every week.

In terms of the volume of world class tournaments hosted regularly and the overwhelming support by the public for these events, Melbourne deserves the sporting capital title.

I almost forgot the Soccer - previously eclipsed by other sports over 50,000 attended the game against Sydney last week - a new record. And so a new sporting tradition is born... again in Melbourne.

Our sporting facilities are designed for mulltipurpose use that makes it an attractive place to host these events... and regarding transport, well what can I say, every major sporting facility in Melbourne is serviced by Trains or trams so thousands can attend events occuring simultaneously. You could easily have 50,000 at the telstra dome, 15,000 at the Rod Laver Arena, 10,000 at the Vodaphone arena, 20,000 at Olympic park and 100,000 at the MCG all at the same time... all within walking distance from each other. There are just not many places in the world that this can occur.

You can debate it all you like but I haven't got too much time because there is just so much happening in town. All this during one of the hottest and driest summers ever... so it is time I hit the beach- only a 10 minute tram trip from the city. Have a great Christmas and new year.

Now you wouldn't happen to work for the Melbourne tourism board would you...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...