Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

making the Olympics more global and cheaper

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • making the Olympics more global and cheaper

    Making the Olympic Games truly global, fairer and cheaper to run (theroar.com.au)

    Article not focused on track and field, but interested to see what readers think about Olympics being held by many cities.

  • #2
    I've always thought that would be a great idea. The FIFA World Cup does it.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think its already trending in that direction. London, Tokyo, Paris, LA, all previous host cities. And with Paris and LA basically being handed the 2024/2028 games, I wouldn't be surprised if the 2040 establishes the start of a rotation.

      Comment


      • #4
        I also think it would reduce power of the IOC as smaller cities would have much more plausible bids to host one or a few sports. It would look rather odd then if the IOC kept giving it to the big cities or even corrupt regimes that have no or little public transparency or input.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Atticus View Post
          I've always thought that would be a great idea. The FIFA World Cup does it.
          Really? where? Qatar is spending gobs on the next WC building stadiums all over. Russia and Rio, the last 2 sites, did the same.

          It is true the European Championships use existing stadium's. But it's a smaller competition.

          Anyways this idea is nothing new and yet the Olympic Circus Monster continues gobbling up more cities.

          Comment


          • #6
            I can see the case for extending the number of cities within a host nation. If a city with a good quality velodrome is within 200 miles of the main host city which stages the core sports it makes sense on a lot of fronts to use that facility rather than build a new one. If it goes any further than that, you run the risk of diluting the Olympic atmosphere, the opening ceremony sets the tone for the two weeks that follow, it might not have that wow factor if 30% of the athletes don’t attend because the city hosting their sport is 500 miles away or more and they compete on the Saturday or Sunday. Continuing with the velodrome example, if the secondary city 200 miles away happens to be in another country I see no problem with that

            Comment


            • #7
              yes treadwater, that would be a good option too. Imagine how well the US, Australia, GB or Canada could do it. Each one of them could have many great cities (of all sizes) hosting sports, with perhaps the main sports not too far from each other.
              However, I still would love to see many cities around the world hosting different sports, albeit the nature of the OG as we know it would change. .

              Comment


              • #8
                Huh, interesting idea.

                Each city could really be the hub for a particular sport and the fans of that particular sport could gather in that one place. It would make a place like Eugene more attractive as an Olympic site. Small(er) cities could participate in the larger Olympic experience. Hmm...
                You there, on the motorbike! Sell me one of your melons!

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think this is an excellent approach. Particularly with how it might help medium sized cities to construct sport specific venues that would be of use for years to come. It also reduces the enormous cost burden (not to mention traffic, hoteling, etc.) of a single site. If that means that the opening ceremonies are somewhat diluted, it would be a small price to pay.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    There was a thread with similar ideas last year:
                    https://forum.trackandfieldnews.com/...olympics-split

                    My post:

                    Originally posted by 18.99s View Post
                    The Olympics should be assigned to a host country, not a city, and then let the country split it into multiple cities as they see fit, subject to a few constraints; for example a maximum of 6 different cities, and the men's and women's version of the same sport must be in the same city.

                    Splitting it like that reduces the need to build or expand facilities and infrastructure to accommodate the athletes and tourists, and the workload of hosting is divided among multiple cities rather than piled high and deep onto one city.

                    Note that the Olympics have already been split like that to a limited extent; for example, Olympic soccer is hosted in different cities across the host country, due to the need for multiple large stadiums each day in the early matches. And certain events such as the open-water long distance swim have to take place outside the host city if that's where they need to go to find a suitable body of water.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      as much as the media likes to harp on how far the Olympics drove, for example, Montréal and Athens into debt, as I understand it, the IOC still draws great pleasure for what "urban renewal" does for Olympic cities.

                      As an example I have first-hand experience with, the Barcelona of '91 and the Barcelona of today is two different planets.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The Olympics are way too bloated. How about start by removing sports like golf, tennis, soccer, basketball, baseball, boxing and a few others. If the Olympics isn’t the pinnacle in an athletes career competing in that sport then that sport shouldn’t be in the Olympics. For example any soccer player would say the World Cup is the pinnacle of their career. Similarly a tennis player would say Wimbledon, golf the masters or the open, World Series for baseball etc etc

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tm71 View Post
                          The Olympics are way too bloated. How about start by removing sports like golf, tennis, soccer, basketball, baseball, boxing and a few others. If the Olympics isn’t the pinnacle in an athletes career competing in that sport then that sport shouldn’t be in the Olympics.
                          I agree. However, that gets tricky in sports where the Olympics are arguably the pinnacle on the women's side but not the men's side. Male basketball players value an NBA championship over Olympic gold, but the women may value Olympic gold over a WNBA title.

                          In the 21st century it's harder to make the case for excluding a sport for one sex but not the other. That has been done where there were an insufficient number of high-level athletes in the sport for a particular sex, such as in women's boxing and wrestling in the past, but that's not the case in basketball.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by tm71 View Post
                            The Olympics are way too bloated. How about start by removing sports like golf, tennis, soccer, basketball, baseball, boxing and a few others. If the Olympics isn’t the pinnacle in an athletes career competing in that sport then that sport shouldn’t be in the Olympics. For example any soccer player would say the World Cup is the pinnacle of their career. Similarly a tennis player would say Wimbledon, golf the masters or the open, World Series for baseball etc etc
                            THIS^^^

                            They can all go and I wouldn't mind getting rid of the ridiculously expensive and elitist horse riding and yachting events (Even though Britain are really good at them).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by tm71 View Post
                              The Olympics are way too bloated. How about start by removing sports like golf, tennis, soccer, basketball, baseball, boxing and a few others. If the Olympics isn’t the pinnacle in an athletes career competing in that sport then that sport shouldn’t be in the Olympics. For example any soccer player would say the World Cup is the pinnacle of their career. Similarly a tennis player would say Wimbledon, golf the masters or the open, World Series for baseball etc etc
                              I’d keep boxing since it has long been part of the games, but the others should go.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X