Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

what's the future of the Commonwealth Games?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by Trickstat View Post
    Cameroon is another country that joined in the 1990s despite never having been a British colony.
    Thanks to Trickstat, I learned something new today.

    Apparently, Southern Cameroons, next to the Nigerian border, was a League of Nations/UN mandate territory under British control. Post-independence, it joined with French Cameroon to make a single nation, this giving it the necessary historical tie for Commonwealth membership. Official languages are English and French, reflecting the two historical European powers that ruled the country. Wikipedia gives more detail:

    In 1960, the French-administered part of Cameroon became independent, as the Republic of Cameroun, under President Ahmadou Ahidjo. The southern part of British Cameroons federated with it in 1961 to form the Federal Republic of Cameroon. The federation was abandoned in 1972. The country was renamed the United Republic of Cameroon in 1972 and the Republic of Cameroon in 1984.
    Given that the British also had mandate territories in the Middle East, I assume that Israel, the Palestinian territory and Iraq and Kuwait(?) are also eligible on the same basis. I'm not sure about Egypt, I think the British just subverted government via the backdoor rather than actually ruling fomally.

    Even if those nations are eligible, I can't see any of them being interested. Some things are just a step too far.

    Comment


    • #47
      I agree there are various challenges with the CWG - both in terms of concept of the Commonwealth and financial stability

      However the changes announced will hopefully address the financial stability and open up a wider group of hosts - I think if 2026 can be navigated there’s a reasonable list of hosts out there. Only will be enhanced if they can get cricket included and sports like netball and rugby sevens only seem likely to grow in popularity in the commonwealth. As much as I love it, getting rid of the need for a potential white elephant track cycling velodrome is a big step (notably Birmingham never even contemplated building one) but going forward you’ll only need:

      - athletics stadium
      - 50m pool
      - multipurpose space - sports hall/conference space
      - a football/rugby stadium

      Capping the event at a side whereby student halls can be used for accommodation is a big step forward too in terms of possible hosts.

      What I have to challenge on this thread is the notion the athletes don’t care. Sure it’s not a world or Olympics but the last summer games in Glasgow 2014 got a very good turn out - even Bolt ran 2 of his 3 races of the year there despite various rumblings.

      The out of season games are always going to be different for athletics but take a look at the 2018 results. Multiple world and Olympic medalists - even if the depth isn’t always there (although a podium of SMU - Jackson - DAS is a credible podium at any level).

      Next year will be a challenge for athletics coming straight after Eugene but for the athletes that compete it’ll still be above the DL and regular circuit meets

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by cjb210 View Post
        Capping the event at a side whereby student halls can be used for accommodation is a big step forward too in terms of possible hosts.
        Is this a big issue though?

        New built villages at Games are usually sold off at market rates or used as social housing so should make a profit/social benefit. If the cost and quality match the local economy there should be no problem. I get that it adds complexity and financing issues but it should be a decision that is made on a case by case basis on which is better.

        The last CWG at the Gold Coast in Australia didn't build any white elephants as far as I can tell with a temporary track in the local Australian Rules stadium and a new major indoor stadium in an area that was badly underserved for sporting facilities as well as a swimming venue to serve the fastest growing area in Australia. These are all investments that would have been made anyway.

        They did build an indoor velodrome but they built it in Brisbane where the track cyclists are and it replaced the 36 year old outdoor track from the 1982 CWG. That was sensible expenditure for a rich country with a strong cycling program but silly for a poorer nation without one. This is why pick and mix choice of sports remains a good idea.

        Comment


        • #49
          The Commonwealth Games Foundation of Australia has contributed $250k to athletics to support some targeted programs and training camps ahead of the 2022 Games - just one part of funding boosts they provide to CG sports.

          Of course, this funding will also assist athletes preparing for other international comps. The contribution covers activities which would not be funded within AA's normal budget.

          Another benefit to having the Comm Games.

          https://www.athletics.com.au/news/au...en2gold2great/

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by El Toro View Post

            Is this a big issue though?

            New built villages at Games are usually sold off at market rates or used as social housing so should make a profit/social benefit. If the cost and quality match the local economy there should be no problem. I get that it adds complexity and financing issues but it should be a decision that is made on a case by case basis on which is better.

            The last CWG at the Gold Coast in Australia didn't build any white elephants as far as I can tell with a temporary track in the local Australian Rules stadium and a new major indoor stadium in an area that was badly underserved for sporting facilities as well as a swimming venue to serve the fastest growing area in Australia. These are all investments that would have been made anyway.

            They did build an indoor velodrome but they built it in Brisbane where the track cyclists are and it replaced the 36 year old outdoor track from the 1982 CWG. That was sensible expenditure for a rich country with a strong cycling program but silly for a poorer nation without one. This is why pick and mix choice of sports remains a good idea.
            Athletes Villages have a number of costs that mean they rarely pay their way - especially compared to the alternative of just developing a site for pure residential. In particular:

            1. Usually built for "Games Mode" and then have to do a significant retrofit to convert them into "normal" accommodation. This is partly to go from the density of a typical Athletes Village to match the requirements of normal housing stock with things like kitchen facilities a big factor. Birmingham reckons it has saved millions through avoiding this cost. Even with retrofitting, the density is often higher than a number of property markets would ordinarily support. Certainly what was planned in Birmingham would have been a big departure from the local area

            2. The "holding" cost of buildings - generally the Athletes Village will be completed in phases over a number of months before the Games and will then need to be maintained (services, security, etc.) for a number of months until retrofit complete and available for sale

            3. Fixtures and furnishings - need to be provided, cleaning regimes established, etc. An already serviced unit has these in place

            4. Financing costs associated with all of this

            5. Absolutely fixed deadline for completion which means that any delays generally lead to increased costs for the Games (yes you can try and contract this risk but only so far!)

            Basically, compared to an equivalent straight to residential development on the site, you are easily looking at another 25%+ of costs.... There is an argument that there is a small value uplift for an address being part of the Athletes Village.... research in Stratford, London put this as low single digit percentages and I think a Commonwealth Village address uplift will be less than an Olympic Village address

            Not saying there aren't other benefits of Athletes Villages in terms of social housing, speeding up development, etc. and absolutely welcome individual hosts including them - but as an expectation they are a big cost and resource drain - including in management time and putting a high volume of work into the local construction market which then leads to price increases on other construction projects.

            Comment


            • #51
              If the Athletics events are being held at a Stadium on/near a University campus, there is the possibility of sharing the costs of housing, which will
              be used as the Athletes Village during the Games, and then University student residences, post-Games. This can be a win-win situation, including
              the sharing of building costs, as well as convenience for all concerned. That was our situation in Victoria / 1994.

              Comment


              • #52
                It would be hilarious if the USA applied to become part of the CWG.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by rsb3 View Post
                  If the Athletics events are being held at a Stadium on/near a University campus, there is the possibility of sharing the costs of housing, which will
                  be used as the Athletes Village during the Games, and then University student residences, post-Games. This can be a win-win situation, including
                  the sharing of building costs, as well as convenience for all concerned. That was our situation in Victoria / 1994.
                  I think that goes to my point about matching the appropriate investment to the location. It certainly deals with cjb210's point about suitable density as it's much higher for students than normal. Of course the other issues he raised are still an issue that need to be considered very carefully.

                  I think this comes back to the grandness of local government's plans. Is it a much needed investment in the right place as much of the 2018 infrastructure or is it a hopeful and vague dream of kickstarting a new "world standard" location?

                  Having said that, what was the last CWG that used existing residences? I know that '82 and '86 used them but I'm not sure about '90 and later.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by El Toro View Post
                    Having said that, what was the last CWG that used existing residences?
                    A bit of research shows that it was Manchester 2002:

                    The Commonwealth Games Village is located on 30 acres of land, which currently operates as the Fallowfield Campus of the University of Manchester. The Village will consist of 3,340 bedrooms in six different halls of residence.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Seems like a few people may need educating about which countries are actually in the Commonwealth..

                      duplantis.jpg

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Vault-emort View Post
                        Seems like a few people may need educating about which countries are actually in the Commonwealth..
                        To be generous, she must have been confused about the terms of the Treaty of Stockholm in 1813, where Britain ceded Guadeloupe to them for support in the war against Napoleon. This only created a temporary military alignment and not any union of nations.

                        Sweden ceded Guadeloupe the following year, not back to Britain but to France as part of the treaty wrapping up the anti-Napoleonic coalition. And so it remains...



                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by rsb3 View Post
                          If the Athletics events are being held at a Stadium on/near a University campus, there is the possibility of sharing the costs of housing, which will
                          be used as the Athletes Village during the Games, and then University student residences, post-Games. This can be a win-win situation, including
                          the sharing of building costs, as well as convenience for all concerned. That was our situation in Victoria / 1994.
                          I believe that some of the Athletes' Village accommodations for the '96 OG transitioned to Ga Tech dorms.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by KevinR View Post

                            I believe that some of the Athletes' Village accommodations for the '96 OG transitioned to Ga Tech dorms.
                            Officials were housed at Emory University dorms.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by El Toro View Post

                              To be generous, she must have been confused about the terms of the Treaty of Stockholm in 1813, where Britain ceded Guadeloupe to them for support in the war against Napoleon. This only created a temporary military alignment and not any union of nations.

                              Sweden ceded Guadeloupe the following year, not back to Britain but to France as part of the treaty wrapping up the anti-Napoleonic coalition. And so it remains...


                              That explains why Marie Jose Perec didn't compete in the Blue and Yellow then...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by AS View Post

                                That explains why Marie Jose Perec didn't compete in the Blue and Yellow then...
                                A source of much regret to her, I'm sure 😛

                                Let's also not forget those further north that also lost the opportunity but gained a building technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedis...n_the_Americas

                                Empires, eh? Where would history be without them?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X