Wednesday, July 6, 2005


       London celebrates

See what can happen if you join up with the United States!!!!

London pulled a shocker by upsetting Paris and will be the host for the 2012 Olympic Games.  New York, Moscow and Madrid all lost out before the final vote.  It will be the 3rd OIympics in London. 

Actually...that fact may have helped London's OIympic bid.  Back during World War II...the Olympics were cancelled in 1940 and 1944.  Europe was war ravaged....yet London came in to host the Olympics and pulled it off nicely.  London made sure to throw that into their pitch.

Also in their pitch was the urban renewal of London....which 100 years ago was basically THE city in the world.  They also played up their love for sports....which has always been known throughout the world [I mean, where do you think Soccer Hooligan comes from]. 


For Paris....this is yet another gut wrenching defeat.  One of the attractive and tourist friendly cities in the world....Paris hasn't hosted the Olympics since 1924 [they also were the host in 1900]. 

For New York...while defeat was somewhat expected, it still stings.  This was to be New York's shining moment 11 years after the September 11th attacks.  It was looked at as THE venue to show to world New York's toughness.  It isn't known if NYC will try for the 2016 games...though there are whispers that the United States could be a favorite for the games, 20 years after they were in Atlanta.

For Madrid...they have to be pleased by how well they did.  Madrid actually got the most votes in the second round of voting [the round after Moscow was eliminated].  Though it is an even longer shot that the Olympics will go to Europe in least Madrid knows that the next time they bid that they have a pretty good shot. 

Moscow was the longest shot...but did well to get even this far.  Moscow really wants the Olympics they'd like to erase the perception of the 1980 Moscow Olympics where the United States boycotted the games in protest to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. 

Yet...another European city is still on many Olympic seeker's minds.  Athens.  Right now, Athens has totaled a record $13B in debt, mainly from construction delays.  While the games went off without a major issue....Athenians will be paying for it a long time, even hurting their EU alliances.

Still...all cities involved will recover.  In fact, right now the Tour De France has started up and will conclude in Paris.  London has Wimbledon going on.  New York is in full baseball mode with the Yankees always on people's minds.  Moscow and Madrid can do what every it is that they do.

Congrats London. 


georgecoztanza said...

I haven't heard anything regarding a New York run at the 2016 Games, but there were a lot of perception problems which might not be issues come 2009.

1) George W. Bush's foreign policy is highly unpopular internationally. The members of the IOC weren't above using their votes to punish the U.S. By 2009, Bush's term will have expired. It's tough to look too far into the future to see how the rest of the Bush administration and his successor  will affect the voting.

2) The stadium situation was up in the air until the final minute. The proposed West Side Stadium was caught up in political gridlock until it was defeated too late in the process to not hurt New York's chances. They finally got a stadium in Queens, but it came too late.

3) The IOC is weary of too many construction projects to hold the games. Many of the proposed venues are either not built or in need of renovation.  By 2009 the proposed Olympic Stadium will be built for the Mets to play, the arena for the Nets in Brooklyn should be well underway, the new Yankee Stadium will be built, and the new Giants Stadium will be, or at least close to it.

4) Vancouver is hosting the 2010 Winter Games. The IOC hesitates to put Games on the same continent too close together. This will not be an issue in 2016.

In the end, it might behoove New York to take another shot at it. So many people have worked too hard to give up now.

sportzassassin said...

I think the stadium issues were the main problem.  Yes, I'm sure the anti-American sentiment was a concern...but London got the Olympics and they are our war buddy [instead of anti-war France].  Yes, I'm sure that the 2002 Salt Lake games hurt us a tad....just as the 1984 and 1996 games hurt us as well.  That would have made three Summer Olympics in a 28 year span in the same country.  

But...this is America...and the Olympics KNOWS they will make a ton of cheese having it here.  They won't go to South or Latin America...and they seem to not be too fond of Canada [Toronto always fails and Montreal was a disaster].  So, they always like to have it on this side of the globe a bunch...and the USA can do it.

The stadium issue was the killer by far.  While it wouldn't have guaranteed the would have made it a tougher out.  I still really feel that if NYC can get their crap together...that they will be the favorite for 2016.

georgecoztanza said...

The question really needs to be asked of Dan Doctoroff, if they saw a stadium in Queens as a viable option at all, why was the fight for the West Side so drawn out? Did Woody Johnson and the Jets really need an $800 million palace that badly? Why on earth didn't they just go to Queens immediately when they saw the opposition that the West Side Stadium faced? You are correct, the stadium situation killed the bid. You know it's a hopeless cause when even my blogging can't save them ;-)

sportzassassin said...

"You know it's a hopeless cause when even my blogging can't save them ;-)"