I think London has been planned with future use in mind. At least one of the Olympic Park venues is being taken down and rebuilt somewhere - possibly Rio?
The official London 2012 Olympic Games thread • Page 270
-
Page
of 272 First / Last -
DaM 11,755 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 11 years ago -
senso-ji 4,564 posts
Seen 27 minutes ago
Registered 5 years agoYep, the Basketball arena is being given to Rio. I think Rio is also adopting the same approach as London with regards to temporary venues.
Edited by senso-ji at 14:36:33 14-08-2012 -
HiddenAway 14,257 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 7 years agoKa-blamo wrote:
Actually, The Who were shown after a sitcom after the main show...
NBC cut out The Who, Muse and Ray Davies from the closing ceremony.On Twitter: @HiddenAway1
-
DanB24 944 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 6 years agoHiddenAway wrote:
Hmmmm many the same for me:
So, best moments then? Have we had that question yet?
...
All the Beeb coverage, amazing live vid player covering everything!
Sophie Hosking and Katherine Copeland celebrating after their gold was a special moment,
Both Mo's gold's where great,
I loved every minute of the cycling,
Jade's win in the taekwondo was a special moment too,
Team GB's fencing team putting up such a fight against the champions Italy was another great moment too and I only stumbled on that one by accident as I flicked through the different feeds.
And hell yeah all of it really..gif)
-
The-Bodybuilder 11,512 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 9 years agoThis thread should be closed and saved right at the top of the sports section.
Let it be our legacy to the Olympics,
/salutes
/sings "God saves the Queen" -
mcmonkeyplc 35,883 posts
Seen 8 hours ago
Registered 10 years agoJust watched the opening ceremony again and I had something in my eye during the lighting of the cauldron ceremony.
I don't think anyone else will ever match that.Come and get it cumslingers!
-
senso-ji 4,564 posts
Seen 27 minutes ago
Registered 5 years agoOk, maybe not an entire generation will be inspired
I understand the 'no compromise' stance to a point but surely some money needs to be kept for the minor sports so that there's something for everyone to aspire to?
Edited by senso-ji at 22:43:54 14-08-2012 -
FWB 39,099 posts
Seen 50 minutes ago
Registered 11 years agoBet the rich toffs in the dressage keep their funding. -
jellyhead 24,346 posts
Seen 1 month ago
Registered 10 years agoNope, it's sporting that only the fittest spots survive!
I expected this to be honest... and it saddens me.This signature intentionally left blank.
-
The-Bodybuilder 11,512 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 9 years ago"we will fund any sports that we think there is a realistic chance of a medal in Rio..."
Yeah, just like how you cut funding in taekwondo and Judo, as there was no realistic chance in those, and gave more to swimming. Tell me Mr. Government man, how did that work out?
its the weaker sports that need more funding if anything, -
SolidSCB 4,533 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 4 years agoBullshit. We got some real surprise medallists from people who were way down in the rankings for their sports. Looks like they'll be lost in the shuffle come Rio. Back to the status quo I guess. -
senso-ji 4,564 posts
Seen 27 minutes ago
Registered 5 years agoIndeed. Plus, the sports we were most successful in won't increase the number of medals if we increase their budgets. Better to keep the same budget for the successful ones, cut some funding to the under performers and invest the rest in grassroots and elite programs for the minor sports.
Edited by senso-ji at 23:00:23 14-08-2012 -
superdelphinus 6,175 posts
Seen 13 minutes ago
Registered 8 years ago
Edited by superdelphinus at 23:00:46 14-08-2012 -
FWB 39,099 posts
Seen 50 minutes ago
Registered 11 years agoSurely the funding should be handed out on a needs/demand basis? Which sports do people who need the cash want to do? There's more to this than winning medals. Sport can be used to mold and shape individuals and communities.
Sod swimming. There might be 5 trillion medals available in the pool, but it's repetitive and boring. -
Psychotext 49,212 posts
Seen 3 minutes ago
Registered 7 years agoPlus of course the US, China, France and Australia seem to be having an all out battle over it. Go for the low hanging fruit.This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
-
kentmonkey 18,614 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoI don't really see the issue.
Everything has to have targets. If you can't make the grade, why pour millions of pounds of budget put aside for the olympics in to something that you realistically don't stand a chance of getting something back on. Just because you're successful in something now, doesn't mean to say you should cut funding, or even leave it static.
And there is this line: "But remember that even if there are sports that don't attract funding, they can still get funding through Sport England and so on to develop their talent into a position where they will qualify for a Games in the future."
So that's not to say all sports have funding taken away. It's just that the funding reserved for the Olympics is used for sports that are likely to feature. Other sports achieve funding through other areas.
For example, Cameron was on Radio 2 the other day and I resisted the urge to turn off just long enough to hear him say that they expect Handball to have a surge in interest, and that the government needs to ensure that youngsters that want to play handball have somewhere to play it. That doesn't mean you fund them now for the next Olympics, just that you take the longer approach and fund now for 8-12 years time.
I really don't see this as a 'fuck off, tough shit' type of approach. They have different funds for different targets. If you want Olympic funding, you've surely got to have a chance at least of making it to the next Olympics. And if the chances are slim, you can apply for funding through another avenue and try and make it there anyway. -
Psychotext 49,212 posts
Seen 3 minutes ago
Registered 7 years agoBless:
Newfoundland boy, 10, gives heartbroken Canadian relay team his Timbits soccer medal
http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/1241643--newfoundland-boy-10-gives-heartbroken-canadian-relay-team-his-timbits-soccer-medal
Following the heart-wrenching disqualification of Canada’s 4x100 relay team at the Olympics and hearing how the team was denied a bronze medal, 10-year-old Elijah Porter decided to write a letter to his new, crestfallen heroes.
The Newfoundland lad sensed the team of Justyn Warner, Gavin Smellie, Oluseyi Smith and Jared Connaughton needed to know that he had their Canadian backs. And then some.
“When I heard what happened on Aug. 11, I knew it was wrong. The rules were not right. But at last I realized how good you were. We’re Canadians. We persevere,” wrote Porter in a letter posted by Warner on his Twitter account.
“We create better lives for each other. The cold didn’t stop us from living in the North. We didn’t lose the War of 1812. We adapt and survive.”
He doesn’t stop there. Porter also promises that if he becomes a biologist and gets rich, he’ll donate money to Canada’s Olympians.
And, perhaps to make up for the bronze medal lost when the team was disqualified, Porter included his Timbits soccer medal, with the final line:
“I hope you like the medal!”This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
-
White_Shadow 2,514 posts
Seen 3 months ago
Registered 8 years agoI don't see too much of an issue. In sports like handball and and volleyball we're not going to qualify let alone win medals, our squads simply aren't good enough. Better to admit defeat in certain areas and push it into sports where there is a clear chance to improve (maybe some of the martial arts, where we did well with shit funding). -
FWB 39,099 posts
Seen 50 minutes ago
Registered 11 years agoThe comments seem to think the Canucks were whiners.
Lovely story though. -
IMO 4,580 posts
Seen 6 minutes ago
Registered 8 years agoWhite_Shadow wrote:
Yeah, let's not bother because we won't improve. That sounds like a fantastic idea.
I don't see too much of an issue. In sports like handball and and volleyball we're not going to qualify let alone win medals, our squads simply aren't good enough. Better to admit defeat in certain areas and push it into sports where there is a clear chance to improve (maybe some of the martial arts, where we did well with shit funding). -
Bremenacht 11,232 posts
Seen 33 seconds ago
Registered 6 years agoTories start implementation of Olympic legacy plans
Perhaps kids should start running to school or play football in the streets or something. Better still - pay £10 a session in their local sports centre. Hurrah!This post is unsuitable for those with a high rumour-sensitivity.
-
kentmonkey 18,614 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoEdited - now read full article:
So, yes, the '20 fields scrapped' line is fairly misleading, seeing as the vast majority, if not all, where all where schools were no longer open or had joined forces and no longer required the field.
Edited by kentmonkey at 23:34:06 14-08-2012 -
White_Shadow 2,514 posts
Seen 3 months ago
Registered 8 years agoIMO wrote:
We would undoubtedly improve, but not to the point of being competitive on an Olympic level. We could put the entire Rio budget into basketball and we still wouldn't win the gold medal.White_Shadow wrote:
Yeah, let's not bother because we won't improve. That sounds like a fantastic idea.
I don't see too much of an issue. In sports like handball and and volleyball we're not going to qualify let alone win medals, our squads simply aren't good enough. Better to admit defeat in certain areas and push it into sports where there is a clear chance to improve (maybe some of the martial arts, where we did well with shit funding).
If we're in a situation where we have a finite amount of funding to distribute amongst the Olympic sports, then we should give it to sports where we actually stand a chance of being successful, and where there are a number of medals available to win. -
IMO 4,580 posts
Seen 6 minutes ago
Registered 8 years agoWhite_Shadow wrote:
So much for "legacy" if we're just going to stick to sports we're meant to be good at.
We would undoubtedly improve, but not to the point of being competitive on an Olympic level. We could put the entire Rio budget into basketball and we still wouldn't win the gold medal. -
kentmonkey 18,614 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoI think there is a big difference though between 'meant to be good at' and 'standing a chance of being successful'.
One implies we're already there. The other suggests that somebody in charge of the budget can see that that sport has a chance to achieve something with the money spent on it.
I'm sure others would equally moan as much if we splashed the cash around to the point that, actually, it wasn't all that meaningful to any sport in the end as each one got so little and that we went down from 29 golds to 4 or 5.
We've got something to build on here. If that means setting targets and giving money (out of this budget) to those sports that stand a chance of performing well, and will use that budget to really further the sport, then I'm okay with that. Especially when the other sports have the ability to seek funding from elsewhere. -
Bremenacht 11,232 posts
Seen 33 seconds ago
Registered 6 years ago@kentmonkey - Fair enough. I think the 20/21 fields story had been established, which draws attention from the relevant story - that of regulation being relaxed with regard to the size of playing fields. Hence my 'play on the streets' comment.
Here is the original specification, which sets out the minimum sizes. Here is the new version. 'Suitable outdoor space' may refer to a postage-stamp sized bit of grass.This post is unsuitable for those with a high rumour-sensitivity.
-
White_Shadow 2,514 posts
Seen 3 months ago
Registered 8 years agoIMO wrote:
Why does "legacy" mean we have to become competitive on such a high level? We don't have the league infrastructure in many of the team sports to compete on an Olympic level, but if the great coverage and support could lead to a greater public interest in a number of sports is that not enough of a "legacy"?White_Shadow wrote:
So much for "legacy" if we're just going to stick to sports we're meant to be good at.
We would undoubtedly improve, but not to the point of being competitive on an Olympic level. We could put the entire Rio budget into basketball and we still wouldn't win the gold medal. -
THFourteen 29,060 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 8 years agolegacy means really old stuff thats no longer useful.
like booting your PC into legacy DOS mode. -
kalel 76,470 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 10 years agoThe "legacy" thing has always been a little bit of bullshit to sweeten the fact that the Olympics would operate at a loss. Nobody really believes in it do they?
There will be a short-term uplift in sports, but you only have to look at how Australia did at these Olympics compared to Sydney to see how long a legacy actually lasts for.
I'm not shitting on the Olympics btw, I thought it was great and worth the cost. I just think whole "legacy" thing is hyperbole. -
@kentmonkey f*ck off with your "reasons" and "logic".
we ain't got time for that shiz, we be mad up in hurr. -
Page
of 272 First / Last
