To think London should step in and offer to host the Olympics?

[ToxicBits]

With all the issues surrounding rio would it not make sense to shift it all over here?

Any country applying to host the Olympics or any other big international sporting event has to agree to admit competitors and spectators from every member of the organisation concerned. I'm not convinced the Qataris could give that undertaking to the Israelis.

You're all completely missing the point.

We are Plucky Brits who will always step in to put right the mess Johnny Foreigner makes. As long as we have a big enough teapot, some custard creams and a cheery song to sing, we'll get through it. And whatever happens we'll tell ourselves worse things happen at sea.

There! Fixed it for you.

bolo I mostly agree with you about drug use. However, I think the process of allocating Olympic games has, so far, been less obviously corrupt than the Fifa decision to give the world cup to Qatar. It's hard to imagine a less appropriate place for a major sporting event, and I'm not even thinking about politics (geography and climate alone should have ruled it out).

Thousands of people descending into a virus hot spot to watch/compete in sport then travelling out to their own countries again

The virus is spread by mosquitos not by people. The risk has been much overstated IMO.

Will people be put off travelling there by the Zika issue, though? I would be. I wonder if athletes will pull out (become 'injured') and how many overseas visitors will decide to watch on TV instead. We can't host, regardless.

We could have it in Aberdeen or somewhere to take the heat off London?

five they could stay in the haven sites and tents!

London has had two turns in 1948 and 2012. Besides, it's impossible to move at this point.

London has had two turns in 1948 and 2012. It's much too late to move it at any rate.

You forget 1908 at White City. No adult now living will see another.

Misti I think the risk is that people become infected too and carry the virus back to their home countries.

If Rio really is not ready then the most sensible thing would be to keep the events that are ready there and spread other events internationally.

UK has lots of football stadia so potentially could take football as could any other European countries.

The equestrian events are often miles away form the city 'hosting', I think for Melbourne they were in Denmark and for Beijing they were in Hong Kong.

sashh yep, both those occasions (it was actually Sweden in 1956) the equestrian events were moved because of issues of concerns over horse-related diseases / horsey visa restrictions.

tendon definitely people are being put off, both athletes and spectators and NOCs have reacted too - IIRC some qualified athletes have already pulled out, or said they will. Think the US NOC for one has issued some guidance on it.

mistigri hmmm, not sure I agree though Qatar was a howler of a choice by FIFA. The Salt Lake City 2002 bid was horribly corrupt and caused huge issues in the IOC - they had to 'change' a lot of procedures over the voting process as a result. And I'd be surprised if Tokyo 2020 comes out smelling of roses re their bidding process. I'd bet that there were fishy goings on re 1996 Atlanta too.

andrew completely see your point on Qatar and Israelis, but in reality I think they'd be so keen to host, they themselves would probably not have a problem. The issues might well come from Qatari allies (for want of better Middle East and / or security concerns from the Israeli NOC, for example. A single host venue though is off the cards now.

And on London 2012 and whether it made a loss, I hold my hand up, I had forgotten the grey area of the LOCOG bailout... www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9627757/London-2012-Olympic-Games-comes-in-at-377m-under-budget-government-announces.html

shuffles off

Allegedly We were prepared to step in when it looked uncertain if they'd be ready for the World Cup in 2014...

www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/england-stands-by-to-host-2014-world-1694560

However, I think the process of allocating Olympic games has, so far, been less obviously corrupt than the Fifa decision to give the world cup to Qatar.

The award of the 2002 winter Olympics to Salt Lake City was completely corrupt.

www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/05/29/410653814/fifa-scandal-has-echoes-of-salt-lake-olympic-corruption-crisis

The idea that there is "good" IOC and "bad" FIFA is just magical thinking: both are entirely corrupt.

My concern is the water based sports, apparently the training pool is infested with Mosquitos and has been for quite some time.

I agree to move internationally but other South American countries are maybe best placed to step up.

Bolo yes, they are both corrupt. (There are different degrees of corruption of course and to my knowledge the IOC hasn't recently lost a number of top executives to criminal prosecution). But corrupt/ dysfunctional organisations can often take decisions which remain at least somewhat credible and defensible. Difficult to argue that for Fifa and Qatar.

sashh the problem is the timescale. Even getting visa for all the athletes and officials might be impossible at this short notice, let alone making practical arrangements for things like security and transport.

redwine I think the general economic thinking is that modern Olympics have tended to roughly break even if you include the wider economic impacts. They don't make countries richer but they do, apparently, make them happier.

2012 took years to organise and billions of pounds. It's not just a case of "shifting it over here"

Oh hush. There's got to be a load of MN-ers in the SE with big back gardens. They could definitely offer to host a few events.

would it not make sense to shift it all over here?

I have to keep re-reading this bit cos it's so wonderful

The IOC never "gave the Olympics to Hitler". Berlin was awarded the 1936 Games years before he came to power.

Indeed; in 1930 at a point when the Nazis had had a setback in the elections. The IOC were in a bind when Hitler became Chancellor and it got worse after the Night of the Long Knives and again after the reoccupation of the Rhineland - with summer 1936 getting ever closer. I don't see how you can blame them without 20/20 hindsight for letting the Games go ahead in Berlin.

Brazil will be fine. The Olympics will go ahead. But I can say that the Olympics are far from Brazil's priority. No one seems to care much about them. You occasionally see something on the TV but it is not on the front of everyone's mind.

Brazil is currently like an old house where renovation works were started and everyone thought there were a few rotten beams and floorboards. Once the work began it was discovered that some of the rot went right down to the very foundations of the building and right up to the level of congress. Now it needs to be built up with new wood that is coated with anti-rot proofing. Which will take a long time.

The corruption has affected the Olympics because the whole back handed system is visable. A new road gets 3 million to do, 2 million goes into the pockets of the rotten and corrupt, the road is built with 1 million and two years later it is full of cracks and holes. This is how Brazil has rolled for decades but the new generation are not accepting it any longer and they want to put Brazil where it should be, with a social, economic and infastructure that people can be proud of. Change is on the horizon for the long term, but sadly in the short term a lot of this way of doing things has tainted the Olympics.

No other South American country is in a position to step up and help out! With the exception of perhaps Chile, the rest are all like the rotten old house, only they are still standing. The idea that Britain can ride in like the saving knight is pretty funny though.

Thank you dizzytomato - where does Venezuela fit into your analogy?