London Still In running for 2012

Looking Busy

Full Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2004
Messages
21,988
Location
Between a bad girls thighs
London has been accepted as an official candidate city for the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics after the shortlist of rivals was reduced from nine to five.
The International Olympic Committee chose London, Paris, New York, Madrid and Moscow to go forward to the final vote next year.

Rio de Janeiro, Istanbul, Leipzig and Havana failed to survive the cut.

The candidate cities must now submit more detailed plans to the IOC ahead of the decision in Singapore in July 2005.

The IOC's evaluation commission will visit all five cities for an inspection in February and March next year, with the possibility of a further cut before the final vote.

"After the evaluation report the IOC will study their findings in May before making a final proposal for the July session," said IOC president Jacques Rogge at the announcement in Lausanne.

The five rivals are now free to incorporate the Olympic rings in their bid logos and begin promoting their cause more intensively.

Paris, which hosted the Games in 1900 and 1924, is currently seen as the favourite, just ahead of London.

France staged the football World Cup in 1998, and the World Athletics Championships in Paris last year were hailed as a success. Paris has almost half its planned Olympic facilities already in place and the bid centres around established venues like the Stade de France, the Parc des Princes and Roland Garros.

The French capital has also moved the site of its proposed Olympic village, having failed with a bid for the 2008 Games, to make it closer to the city centre.

London is bidding to host the Games for the third time. It staged the event in 1908 and in 1948, when it stepped in after the Second World War.

It can make a powerful case for an Olympic legacy as the bid will involve the regeneration of a huge swathe of land in the east of the city around Stratford.

And London's bid team hopes to overcome doubts about transport problems by using the Channel Tunnel rail link to whisk spectators from King's Cross Station and north Kent to the Olympic zone.

New York, which has never hosted the Games before, is the only non-European city to make the cut.

The 2012 Games are believed to have a stronger chance of coming to Europe than North America as the 2010 Winter Olympics will be staged in Vancouver.

Madrid has promised an environmentally-friendly Olympics, but could be hampered by the fact that Spain staged the Games in Barcelona in 1992.

Rio was axed despite being tipped as an outside bet to win the Games, while Moscow was seen as one of the cities at risk of missing the cut.

The nine cities were judged on the 50-page detailed questionnaire they submitted in January.
BBC sports news correspondent Gordon Farquhar said the IOC report in Lausanne expressed a lower level of confidence in the Russian capital than in its four rivals.

London was marked better than New York, but behind Paris and Madrid, for transport.

It was given a strong rating for security and finance and a weak one for public opinion.

The former East German city of Leipzig had always been expected to struggle in a battle against more high-profile rivals.

Turkey will now set their sights on the 2016 Games after seeing Istanbul miss out for the fourth time in a row.

Havana's bid had been seen as the least likely to succeed due to the Cuban capital's lack of infrastructure and inadequate accommodation.

IOC president Jacques Rogge said: "This is not an indication that we don't trust these countries.

"It's just that the bids of these places in these countries were not considered to be good enough."

Source - BBC Sport
 
I hope Paris wins. The French can pay for it (rather than me) and it's just as easy for me to get to Paris as f*cking London in the unlikely event that I want to go to it...
 
kf said:
I hope Paris wins. The French can pay for it (rather than me) and it's just as easy for me to get to Paris as f*cking London in the unlikely event that I want to go to it...

The only advantage I can see in London getting it is that it might force Ken Livingstone to get off his arse and improve the transport. i.e The fecking mess that they call a tube system
 
Looking Busy said:
The only advantage I can see in London getting it is that it might force Ken Livingstone to get off his arse and improve the transport. i.e The fecking mess that they call a tube system
I was there yesterday, middle of the day, not the rush hour and 'cos it was a bit warm up top, the fecking tube was like a sauna and packed with the normal London commuter and tourist traffic, I just don't see how they can make London cope with the increased traffic that will come from the Games. Also, as a Manchester rate payer I don't want to pay to upgrade the tube and build a load of infrastructure so that London can stage an event I have no intention of going to... Apparently public opinion being in support of the Games is a key assessment factor so if we all start a campaign for it to go to Madrid or Paris that should make it go away...
 
kf said:
I was there yesterday, middle of the day, not the rush hour and 'cos it was a bit warm up top, the fecking tube was like a sauna and packed with the normal London commuter and tourist traffic, I just don't see how they can make London cope with the increased traffic that will come from the Games. Also, as a Manchester rate payer I don't want to pay to upgrade the tube and build a load of infrastructure so that London can stage an event I have no intention of going to... Apparently public opinion being in support of the Games is a key assessment factor so if we all start a campaign for it to go to Madrid or Paris that should make it go away...

I want them to do the tube upgrade. I have get the tube every morning and evening and i'm sick of delays, emergency engineering works, broken trains, derailments etc. It cost me about £100 per month and 3 million people every day use the tube. It deyond me how they say they can't afford to upgrade the network.
 
You can have your tube upgrade mate, I just don't see the need for a massively expensive Olympic bid just so that the rest of the country pays for it!

Apparently of the candidate cities, London was third in the pecking order behind Paris and Madrid.
 
kf said:
You can have your tube upgrade mate, I just don't see the need for a massively expensive Olympic bid just so that the rest of the country pays for it!

Just like the rest of us did when Manchester built the Metrolink as part of their Olympic bid.