posted Nov 9, 2008

Jacques Rogge's comments are not acceptable, no matter what your view on the value of'legacy'. A permanent athletics venue was a pledge of the London bid, something which has already proved to be a work of ill-advised fiction. This is like a push on the slippery slope of failure to deliver; it would be absolutely unsurprising if there was no 2012 Olympics at all.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 9, 2008

If they take down the top 2 tiers, and stick a mobile roofing system on, then there will be endless possibilities and uses, methinks!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 9, 2008

What this thread shows is that there is an enormous arguement for holding the olympics in the same country each time.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 10, 2008

This is all very silly.

Athletics in this country does not need a stadium, it needs a proper structured coaching and training system.

The idea that our top eight sprinters can work with eight different coaches at eight different clubs and still get the best out of it is a fallacy and needs to stop, it is unacceptable in the modern age for this to be the case.

UK Athletics needs to focus on two to four elite sites around the UK where the best coaches and advisors can be employed to work with a many of the top athletes as possible. It then needs to proactively scout the local clubs in order to identify and brign young talent into that environment as soon as possible.

Once that is sorted, once we start seeing an improvement on the track and in the field, then we can start to think about a showpiece stadium.

Until that time it means nothing, a white elephant that is unsuitable for most other sports and as such would only be used a few times a year and outside of landing the worlds or euros would never be filled. Yes there coudl be concerts and conventions but the market, especially in London, is vastly oversaturated for this sort of thing already.

With the amount of money being spent the IOC/LOC has a duty to ensure that any facility would be used properly and Athletics can ot make a good enough claim for that, not when other sports are recieveing no legacy whatsoever despite being underfacilitated already. The best example is shooting, there is a good facility at Bisley in Surrey that is in constant use all year round, it would cost a lot less to upgrade to the required standard and would leave a legacy usable by sportsmen every week than the current idea of a temporary facility at woolwich.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 10, 2008

Here's an idea. Why don't we build the stadium on a big barge in teh Thames, and then once the games have finished it can be towed away to the next olympic hosts.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 11, 2008

Hacker Jack

I have to agree with every word that you have written. At last somebody makes some sense. I am afraid that the atheletes with there own coaches won't buy that argument. They won't feel quite so special if they have to share thier coaches (bless them). Sadley we have to consider the prima donna factor that you are bound to get when altheletes swan around bathing in the glorious title of "Elite Athelete".

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 12, 2008

I have no idea why this is even a talking point.

The UK is the only country who has taken on the Olympics to even consider scrapping and turning into a footie stadium.

Truth be told the IAAF should withdraw there events if the decision is made to tear up the track.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 12, 2008

I bet athens wish thay had, what with their white elephant stadium standing empty

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 14, 2008

I thought their stadium is being used by Panathinaikos and AEK Athens for football. It still has a track around it aswell I think.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 14, 2008

comment by tonytorra (U10022775)

posted Yesterday

I have no idea why this is even a talking point.

The UK is the only country who has taken on the Olympics to even consider scrapping and turning into a footie stadium.

Truth be told the IAAF should withdraw there events if the decision is made to tear up the track.

===============================

Sorry but your wrong as you would see if you read the earlier comments.

A lot of olympic stadiums are converted after the games.

LA 1984: Turned back into a Gridiron stadium.

Atlanta 1996: Turned into a Baseball stadium

Sydney 2000: Turned into Aussie rules/rugby/football stadium.

Dont critise the London bid for something that lots of other bids have done before.

80K athletics stadia are the biggest white elephants going.

Can you imagine the public outcry if wembley was used once or twice a year and was only a 1/4 full.

the fact is that athletics (apart from the olympics and world champs every 2/4 years)is NOT a big spectator sport.

add comment | complain about this comment