London 2012: The biggest event, the biggest challenge
From a lecture to Lincoln University, 3 December 2008:
I want to be optimistic. That may seem like an odd thing to say in the middle of , and with daily reminders about the complexity - and - of modern life. But I want to make a case for hope around the biggest event in the UK in generations: the . And I also want to outline the case for sport as a vital part of the existence of every citizen, and for the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's role in supporting that.
Now, I think it's important to say at the outset that I'm not departing from the tradition of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú impartiality. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú will report freely and fairly on the London Games and we'll represent every strand of British opinion. It wasn't easy for the London bid at the time, but we did broadcast while London was in fierce competition to win the Olympiad. We'll continue to report on .
But the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is also the domestic rightsholder for the Games. It's the place where the story of the London Olympics will be told. It's the organisation that will bring the events to viewers across the United Kingdom and beyond; and I believe - and I'm pretty sure the organisers believe - the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's involvement will be key to the success of 2012. The Games are supported by every mainstream political party in the UK and by a clear majority of the public, so our job - and my job - is to make them work.
And let's understand what we're talking about. I saw an internal report that said the Olympics are one of the biggest events in . We should be clear. They're not just the biggest event in sport. They're the biggest event in the world, bar none. There's nothing else that brings the people of the planet together in this way, and there's .
The Beijing Olympics won more than 42 million viewers in the United Kingdom - far more than any other event or sports event this year. The 2008 Games were the with 214 million viewers; and that forms part of a pattern where the . Even those figures are dwarfed by China, where - 63% of the entire population. Lots of events claim, erroneously, to be watched by billions. This one really is.
I got a bit of gentle teasing after where I said that one of our lessons from Beijing was that it was even bigger than we'd thought - but I make no apology for saying what we all felt. We all knew the Games were huge. But the scale has now reached epic proportions thanks in part to ; and you have to think of the equivalent of a being played at at the same time - for not one afternoon but right across 17 days - and then broadcast to an audience across the globe. And that's without all the surrounding hoopla of state events, concerts, tourism and partying that accompanies the modern Olympics.
So for the next 4 minutes in a film I want to focus on what's at the heart of the Games themselves - the individual and team achievements which merit that kind of attention:
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit µþµþ°äÌý°Â±ð²ú·É¾±²õ±ð for full instructions
That compilation reminds us about British success - . I was in Beijing for the first week of the Games but nothing prepared me for when I got back home. It had a lot to do with the kind of people who were winning medals. at the time contrasted the rewards for footballers with the 'ordinary heroes' who were winning gold in Beijing. and the increased support our sportsmen and women now have, are required.
For me, one of the stories that stood out was that of the . Many people would have been satisfied with . Others would have given up after a . But he came back , cheered on by millions of Britons watching live on breakfast-time TV. And that kind of experience illustrates two of the positives of sport. First, that it can cheer us up. These days that's a major advantage. The second is that it can inspire: . In a country and lack of fitness, participation is a straightforwardly good thing. It can improve health standards nationwide.
But the agenda is much bigger than that. At the end of last year I went to see . The quickest way to get there is the which goes from the affluent suburbs of Ealing and Richmond, Chiswick and Kew. As you head towards Dagenham it becomes markedly different as I'll explain in a moment. But what struck me at the time was the banner on the floodlights at the match: "". And it made me think about the challenge to turn that into a reality and to use the Olympics as a force for social good as well as for sport. That is, of course, .
And the scale of the challenge in the Olympic boroughs is a big one. London is a tale of two cities - , as you see in that journey along the District Line.
The five Olympic boroughs are , , , and . The three areas with the lowest employment rates in the whole of Great Britain are in the Olympic zone - Tower Hamlets, Newham and Hackney. In Tower Hamlets, over half of all . London has some of the most straightforwardly deprived communities in the country. Of London's boroughs, 20 are among the top 50 , with Tower Hamlets, Newham and Hackney in the top 10. Finally in these statistics - London has the highest rate of recorded crime in the UK; and the Olympic boroughs have .
Now it isn't my job to say whether the amount of money being spent on the 2012 Games is too much, too little or just right. I'm resolutely neutral on those issues of public policy. But what I can't imagine anybody seriously disagreeing with is that it would be a massive missed opportunity if the £9.3 billion currently projected to be spent didn't lastingly improve and beyond.
, though across the country there is still a battle to be won. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú recently did a survey asking people whether they think the Games will benefit themselves and their community. In the UK as a whole, 17% thought it would. In London that figure rose to 35%. In the Olympic boroughs the number expecting concrete benefits reached roughly half --- 49%. It will be interesting to ask the question again in 2013; and we will. I should add that if we ask a different question - Are you pleased the Olympics will be in London in 2012? - there's a clear majority in favour with the most supportive areas being not just London but the East Midlands, the South West of England and Northern Ireland.
I now want to have what may seem like a brief digression to talk about a Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport project called . It's designed to use the power of football to reach some of those on the margins of society - ranging from gang members to former prisoners, and taking in some stigmatised minorities and people with special needs. Some of my best memories from the last three years have been about meeting young people for whom Your Game has literally been a lifeline, or at the very least a glimpse of a different kind of world. This short film gives you a sense of its style and its approach:
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit µþµþ°äÌý°Â±ð²ú·É¾±²õ±ð for full instructions
The reason I showed that is because Your Game is, despite its success, a relatively small scheme. Just imagine what social outreach around London 2012 could look like. There are, many of them from the ethnic groups that make London the most diverse city on the planet. There's a great opportunity to make the Games a success and to make sure their legacy is a lasting one.
This is a job for the whole of Britain. It's one for national and local government, for the - and for the broadcasters too. It's what I meant when I said at the beginning that sport is a vital part of the existence of every citizen: not because I expect everyone to follow Manchester United, let alone Bradford City, and it's while recognising that a small minority avoid any kind of sporting action. But if sport gets the Olympics right, it gets a significant part of national policy right too; and all the taxpayers who've funded it get a return.
I now want to look in more detail about what licence payers can expect from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú. I've no hesitation in saying this will be a massive challenge for us: the biggest event in our lifetimes in , and with a country that has and a profusion of .
However, sport in general and the Olympics in particular still cut through in . I mentioned the 42 million people in Britain who watched at least 15 minutes of Beijing on television. You can also see the power of sport in the peak TV audiences of 2008 where 4 of the top 10 are sport: the and the and the and the .
But that's only part of the story. In the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú we've innovated with our range of (offering lots of extra video choices as at Wimbledon), our online site (the most popular sport destination in Europe), and (with the football results on a Saturday afternoon being the time of peak demand for Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú mobile.) There may be a view sometimes that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is about traditions, and there's no doubt we're proud of them; but you should never underestimate how much new thinking is part of what we do too. The ; and only ten years later we were doing the first sport television outside broadcast from Wimbledon. Sport is, and the Olympics are, central to the development of media as a whole.
So I'm now going to pull together some thoughts before I let you interrogate me. They're based on an absolute acceptance that licence-payers will want to hold the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú to account for its coverage of the London Olympics, and that accountability begins now.
First, we must report the issues with vigour and with impartiality. We may be a broadcast partner but there will be no special favours. I have always supported the view that .
Second, though, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú has a responsibility to work with the all the agencies seeking to make the Games deliver. The decision has been made. London is already the Olympic city, . For a broadcaster funded by the public, it's right to expect that we work in partnership with the organisations charged with meeting the targets they've been set. To take an example, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú cannot have a view on whether on the main stadium is right or wrong; but every sane individual would agree that it needs to be completed on time, just as it's better for the Olympic boroughs to have a legacy than to be left with nothing.
Third, this is a major opportunity to reflect our public purposes - the reasons why we do what we do. There are six of them:
- sustaining citizenship and civil society
- promoting education and learning
- stimulating creativity and cultural excellence
- representing the UK, its nations, regions and communities
- bringing the UK to the world and the world to the UK
- in promoting its other purposes, helping to deliver to the public the benefit of emerging communications technologies and services and, in addition, taking a leading role in the switchover to digital television
I have to say I think the Olympics offer something for everyone. The organising committee already has - and we're working with them on that. is about cultural excellence. The Games will not work unless the whole of the UK gets behind them, and we're uniquely placed to make those connections; and what we sometimes call our 3x3 offering - global, national, local; on tv, on radio, online - is brilliantly suited to the nature of London 2012.
So that's what we're going to do. To go back to the word I chose at the beginning, I'm optimistic because I have faith in the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's ability to rise to these big occasions; and I also believe that the UK can show itself in a new light too. The scale of the challenge is that many host countries have in some way redefined themselves through the Olympics: as an emerging economic force in 1988, modern in 1992, - through to this summer. The UK has the chance to do the same. It should be a fascinating four years, and we'll be there every step of the way.
Comment number 1.
At 3rd Dec 2008, SuperCharybdis wrote:You outline the case for the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú to portray the 'Games' in a good light and one would hope, which didn't really didn't come out in your blog, the parallel need to showcase the 'UK' in a positive way too. The games will, after all, be a once in a lifetime experience not just for Britons but also for other countries to see what this island nation is all about.
The Beijing Games were amazing, however, the TV coverage ran hot and cold and certain events such as Sailing and Rowing, where the camera angles did not allow a full understanding of the unfolding events, were frustrating. The results service both during and immediately after events was also poor but I did think the Beijing results website was excellent. Hopefully, we will see Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú innovation, flair and ingenuity come to the fore!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 4th Dec 2008, Jordan D wrote:Very interesting speech Roger. A question for you - can you explain the logistics between the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, LOCOG and any London Olympic Broadcasting ('LOB') Group similar to the AOB & BOB organisations at the last two Summer Games.
I recollect from a previous blog posting that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú was commissioned by BOB to provide the coverage from the rowing this year (correct me if I'm wrong): will the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú (as part of LOB or as host broadcaster) commission other organisations to do similar?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 4th Dec 2008, Jordan D wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 4th Dec 2008, RedRedRobin wrote:"Even those figures are dwarfed by China, where the opening ceremony alone in August was watched by 842 million - 63% of the entire population. Lots of events claim, erroneously, to be watched by billions. This one really is."
What makes you so certain that these figures are any more accurate than those usually used to make erroneous claims about sporting events?
The piece you link to is a news digest that alludes to a blog posting that gives no information about the methodology used.
Could it not be that those involved in televising the olympics are as prone to overstatement as those involved in other events?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 4th Dec 2008, jcb336 wrote:I mentioned this in one of Roger's blogs previously, but the International Olimpics Committee in 2004 established a subsidiary based in Madrid which will act as "host broadcaster" for all Olympics from Vancouver 2010 on. This is different to the arrangements since 1992 where the local organising committee and the IOC have set up a joint body to be host broadcaster. (Up to 1998 the local broadcaster would usually take the lead.) However as was obvious the Chinese state broadcaster was massively involved in Beijing, as the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú obviously will be in 2012. The website is here: It would seem that the host broadcaster will not as such be pointing cameras at anything, but instead arranging client broadcasters,in many cases the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, to do the job for it. I stand to be corrected on this however. Roger has been asked to spearhead all of this and abandon, as it were, the rest of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú sport for the duration. No doubt he can clarify.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 4th Dec 2008, BigBadDaveB wrote:An excellent and thorough blog post, Roger.
I can only hope that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú builds on the excellent coverage it provided in Bejing, but suspect that it's damned if it does and damned if it doesn't.
Not enough coverage and it will be accused of ignoring potentially the most important sporting occasion to be held in the UK for decades; too much and it will be accused of wasting licence fee payers' cash on minority sports which nobody cares about.
It's hard to predict where technology will be even in four years' time, but it's entirely possible that every single event will be available to view live via the red button or online - a mouthwatering prospect indeed!
My personal wish-list would be:
- At least one HD channel showing the main action and a highlights package overnight.
- 6 interactive DSAT streams coving the best live action and giving a thouroughly comprehensive highlights package and replays overnight.
- All events available to view live via the website.
- All events available on iPlayer as soon as possible after the event
- Five Live Sports Extra to be dedicated to the Olympics
- Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Parliament to be utilised for extra coverage if at all possible
- At least one "main" Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú channel to be declared an Olympic-free zone to appease the whingers!
Completely off-topic, Roger, will you soon be revealing more details about the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's planned F1 coverage? I know the commentary team's been announced but when do you expect an official confirmation about HD and interactive coverage?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 4th Dec 2008, Roger Mosey - Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Director, London 2012 wrote:Thanks for the feedback.
Good news: I think we should be able to meet almost all of BigBadDaveB's wishes in #6.
To Jordan D in #2 and jcb336 in #5: yes, the host broadcaster commissions other world media organisations to cover specific events. So, for instance, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú did the athletics in Sydney and we supplied the team for the rowing and flat-water canoeing in Beijing.
The issue for London is that we'll be using many of our staff for the unprecedented domestic coverage of the Games, and it'll need a lot of people for the kind of high quality 24x7 services that BigBadDaveB mentions. So we'll be talking to the host organisation in the coming months to work out the best use of staff across all the competing demands.
To RedRedRobin in #4: I think the Olympic "billions" make sense because they add up logically across all the various markets of the world. By contrast, I sometimes see a claim that a particular domestic football match will be watched by "a billion" and you have to start from a live audience of only around 2m in the UK - and then somehow find 998m watching in the rest of the world, which is pretty hard to do.
There was an interesting piece in the New Yorker a while ago which made the same point about the Oscars...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 4th Dec 2008, WebbyFoxes wrote:A well thoughout post by the soon to be ex Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport Director.
Roger, your impact on Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport has been major with major things like the axing of Grandstand and the coverage of the 2008 Olympics.
As you take up your 2012 role...will you still be having a part within the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport department alongside the new Director?
Or will the new role be more focused on the London 2012 coverage and how the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú plan to cover the 4 years leading to it?
Whatever happens, Roger, you have turned Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport on its head and what you have done has changed the way the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport is looked like now.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 5th Dec 2008, AlexGraham wrote:great blog, always interesting to see things from the inside out.
But even as a keen sports watcher I do have real doubts when people try to link Olympic sports investment to long term local and national improvements. Wouldn't some kind of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú program chronicalling what happened after Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney and Athens be useful in terms of what those individual cities did and how successful they were? Is there a real tangible legacy, or is it just a myth created by politicans and media?
I know there will be long term tourist increases but with the huge urban social problems the UK (and other Countries) is suffering from we can't justify billions of pounds on what is basically a glorified urban renewal project with some nice stadia thrown in for good measure.
I'd also be interested to see just how many professional sports venues we'll have in Greater London once everything is built, according to its 90 pre-2012, that seems like an insanely high number to me for a population of just 7.4 million, when New York State has 150 venues and 20 million people.
Apologies for going off at a tangent, but my mind wandered a bit
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 5th Dec 2008, land-force wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 5th Dec 2008, jcb336 wrote:I apologise for the mistake in my blog #5-the date for the last time the local broadcaster took the lead was 1988 in Seoul, not 1998 obviously. Elsewhere Olympic enthusiasts will note the IOC has finally brought its long term relataionship with the EBU to an end. The implications for Sochi 2014 on will take some time to unravel. I have no doubt the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú will already be considering its options-it's official stance is that it is looking forward to negotiating with the IOC directly. I don't expect Roger to comment at all-but at a time when I (like many others no doubt)have cancelled my Sky Sports subscription I think that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú deserve more credit for the efforts they have made to maintain its sport portfolio. The free to air model for commercial broadcasters in any sport except football is just about a busted flush.
As for global sport audiences, a research project a few years ago showed IIRC that at that time only the FIFA World Cup Final and the Superbowl were likely to approach 100 million-anything else was lucky to get 30 million-globally. Many countries only now sell to tiny subscription audiences-this has of course dramatically affected what used to be big audience pullers like boxing. You have to remember for that most Sky and Setanta broadcasts in the UK the audiences are so small they are barely worth estimating. For subscription broadcasters, the issue is not the size of the audience, but the number of subscribers. For FTA broadcasters the conundrum is different-the audiences are bigger but does their size justify the huge outlay rights holders now expect. Only for the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is the answer still likely to remain a yes I would have thought. But the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's resources are finite.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 5th Dec 2008, Wanzebra wrote:I have to agree with Cryotek #9- I live almost 400 miles away from London and fail to see the benefit to myself and my neighbours of the cost of urban re-generation in London.
I wish the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú best wishes for it's coverage and hope that it retains a 'cost effective' view towards coverage rather than a 'blank cheque it's the olympics' view especially if they are able to show the UK (not just London) to the rest of the World to encourage tourism.
My personal view is that the UK cannot afford the games, the benefit to the UK (outside London) will be minimum and the lasting legacy of the Olympics being a cost/debt and a few unused stadia - I look forward to being proved wrong.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 6th Dec 2008, hank-kingsley wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)
Comment number 14.
At 8th Dec 2008, RedRedRobin wrote:Mr Mosey,
I'd agree about the claims made about domestic football matches, but I'd draw your attention to this article from the Independent:
which has a very goosd analysis of FIFA's 1 billion viewer claim for the World Cup, which on the face of it would seem as logical as the IOCs, but on closer analysis overstates things by atleast 100%.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 14)
Comment number 15.
At 8th Dec 2008, veryfaraway wrote:I'm a PE teacher and looked at the "education programme" and some of the associated links.
I feel so depressed - lots of idealistic enthusiastic vocabulary and various recent governmental reports on objectives which I was expected to attain 30 years ago on teaching practice.
I now live in Barcelona and whilst the 1992 Olympics were fundamental in bringing about major changes and excellent developments in the infrastructure of Barcelona, they did very little for improving PE and sports at school or for ordinary Joe Bloggs.
I truly hope that some of the poorest parts of London benefit and I admire your optimism but I doubt that the Olympics has something for everyone.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 15)
Comment number 16.
At 9th Dec 2008, Roger Mosey - Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Director, London 2012 wrote:To Cryotek in #9, Wanzebra in #12 and veryfaraway in #15: I think you all identify the scale of the challenge. I wouldn't for a minute argue that success is guaranteed, but the key thing is to learn from the mistakes of the past and to try to ensure long-term benefit.
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's role in this is pretty obvious: we will challenge the decision-makers on the promises made, just as we ourselves will expect to be accountable for our coverage.
To WebbyFoxes in #8: at the moment I'm still Director of Sport, but sometime in the new year I'll be moving full-time to be Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Director of London 2012 - looking after not just the sport but the full range of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú activities around the Olympics.
You're right there's been a lot of change in recent years but it's involved pretty much the whole of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport in adjusting to the needs of our audiences. This blog is just a small part of it: people now expect to participate and to shape our content in ways that didn't happen 5 years ago. I'm sure that will our ambitions will remain in the coming years because the real danger is in failing to innovate.
And, as ever, thanks for all the feedback. Jcb336 and RedRedRobin make interesting points about billions, and I think we'd all accept it's right to be cautious about statistics.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 16)
Comment number 17.
At 9th Dec 2008, David Shield wrote:Roger sorry to go off topic, but there has been a few bits and pieces in the press recently that in 2009 Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Television's horse racing coverage will be truncated to just 12 days coverage, for the big events.
Will there be any Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú responce on this, whether it is true and if so the reasons for this truncation?
Good luck with you new role for 2012, I am still dissapointed at the axing of Grandstand but apart from that you have done a good job with Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport and leave it in good shape.
P.S. This blog is still a lot quieter than this time last year, you would get blogs previewing most of the weekend's big events i.e. most rugby weekends, golf, football etc, it is still very quiet in comparison.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 17)
Comment number 18.
At 9th Dec 2008, Roger Mosey - Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Director, London 2012 wrote:Hi David in #17
Thanks for the kind words.
Unfortunately we can't comment on any current negotiations, but I'm aiming to write a blog about rights in the coming weeks.
A bit like our new UK athletics deal - which was announced a few days ago - quite a few issues have been running a fair time (the UKA deal was agreed in principle in the spring) without coming to the final resolution. But as soon as we can discuss them, I will.
Point taken about the blog; but one of us - probably me - will be posting something new about Sports Personality before the weekend.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 18)
Comment number 19.
At 10th Dec 2008, Jordan D wrote:Roger going back to the earlier points regarding the OBSL and your role as Director of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's 2012 related operations, what role will Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport be playing with reference to OBSL. I appreciate that you may have your hand tied for one reason or the other (do say so though!), but can you explain how that relationship will work? Will OBSL be heavily be put together by staff from OBSV or BOB or alternatively will it have a Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú team at the core?
Separately - and off topic - are there any plans to bring the Boat Race back now that ITV have dropped it after the '09 race?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 19)
Comment number 20.
At 10th Dec 2008, galinor wrote:We had a choice London or nothing. If the games weren't in London we would never have had the support of the government.
While I'm sure many non-Londoners feel positive about the games being in London I doubt that too many people in the West Mid-lands or Lancashire feel too good about it as Manchester and Birmingham were never really given a fair chance. As for London’s geographic location, it is in the far south east corner of a long narrow island and therefore fairly difficult to get to if you live in the north.
So Northern Ireland is in favour of the London games, I wonder how many in favour are republican Catholics.
London is a very expensive place to build.
Why are so many stats about viewer numbers from the USA? London is a European Capital.
In the End I hope it goes well. But it will always be a London games and not a general UK games. There’s nothing Welsh, Scot or northern about it's current presentation.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 20)
Comment number 21.
At 8th Jan 2009, aatol79 wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 21)
Comment number 22.
At 9th Jan 2009, nigelevans wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 22)
Comment number 23.
At 9th Jan 2009, nigelevans wrote:Beijing raised the proverbial bar so high it is difficult to imagine how us Brits - as known as we are for being less than spectacular and outgoing in our daily endeavours - to attain such heights in 2012.
Some heavy weights, to use another sporting analogy, lay on the shoulders of the committees whose task awaits!
Much more on this thread is found in
Complain about this comment (Comment number 23)
Comment number 24.
At 12th Jan 2009, Lynx77777 wrote:"The Games are supported by every mainstream political party in the UK and by a clear majority of the public..."
I don't think it is.
The Olympics are going to be a huge drain on vital resources for Britain at the worst possible time. I have never supported the Olympics and the majority of people only catch snip its of it when its on else where. We're not set up to host an Olympics, nor do the people have enough interest or desire to pay for such an event.
I would whole heartedly like to see some honest tough journalism from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú that expresses these views.
I understand we are now commited to hosting the 2012 games and there is little or no point nay saying and making things worse. But the British public is going to become more and more concerned the closer we get to 2012, and the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú should be there to relay those concerns.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 24)