It might not be quite that dramatic, but that's certainly the way it seems. Now that Oslo, the presumed favorite, has pulled out, the race for the 2022 Winter Olympics is down to two cities--Almaty, Kazakhstan and Beijing. Neither choice is ultra-desirable, but they're all the IOC is left with after seeing city after city fall by the wayside. At least there's still going to be a vote, because neither of the remaining candidates is going anywhere.
The IOC is clearly unhappy about these developments, and they've made that stance known. The reason Oslo withdrew its bid was because it couldn't get the necessary governmental support, an IOC requirement. Although, in the IOC's opinion, that problem could've been avoided if their had been better communication between the bid organizers and the government, which would've resulted in a clearer understanding of the actual costs and how that money would've been spent.
Governments, especially in Western nations, are scared off by the cost associated with hosting an Olympics. They look at that $51 billion price tag for the Sochi Games and decide "Thanks, but No Thanks" without considering why the Russians spent that much. In Sochi, they built a winter sports resort from scratch. That costs money. And that's what accounted for a majority of that $51 billion. Oslo's already got most of that stuff in place. As a result, their projected budget was only $5 billion, which was still too much for the government.
As a terrific article I read about the Oslo situation noted, the Norwegian media was also against hosting the Olympics, which turned the public against the bid, which in turn soured the government on the idea. Having read some of those articles myself, I agree with that point completely. The Norwegian media took things out of IOC manuals that were designed as suggestions for all potential Olympic hosts and ran with them as "demands" that made the IOC look like privileged prima donnas.
One example noted in the article was that the IOC members asked for five-star hotels and 24-hour room service. The fact that the IOC would pay for this themselves was conveniently ignored. They also jumped on the IOC because of the suggestion that there should be a cocktail party with IOC members and the host country's head of state following the Opening Ceremony, as if that was an unreasonable idea. (If I was an Olympic organizer, that's something I'd want to do regardless.)
There's no question that the 2022 bid "race" has been a black mark for the IOC. Before Norway, bids from Switzerland, Germany, Sweden and Poland were either considered and not submitted or submitted and withdrawn for mostly the same reasons. (The Ukranian city of Lviv also withdrew as a candidate, but the political situation between Ukraine and Russia also played a big part in that.) As a result, the Olympics will be in Asia for the third consecutive time and, outside of Rio 2016, won't have been further West than Sochi for an entire decade. It's also guaranteed that there will be at least a 12-year gap between Olympics in Western Europe (and a 10-year gap between Olympics in Europe period), and that's assuming the 2024 Games go to a European city, which is by no means a guarantee.
I haven't even mentioned the World Cup problem yet, either. Since FIFA was stupid enough to give the World Cup to Qatar, a country where it's too hot to play soccer in the summer, they're going to have to move the World Cup. Rather than playing it in November/December, some soccer people have said that the World Cup should be played in February instead. So, even though FIFA's the ones that screwed up, the Winter Olympics, which are always in February, should be held at a different time? That makes a lot of sense.
Anyway, IOC President Thomas Bach knows the IOC looks bad, and reforming the bidding process is one of the big things that will be discussed as a part of his "Olympic Agenda 2020." Something needs to change. Because nobody wants to host the Olympics right now. At least not any of the Western democracies that traditionally do the best. (The ironic part here is that the IOC doesn't want the U.S. right now, which is why there was no American bid for 2018, 2020 or 2022.) And it's difficult to spread the Olympic Movement if the Games end up going back to the same country over and over again because they're the only ones willing to host them.
To his credit, Bach has remained steadfast. Even though we're down to just two candidates, he's not reopening the bid process. For one, that would be unfair to Almaty and Beijing. For another, who's to say any new candidates would suddenly emerge. So, for better or worse and whether we like it or not, the 2022 Winter Olympics will be held in either Almaty or Beijing.
Ultimately, I think the Almaty bid is much stronger, and a Games in Almaty makes much more sense (there are no mountains in Beijing). I also think the IOC is highly unlikely to go to Korea, then Japan, then China for three straight Olympics. Lastly, giving the same city two Olympics 14 years apart, let alone one Summer Games and one Winter Games, isn't exactly spreading the Olympic Movement.
Central Asia, however, is an untapped market. The Olympics have never been in Kazakhstan (or any of the former Soviet republics other than Russia). It might not be the most desirable bid, but it's definitely the lesser of two evils. And let's not forget, Rio was rated fourth of the four finalists for 2016, but ended up winning the Games. We don't yet know how the Rio Games will go, but I think we can all agree it was good for the Olympic Movement to have its first South American host.
Almaty 2022 can do the same thing for Central Asia. And if those Games are successful, nobody will be talking about all the cities that dropped out during the bidding process. Just like no one cares that LA was the only bidder for the 1984 Summer Games. That one worked out OK, and I have a feeling this will to. Even if it doesn't seem like that right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment