Rio's Olympic bid strikes the right chord
A member of the here said to me just ahead of Friday's vote on the 2016 Olympic host city that this felt like another rite of passage for London.
It's more than four years since we knew the Games were heading to the UK - and it's now not much more than 1000 days to the Opening Ceremony. The IOC's decision means it'll be the Mayor of Rio who'll be receiving the Olympic flag in the stadium in Stratford when the London Games are over, and the next stage of the journey is to South America.
The concerts being planned to capture the music of the past and future hosts will have to span China and Brazil, and the Cultural Olympiad can enjoy a touch of
Handing over to the first Olympics in South America will, I think, make a small but important difference to London 2012.
The result was relayed to crowds on Rio's famous Copacabana beach
For four recent Olympiads the hosts were in the European or English-speaking heartlands: Barcelona in 1992 handed to Atlanta and then to Sydney and Athens.
London is now in the middle of a movement that is unambiguously about crossing continents and cultures - and it was significant that Seb Coe . With a World Cup next year in South Africa, the club of major event hosts has more members - and
Events in Copenhagen also reminded us just how well London did when it won the bid in Singapore in 2005. I confess I spent much of the preceding months, when I was head of 91Èȱ¬ television news, telling colleagues to keep calm because the Games were heading to Paris.
I remembered the hype and the disappointment of the bids in the previous decade from Birmingham and Manchester - and, hey, Brits are used to losing on the international stage. But a few days before the vote it was apparent that London's message was getting through, and the vision was polished by a brilliant pitch in the conference hall.
All the bidders last week had learned from that, though to a neutral observer there were some crucial differences. but watching President and Mrs Obama - the transcript of what they said is - the question was whether it was the right sort of tug on the heartstrings.
Emotion gets the better of Brazilain president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in the wake of Rio's triumph
Nobody could question how important Chicago is to them, but the President's statement that "there is nothing I would like more than to step just a few blocks from my family's home, with Michelle and our two girls, and welcome the world back into our neighbourhood" was clearly not as much as a rallying cry as he'd hoped. By contrast, Brazil's President da Silva is also but there was also a relentless focus on what a South American games would mean for the continent and the international community.
We saw the killer graphic in their pitch: thirty Games in Europe, five in Asia, two in Oceania, eight in the United States and none in South America or Africa. So no matter how much Michelle Obama loved her dad or how nice it would have been for the Obama kids to walk to the stadium, there was both an emotional pull and logic in the Rio vision.
Just three years ago I was part of a 91Èȱ¬ team in Beijing being given a welcome by Chinese government and broadcasters because of our role at the heart of the Games after theirs. It will be a pleasure for us to do the same with colleagues from Brazil as they head to London in the coming years. The Olympic map is being spread wide, and that must be a good thing.
Comment number 1.
At 5th Oct 2009, LABSAB9 wrote:The right decision has been made.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 5th Oct 2009, rjaggar wrote:A good decision.
Given the seemingly highly effective project management going on for London 2012, any commercial opportunities for the 2012 team/UK plc in helping Brazil in that way??
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 5th Oct 2009, 355gts wrote:Great decision. Completely agree about Obama.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 5th Oct 2009, Matwin wrote:Why are we still talking about Obama in relation to the 2016 games, so what? Chicago did not win, neither did Madrid or Tokyo. Give Rio credit where credit is due! They have a brilliant vision and did not win based solely on the fact that it's logical to have an Olympic games in South America! BRAVO!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 6th Oct 2009, Roger Mosey - 91Èȱ¬ Director, London 2012 wrote:LABSAB9, rjaggar, 355gts - I'm pleased we all agree.
Matwin in #4: I think we agree too? The only thing I was picking up was the notion before the vote that all that was needed for Chicago to win was: (1) President Obama should turn up (2) Their presentation should be 'emotional'.
Now there's some interesting stuff on American websites about the background - some of which include views that Chicago could never have won
Actually, what's interesting about votes like these is how the balance can be tipped very easily. In the first round, Madrid was ahead; and Rio was just 8 votes ahead of Chicago. Seb Coe was right that the four bids were closely grouped together and the first round would be trickiest of all.
Finally, worth noting that the IOC is now emphasising that this shows money isn't top of their agenda:
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 9th Oct 2009, captainlazytim wrote:"Finally, worth noting that the IOC is now emphasising that this shows money isn't top of their agenda: "
For someone who works closely in sport, you are surpisingly willing to give coverage to a statement which beggars belief if you know the history of the IOC, or anything about the people who now run it.
Where is the largest growth market available to companies? Chicago? Madrid? No, in SA, where there hasn't been a games.
I'm also worried that South Africa next year and Brazil could be like Beijing, a falsehood, one which does nothing for the country except present a false image.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 9th Oct 2009, Roger Mosey - 91Èȱ¬ Director, London 2012 wrote:Captainlazytim: thanks for the comment, but it's our job to give coverage - and it doesn't mean we necessarily agree with what's being said.
In this case, though, there was some evidence behind the IOC's comments.
The main thing to note is that the Fox networks in the United States said they would only bid for the broadcasting rights to the Games if they took place in the US - a statement that raised some eyebrows, but one that would potentially have a significant effect on the finances.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 10th Oct 2009, Brekkie wrote:The right result, and good for London too - the handover in the Closing Ceremony should be great.
Also glad Rugby Sevens got the nod for inclusion too, and hope unlike football the history of the British Lions means Britain is involved as it should be - though there may be complications with Ireland.
Not so bothered about Golf - I think something like Squash was more worthy of a place in the games.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 21st Oct 2009, rjaggar wrote:7. At 4:00pm on 09 Oct 2009, Roger Mosey - 91Èȱ¬ Director, London 2012 wrote:
The main thing to note is that the Fox networks in the United States said they would only bid for the broadcasting rights to the Games if they took place in the US - a statement that raised some eyebrows, but one that would potentially have a significant effect on the finances.
It's therefore very interesting that the London Times, whose owner is the same person who owns Fox, ran an editorial the day of the vote coming out in favour of Rio.
Clearly editors/MDs in different geographies are not receiving the same party line from on high, if they indeed received one on that......
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)