Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Olympic Budget "could" Rise
Topic Started: Dec 10 2007, 07:12 AM (652 Views)
stradlin24
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
safc_fan89,Dec 10 2007
04:24 PM
John,Dec 10 2007
04:15 PM
safc_fan89,Dec 10 2007
03:43 PM
More relevant because more people would care.

I will admit it is a question of perspective and maybe to a football loving young man he may well feel that to him and his peers the World Cup is more relevant or indeed more popular...

I do not wish to devalue the obvious appeal of Football... indeed as a confirmed non Football fan I do still enjoy the World Cup when it comes around, but I would argue that the Olympics is a Bigger deal for any nation to host and has a broader appeal to people around the world.

It is not a popularity contest and the fact they are both staged so as not to clash with each other shows they equally premier sporting events...

I just fail to believe that the the World Cup is 'more' relevant or indeed that more people 'care' than for the Olympics.

Well you get in excess of a million people going to football matches (most probably) every week. It's the biggest sport in this country.

I hear people talking about football constantly. I don't hear people talking about swimming, athletics, gymnastics and all the other Olympic sports. Plus, the Olympics is a London event, not a nationwide event. The Worl Cup would be a nationwide event, and just about everything is in place.

The football World Cup IMO would be much better for the country than the Olympics

the venues would be all the country instead of being all in the capital, so everyone would get a chance to see some of the action and there would be much more interest

how many stadia do they use for the WC? 10?

So it would be....

Wembley
Emerates
Scum Trafford
Liverpool's new ground
St James' Park
Eastlands
Villa Park
Stamford Bridge
Stadium of light and of course...........................Elland Road
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The STIG
Driver
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Just one small flaw in your argument there Strad. The Olympic games won't just be in London either. I believe some of the football will be in Cardiff, for example.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lord Tau
Member Avatar

Admin
The STIG,Dec 12 2007
10:15 PM
Just one small flaw in your argument there Strad. The Olympic games won't just be in London either. I believe some of the football will be in Cardiff, for example.

...and the training for the rowing is supposed to be just down the road from me, apparently!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stradlin24
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
well, hardly "all over the country" is it like the football WC would be

It doesn't benefit us "up narth" in any way so why should we be that interested?

the answer is, most of us aren't
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
safc_fan89
Member Avatar
safc_fan89
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Red Andy,Dec 11 2007
10:56 PM
What if they visit Durham University, paying good money to examine the historic site, and the university then spends that revenue on a mass spectrometer or a particle accelerator or some other expensive scientific toy, allowing you to conduct an even better research project, get an even better degree and therefore a better job in the future? :P

(Okay, so a particle accelerator might be a bit of an exaggeration, but the point remains).

They would visit the castle, cathedral and shops, not my college or the student union!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
styeffo
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The STIG,Dec 12 2007
10:15 PM
Just one small flaw in your argument there Strad. The Olympic games won't just be in London either. I believe some of the football will be in Cardiff, for example.

Didn't know that, makes no difference to me still a massive ZZZZZ fest (for me).

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
safc_fan89
Member Avatar
safc_fan89
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That's another problem with the olympics. A lot of the sport is toned down. Football for instance, you can only have a specific number of players aged over 23. Boxing isn't proper boxing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
safc_fan89,Dec 13 2007
04:31 PM
That's another problem with the olympics. A lot of the sport is toned down. Football for instance, you can only have a specific number of players aged over 23. Boxing isn't proper boxing.

Which explains the "A-Force's" lack of success.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pedal power
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Why is that every time England goes to host one of these sporting events, it's always in or around London.

The amount of money that being spent regenerating London, is effectively being picked up by the taxpayers.

If there were substantial reinvestment around the rest of the country, the public would get behind the Olympics.

I’m from Birmingham and it amazes me that whenever a new sporting venue or arena needs building the have a competition to see which city should have it, and nine of ten times it end in London having it.

Some things that Birmingham were snubbed over.

Channel Tunnel Rail Link - When the CTRL was being talked about it, one thing that was touted to justify it was that the rest of the country would get a high speed rail link from Ashford via London to Birmingham and then beyond to Edinburgh, with other spurs shooting off to Manchester and Liverpool. When the tunnel was built, the high-speed link only went as far as London. And now a new high-speed link has been completed between Ashford and London

Millennium Dome – The money for said project was on the table and the donors gave guarantees. The London bid was running out of money and the government made up the excess.

New Football Stadium – Birmingham had a new site set up next to the airport. You had various transport links on the front door, road, train and air. It was situated in the centre of the country.

Airport Upgrade – Birmingham wants to expand their current runway and have a new runway to carry the north Atlantic airplane traffic. This keeps getting rejected at government level.
Heathrow has a new terminal coming online soon T5, and they want another terminal. Why not reroute some of the traffic to the airports in the midlands and the north to relive the congestion down south.

Other thing I remember was that the BBC said if the licence fee were increased it would transfer some 1500 jobs up to Manchester. The license fee has increased and there is no mention of these jobs being transferred, rather job cuts.

It does seem that the policy makers thing that London should be at the heart of everything even when it to the detriment to the rest of the country

<kaboom>

rant over.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
pedal power,Dec 14 2007
02:29 PM
Why is that every time England goes to host one of these sporting events, it's always in or around London.

The amount of money that being spent regenerating London, is effectively being picked up by the taxpayers.

If there were substantial reinvestment around the rest of the country, the public would get behind the Olympics.

I’m from Birmingham and it amazes me that whenever a new sporting venue or arena needs building the have a competition to see which city should have it, and nine of ten times it end in London having it.

Some things that Birmingham were snubbed over.

Channel Tunnel Rail Link - When the CTRL was being talked about it, one thing that was touted to justify it was that the rest of the country would get a high speed rail link from Ashford via London to Birmingham and then beyond to Edinburgh, with other spurs shooting off to Manchester and Liverpool. When the tunnel was built, the high-speed link only went as far as London. And now a new high-speed link has been completed between Ashford and London

Millennium Dome – The money for said project was on the table and the donors gave guarantees. The London bid was running out of money and the government made up the excess.

New Football Stadium – Birmingham had a new site set up next to the airport. You had various transport links on the front door, road, train and air. It was situated in the centre of the country.

Airport Upgrade – Birmingham wants to expand their current runway and have a new runway to carry the north Atlantic airplane traffic. This keeps getting rejected at government level.
Heathrow has a new terminal coming online soon T5, and they want another terminal. Why not reroute some of the traffic to the airports in the midlands and the north to relive the congestion down south.

Other thing I remember was that the BBC said if the licence fee were increased it would transfer some 1500 jobs up to Manchester. The license fee has increased and there is no mention of these jobs being transferred, rather job cuts.

It does seem that the policy makers thing that London should be at the heart of everything even when it to the detriment to the rest of the country

<kaboom>

rant over.

It's worse than you think. For every quantity of money spent on London, Scotland, Wales and Ulster get a certain quantity of cash to spend, where as the rest of England gets nothing. I don't begrudge Scotland, Ulster and Wales getting cash, but I do resent the rest of England missing out. That is why Edinburgh has a flash new tram system when the Leeds Super tram was cancelled. That is why Scots can go to uni for free but English students need to pay. It's crap. Why should some one suffer just because they happen to be english but live outside london.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lord Tau
Member Avatar

Admin
pedal power,Dec 14 2007
02:29 PM
Why is that every time England goes to host one of these sporting events, it's always in or around London.

*cough*....Commonwealth Games in 2002 in Manchester....*cough*
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Lord Tau,Dec 14 2007
04:19 PM
pedal power,Dec 14 2007
02:29 PM
Why is that every time England goes to host one of these sporting events, it's always in or around London.

*cough*....Commonwealth Games in 2002 in Manchester....*cough*

My comment was just refering to general expenditure.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Views on the News · Next Topic »
Add Reply