2012 Olympics

“Five cities bid for 2012 Summer Olympics: London, Madrid, Moscow, New York and Paris.

The Voting

• By rounds until one city obtains a majority. City receiving the fewest votes drops out after each round. Four rounds would be the maximum.
• Of the IOC's 116 members, 99 are eligible to vote in the first round.
• Voting is done electronically.
• Voting begins at 5:45 a.m. EDT)
• The winning city will be announced around 7:40 a.m. EDT.

---

And I thought it was awarded to the highest bidder.

It's down to London and Paris.
last edited: 7/06/05 7:16:54 AM”

“CNN
"Moscow was eliminated in the first round, New York in the second and Madrid in the third.

The voting followed a final, furious lobbying effort by an elite "who's who" of politicians and athletes in Singapore, where the IOC is holding its annual meeting."

lumberzac and Sarge are fast! They beat me with the announcement that:

London wins 2012 Olympics.
last edited: 7/06/05 7:28:39 AM”

“Looks like London got it.”

“London gets it.


^ What he said. ^
last edited: 7/06/05 7:21:34 AM”

“(font = sarcasm) If only the West Side Stadium had been passed, then NYC would have gotten it. (/font)”

“LMBO @ lumberzac.”

“We really don't need to join the list of cities that "take a bath" financially after hosting the Olympics...”

“Someone I went to college referred to the Olympics as economic crack. They give a city a big economic boost for a short period and then it crashes faster than it rose.”

“I've been following this thing for a long time, through the sale of the MTA trainyards (Dan Doctoroff's bid-rigging and all), up to Sheldon Silver's axing of the sale. Then, they were going to Plan B, which would have involved the Mets getting a new Shea Stadium. At least, they would have paid for their own stadium under that plan. We would have had top pay for infrastructure improvements, but at least that was a little less bitter pill to swallow.

Now, London, apparently, had this huge push and lots of public support for it 5the games. It was only lukewarm here, most enthusiastically syupported by big business and politicans willing to heave this onto the taxpayers' backs. Good luck, London. Let the games begin!”

“Food in London for the Oilypics! Shepherd's pie and bangers. Mmmmm....so good.”

“I will be ready to go to London again in 2012...something to start saving for since prices are so high there.”

“Fish and chips!”

““We really don't need to join the list of cities that "take a bath" financially after hosting the Olympics...”
Treebeard
7:53:23 AM
7/06/05

Come now TB don't be bitter ;o)”

“The cost of the Westside stadium would have been borne by NJ taxpayers too since the Jets weren't going to be a part of the new Meadowlands stadium.”

“Actually, this city has much to offer, Y2. The prospect of hosting the Olympics really was never a major goal in my mind. There was too much to overcome to prepare for it and the net results wouldn't have benefitted us financially, IMO. I wish London well. It's probably a beautiful place to have it. I've never been there and would love to go!”

“How many people would have satyed away from Manhattan (including workers) because of the Olympics?

I wonder if there would have been a net economic gain, even in the short term.”

“I think there is a sore loser in the crowd.

LOL.”

“It sounds like a huge headache anyway.

Sore, get it?”

“Well considering Paris was the heavy favorite I'd like to thank that Clown Chirac for the British and Finnish Food commentary, guess the Finnish judges didn't think too much of it. Bravo for London!”

“Philadelphia is trying for it in 2016”

“thank god london got it-we dont really need that mess in new york---”

“who has the 08 olympics?”

“Beijing.”

“i guess we better not go to war with them any time soon

dont worry, shrub will probably piss them off so much somehow that theyll boycott their own olympics”

“Seattle will always have The Olympics”

“IOC drops baseball, softball from 2012 program

By STEPHEN WILSON, AP Sports Writer
July 8, 2005
SINGAPORE (AP) -- Baseball and softball were dropped Friday from the Olympic program for the 2012 Summer Games in London.

Each of the 28 existing sports was put to a secret vote by the International Olympic Committee, and baseball and softball failed to receive a majority required to stay on the program. The other 26 sports were retained.

The IOC will consider replacing them with two sports from a waiting list of five: golf, rugby, squash, karate and roller sports. That decision will be made Saturday. why even bother to bring these sports in?

Baseball and softball are the first sports cut from the Olympics since water polo in 1936.

Baseball has been vulnerable because it doesn't bring top Major League players to the Olympics. Softball has been in danger because of a perceived lack of global appeal and participation.

``Needless to say, these sports are very, very disappointed,'' IOC president Jacques Rogge said after announcing the result. ``However, I have to emphasize the fact that they should not fear this purge. The fact is that they shall not be included in the program of the 2012 Olympic Games, but it does not disqualify them forever as Olympic sports.''

Rogge said baseball and softball will be eligible to win back their place in future games.

``I would like to invite the leaders of these sports that will not be included in the program to make their very best efforts during the coming years so as to be able to convince the session that they deserve to come back to the Olympic Games in 2016. We shall support them in their efforts,'' he said.

The IOC will keep the voting figures secret. Not even the IOC members or sports federations will learn the totals. The secrecy was requested by the international federations in order to avoid any ranking or embarrassment for any sports which just barely make the cut.

Rogge said the figures will be seen only by an independent official, who will send the results by sealed envelope to an IOC notary in Lausanne, Switzerland. Rogge will only open the envelope in the case of a voting dispute.

``Not all sports are indispensable for the Olympic program, we know that,'' Rogge told the delegates before the vote.

Rogge urged the 100-plus members to vote strictly on the technical merits of the sports and not for subjective, political or personal reasons.

``If you consider a modification, you should be convinced it will bring an improvement,'' Rogge said.

Senior IOC member Dick Pound of Canada harshly criticized the secrecy, saying it undermined the IOC's moves for openness. He said it was in the interests of the sports federations themselves to know how they stand.

``What kind of message does the IOC send when there is complete secrecy on an issue that is important to the world?'' Pound said. ``I strongly urge that we reconsider the idea of sending a sealed envelope by messenger to a notary to Switzerland who keeps it in a safe somewhere. It's off message in the year 2005. We should be proud that we're able to decide and we should know exactly what the outcomes should be.''

But Rogge said the IOC executive board had accepted the request by the federations, who fear a low vote total would hurt them in finding sponsorship and television contracts.

``Whether we agree or not, if this is the unanimous position of the 28 international federations, we have to respect that,'' Rogge said.

Removal from the program would be devastating for smaller sports, which rely heavily on Olympic revenues for survival.

In 2002, Rogge proposed that baseball, softball and modern pentathlon be removed and golf and rugby be added, but IOC members resisted and no vote was taken. Since then, he has instituted a review of the entire program after each edition of the games.

``The program isn't something that can be fixed for eternity -- it has to be evolving,'' Rogge said. ``We need to be relevant.''”