Time to disband the Commonwealth Games

everyone knows that Dan. No one believes the commonwealth games is the highlight of the international sporting calendar with the worlds fastest times, or anything like that. I mean - this is not a new event, we've all been here before. But it has a place, particularly for the many smaller nations that don't get to big events, and for many competitors who never make a final otherwise. It's a good multi-sports events, conducted amongst nations with a common history or ideals in a friendly manner. Some good events, in the recent games the distance running was world class, as were a number of other events. But we all know it's not the olympics.

I think that all commonwealth games supporters/ fans should read the very interesting article published in SMH titled: "Weak fields undermine gold rush." http://www.smh.com.au/commonwealth-games-2010/comm-games-news/weak-fields-undermine-gold-rush-20101016-16o95.html The article basically states that the 74 gold medals won by Australia would have translated into just SEVEN gold medals if this had been an olympic games, where there was a true global field, and that "many of the gold medals were won against mediocre opposition." This article echoes what I've been saying all along.

Yes Tui, all 24 of them!

warlach - many thanx for the vote of confidence. We both know that so far as the commonwealth games are concerned, the facts and figures do not make pleasant reading for fans of this 3rd tier sporting event. The fact that at Delhi 2010, the men's 100 m sprint was won in a time that would not have made even the final in the olympic games at Beijing 2008 speaks volumes with regards to where the commonwealth games stands.

As someone new to the site, I offer this perspective. Back when the Empire Games kicked off, there were no other major multi-sport competitions apart,from the Olympics, for athletes to gain experience. Now there is a plethora- we just had the Youth Olympics for God`s sake. IMO, the Comm Games is a victim of its own success, and complacency. to explain, other regions, organisations,political affiliations etc. have copied the model and marketed it so much more effectively. Those small countries will still get to compete, just not with the world wide exposure the Comm games delivers. I really hate to say this, but I think Dan is correct in his assertions that the Comm Games is past its use-by-date, which is a real shame as the tag of the "Friendly Games" was something to applaud.

TCunbeliever - you said "as a viewer it’s a great chance to see some top-class Hockey, Netball, Cycling and Athletics on prime-time television." But the standard of sport at the commonwealth games is NOT top-class ! (Certainly so far as the athletics program is concerned). As I explained in a previous post: The athletics program at the commonwealth games is simply NOT to olympic or world class standard. At Delhi 2010, Lerone Clark won the 100m sprint in a time of 10.12s – such a time would not have even got him into the final of the 100m at the summer olympics. At Beijing 2008, Darvis Patton finished LAST (8th place) in the 100m sprint with a quicker time of 10.03s (the 100m was won by Usain Bolt in a world record time of 9.69s). Similarly at Delhi 2010, the women’s 4x400m was won by in India in a time of 3:27.77s – at the Beijing 2008 olympics, such a time would have resulted in India finishing last in 8th place (the 4x400m at Beijing 2008 was won by the US team with a time of 3:18.54 – over 9 seconds faster!). These are only a few examples of the vast difference in standard between the commonwealth games and the summer olympics / world championships.

With regards to being "angry" I think the people who should be angry are the CGF (commonwealth games federation), given that this 2010 edition of the games has done to the CWG brand, what the Delhi dogs did to the bed linen in the athletes' village (as exposed by the photos a few weeks ago). The CWG is already an event that is struggling for it's place on the international sporting calendar and overall significance (eg. winning the 100m title in a time that would not have even got you into the final of the olympics or world championships), and after the Delhi 2010 games it is in even worse condition. Even more of the top athletes didn't compete this time round compared to previous games. The CGF should be very angry indeed!! With regards to "getting over it or coming through it," my question is: How is the CGF/ CWG in general going to recover from these Delhi games? The next games are in Glasgow, but wiith regards to broadcasting, TV channels are now shying away! The BBC has turned down the opportunity to be the host broadcaster of the 2014 games is set to pull out of its broadcast deal to cover the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014, which would have saved millions of pounds for the event. Check out the following link: http://www.thedrum.co.uk/news/2010/10/08/16027-bbc-will-not-be-host-broadcaster-of-glasgow-2014-commonwealth-games/ As for the athletes, it will now be more routine (a precedent has been set) for the big name athletes to not attend, it will be very difficult to attract them back and market the CWG in the future. This is a problem that been acknowledged by Perry Crosswhite (Australian Commonwealth Games Association chief executive). During a recent interview with the smh, he (Perry Crosswhite) was quoted as saying: "Unfortunately ... there's no money in the Commonwealth Games and I don't think there ever will be as far as paying individuals to come or paying gold medal reward schemes or things like that......So you're always going to have a difficulty attracting people that might be able to earn more money elsewhere......My view is that you've got a lot of work to make sure that Glasgow (2014) has a good turn-up (by athletes)......My view is that we've got to work hard to probably define what the Commonwealth Games is." Check out the full article at this follwing link: http://www.smh.com.au/commonwealth-games-2010/comm-games-news/focus-on-athletes-says-australian-games-boss-20101010-16dqs.html

Such anger Dan. I feel quite sorry for you there. I do hope, quite genuinely, that you come through it ok.

We came with suitcases you came with ball and chain, ball and chain, ball and chain....how about those netballers!!!! lol

Ivan Ho - you said -"Michael Johnson is an American. Quoting him on the Commonwealh Games is a bit like quoting a penguin on life in the desert." Sorry, I simply don't accept that view. Michael Johnson is a world class spirinter, gold medalist at the olympics and world athletics championships, regardless of his nationality, his opinion and comments about an athletics program whether it is at the Commonwealth games, Pan Am games or Olympic games is VERY relevant indeed. Certainly the BBC seems to think what he says is relevant, given that he was hired to commentate on the athletics events during the Manchester 2002 and Melbourne 2006 CWG, despite the fact he's an American, and the USA not participating at the commonwealth games. You said ..." a few sprinters didn't show?" I think the problem (lack of participation of big named athletes) is far more extensive than "just a few." The list of top tier athletes that are absent from the 2010 Delhi games is quite significant. Check out this link titled: "Top 25 stars missing from the Commonwealth Games" http://www.smh.com.au/photogallery/commonwealth-games-2010/top-25-stars-missing-from-the-commonwealth-games/20100929-15wsm.html The athletics program at the commonwealth games is simply NOT to olympic or world class standard anymore (it was back in Vancouver 1954). I think you need to "care to look" at some of the times. At Delhi 2010, Lerone Clark won the 100m sprint in a time of 10.12s - such a time would not have even got him into the final of the 100m at the summer olympics. At Beijing 2008, Darvis Patton finished LAST (8th place) in the 100m sprint with a quicker time of 10.03s (the 100m was won by Usain Bolt in a world record time of 9.69s). Similarly at Delhi 2010, the women's 4x400m was won by in India in a time of 3:27.77s - at the Beijing 2008 olympics, such a time would have resulted in India finishing last in 8th place (the 4x400m at Beijing 2008 was won by the US team with a time of 3:18.54 - over 9 seconds faster!). These are only a few examples of the vast difference in standard between the commonwealth games and the summer olympics / world championships. You said: "As for hosts and venues – the standard for the CWG are world class, second only to the Olympics." Again, this is simply not true. The venues for Guangzhou 2010 Asian Games are bigger and better than those that are being used for the Delhi 2010 CWG. The Guangdong Olympic Stadium (main athletics stadium) will seat 80,000, compared to Delhi's 60,000 seater stadium. Guangzhou's tennis centre will host 12000 seats, compared to the R K Khanna Tennis Complex at Delhi 2010 which has a capacity of 5,015. The list goes on.... CWG venues 2nd only to the olympics? I don't think so.... You said: " how can you claim the pan American or Asian games are world class." I never stated the Pan Am or Asian games were world class. What I did mention is how they are in better shape than the commonwealth games are. There is far more hosting interest in the Pan Am Games and Asian Games. More countries are interested and they are putting forward their major cities for the bidding. For the 2015 Pan American Games, there were bids from 3 major capitals/ no.1 cities in the Americas - Toronto (Canada's largest city), Lima (Capital of Peru) and Bogota (Capital of Columbia). For the 2019/ 23 Asian Games, there is interest from Dubai, Hong Kong, Singapore, Manila etc. Compare that with the 2018 commonwealth games- 2 bids from: Gold Coast (Australia's 6th largest city), and Hambantota (small town in Sri Lanka). Hardly a list of A grade/ world cities. What's quite ironic is that Halifax, Canada (Halifax is the small provincial capital of Nova Scotia) submitted a bid for the 2014 commonwealth games (to be hosted by Glasgow), but then withdrew the bid as it was deemed too expensive at $1.3 billion. The Canadians then decided to put together a $2.4 billion bid for the 2015 Pan Am Games, this time putting forward their no.1 city: Toronto. It's clear where their priorities are - clearly the Canadians view the Pan Am Games to be more valuable/ more worth hosting than the commonwealth games (even though Canada recently hosted the Pan Am Games with Winnipeg in 1999, more recent that the Victoria 1994 CWG in Canada). No-one out of Canada, NZ, Singapore, South Africa really wants to host the CWG , which means that Australia will be hosting again in the space of 12 years...... You said: "You’re sounding like a wounded kiwi Dan." I'm not from New Zealand. Regardless of where I am from, the bottom line is I quote facts and figures. I am not viewing the commonwealth games through a pair of rose tinted glasses, which is what many people on this site seem to doing.

Great to see some true sports fans on Roar supporting these games. Vinay I suspect there's much more interest around Australia than the Roar blogs indicate. Fox would not go live 24 hours on 6 channels (plus more in HD) if there was no interest, and Channel 10 free-to-air the same on their two. I think the Roar is dominated by football fans (of all codes), many of whom just don't appreciate these great sports. I've just watched the marathons and I don't think there is a more gruelling spots event. The Kenyans are truly great runners, with a number of Africans on their tail (Uganda), but those Australians who gutsed in silver and bronze. Wow!! They deserve our support. I'd like to challenge the Roar to write an article for comment on the great sporting moments of these games. The athletes (in all events) deserve more from the Roar than these critical articles the Roar continues to publish.

You're sounding like a wounded kiwi Dan. Michael Johnson is an American. Quoting him on the Commonwealh Games is a bit like quoting a penguin on life in the desert. I'm with Betty b on this - it's a great sporting event, but no one's claiming it as a world championship. I wonder what Michael Johnson thinks of the Kenyan and other African runners at the CWG? If you claim that the commonwealth lacks world class because a few sprinters didn't show, how can you claim the pan American or Asian games are world class without the Kenyans? Or the other African runners, the Chinese and Australian swimmers, the Australian/Canadian (and now UK) divers, the Aust bike team or field athletes? The list is quite long if you care to look. As for hosts and venues - the standard for the CWG are world class, second only to the Olympics. You simply can't compare the Asian or pan-American venues. Sure, there may be room for the C'wealth to drop its standard and reduce hosting costs, but remember India has already hosted a successful asian games. Think of the criticism that has already been leveled at them for Delhi 2010, and how much more intense it would have been if Asian games standard applied.

JF - you said: "Why this continual kicking of the Commonwealth games? ........This all has more to do with anti-anglo sentiment, " I disagree. Yes - there has been a lot of negative publicity in the run up to the Delhi 2010 games, and these games have been severely criticised, but this hasn't really been about being anti-British, it's been about things like dirty athletes' accommodation, incomplete venues, Dengue fever and security. Also, with regards to the siognificance of the CWG and standard of competition - these are valid debates, considering you have some of the world's best athetes deciding not to attend these games (eg. Usain Bolt, Asafa Powell, Chris Hoy, Christine Ohurugu, Victoria Pendelton ), it does raise vaild questions about the significance of these games. Raising and discussing these issues does not make a person "anti-British" by any means. I think

Rabbitz - you stated "....should do we would have less of the black arm band history revisions and little more of a real view of history." I take it you are referring to the Black Power salute at the 1968 Mexico Olympics? Let me point out that the Commonwealth games has NOT been free of political statements. At Edinburgh 1986, 32/59 Commonwealth nations boycotted the Games. The boycott was over the Thatcher Government's links with apartheid goverment in South Africa at that time. The games were boycotted by a large number of African, Asian and Caribbean countries. The commonwealth games are not squeaky clean and should not be viewed through a pair of rose tinted glasses.

Dan - but isn't that the point?

Mister Football - you said: "I sort of cringe at the fact that Australia end up winning close to half the gold medals." I wouldn't be too concerned in all honesty if I were you... Sure, Australia is winning most of the gold medals, but it really is NO big achievement. Some of the big sporting powers are simply not there eg. USA, China, Russia, Germany. Also, Great Britain is competing as 7 different nations, rather than under the united Great Britain team that they send to the olympic games. Also, the home nations (British teams) have sent weakend teams to the Delhi games eg. Chris Hoy, Victoria Pendelton, Christine Ohurugu , who all won olympic gold medals are not attending these Delhi 2010 games, not to mention several Jamaican stars like Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell are simply not there. Winning 70-80 gold at a commonwealth games does NOT translate into international success at an Olympics or world championships. Remember – at the Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth games, Australia won 84 gold compared to England won 36 gold medal. Bid gap there. However at the 2008 Beijing Olympics, Great Britain won 19 gold compared to Australia’s 14 gold medals. The addition of USA, Russia, China and a unified Great Britain team makes a huge difference. For example – it is important to point out that at Delhi 2010, Australia have won 14 commonwealth gold medals in cycling. In contrast, at Beijing 2008, Great Britain won 8 olympic gold medals in cycling, Australia won zero gold medals at Beijing, just 1 silver….. The Australian team performance at a CWG is NOT an indicator as to how the Australian team will perform on the global stage, nor does it indicate where Australian athletes rate/ rank on the international stage.

I would argue that the Commonwealth Games is a great event for thousands of sports people around the world. To me it's not about who wins the most Gold or even about the spectators. It is primarily an event for the athletes who come from all over the world. And it is a great thing for these athletes to be able to represent their countries in all of the various sporting disciplines, as there are very few high-profile sports 'carnivals' where track and field athletes, Netball, Hockey, Squash, etc can compete. So why not let them. Also as a viewer it's a great chance to see some top-class Hockey, Netball, Cycling and Athletics on prime-time television, as quite a few of these sports (especially Hockey) tend to get overlooked quite a lot.

Vinay thanks for that, pefect timing! Punter seriously, pull your head in.

Vinay, For a Hockey game, AFL would kill for that sort of exposure. Unfortunately Australians don't care for world games.

betty b,Mister Football..game on at 5PM..it will be one of the most watched events in the world this year. A potential audience on TV of 250 million. However doesn't seem to have much interest around Australia or even on the Roar.