The IOC could rue the day Rio was awarded the Olympics

Having attended the Brazil World Cup, what you see on TV will be perfectly fine. What everyone else sees, though, will be a different story. The problems with these Olympics haven't surprised me one bit. The saying 'they couldn't run a piss up in a brewery' certainly applies to Brazilians.

Very sound and realistic arguments against a permanent location. However, the enormous demands placed on host cities by the IOC (who have yet to rein in their own gravy train) are a significant "turn-off factor" for any potential host city. Granted it is never going to be a cheap undertaking but unless the Games contract in size (and that means culling sports) and the capital expenditure required decreases; you are just not going to have cities willing to take it on. Harsh as it may seem, the Olympics will almost certainly have to scale down considerably or they will put themselves out of business.

TBH, the IOC have been writing their own obituary for some times due to the increasingly bloated nature of the events themselves and the demands made of potential hosts. Whilst global and domestic economic factors are the prime factors behind Rio's potential failure; it is also the case where the "chickens have came home to roost" for the IOC before the eyes of the world. Athens was "alright on the night" but its legacy has been more stark than Montreal; Rio has the potential (which hopefully is not realised) for going awry "in real time". They are already finding it very difficult to find hosts for the Winter Olympics, as seen with Beijing being granted 2022 and if Rio goes "belly up", one can hardly see many cities or even countries being eager candidates. Even if Rio "scrapes through"; this is still likely to be the case with most western economies still "feeling the pinch" and public sentiment being far more in favour of public expenditure on necessary public infrastructure, health and education rather than "circuses". We are now seeing this with team selection policy even in major European "Olympic powers" where selection standards are ever more stringent and this will only continue as public funding inevitably contracts. Rio is likely to be the very last "bloated" AUS Olympic team as funding is likely to get much much tighter and a number of non-performing sports/teams lose funding post Rio. An AUS team would never be small but a team of 400+ when the return is probably only going to be 30-35 medals at best ....... and quite probably outpointed on the gold ranking by NZL (shades of 1984) isn't exactly sustainable. And furthermore, the public "care factor" has significantly diminished from what it may have been 10-15 years ago.

Dunno about that. I think any sensible person would tend to ignore any suggestion of yours and instead do something smarter. I'd like to think the ioc are a sensible bunch, but hey...They idiotically caved in and gave the 2022 winter olympics to beijing.

Yes, but if you read my original comment...

Funny you should say that, I remember when Beijing had the games in 2008 and the swimming finals were held in the morning to suit US television.

I think the olympics should move to a Country Host focus rather than city focus.It's too much for 1 city to host.

My point was, it could be a problem for more folks than the IOC if athletes or spectators from around the world start catching zika, and medical authorities have to play catch-up on managing the issue. It's interesting that the North American press is reporting on an almost daily basis on cases of American and Canadian women in early pregnancy with the disease - and the very worrying prospects of what might ensure. The Australian press hasn't caught up with it, but it will if one of our athletes or spectators ends up in the same situation, wondering whether they're giving birth to a badly disabled child.

Who gives a crap about some pampered athletes? What about the tens of thousands of people in poverty who are having are paying the real price for hosting this stupid corrupt event? That's where the real outrage should be focused.

It would be a tragedy for a few hundred people who have lived a pretty sheltered life, most of them. Think about the tens of thousands of people going without adequate education and health services so these athletes can have a memorable time. And FWIW, if you have a bad time in Rio, then you weren't trying at all. The place is gorgeous, the people are excellent, but yes it's a bit of a pain to get around the place. When you look at the topography, you can see why.

At the risk of sounding perhaps unpatriotic. From a strictly viewer point of view. Who gives a stuff how uncomfortable the athletes and people who can afford a holiday in Rio during the Olympics are? When they get on the arena (and on to my screen) they'll either perform under the circumstances or come home with nothing. Viewers will still watch. The stadium could be held together by glue and I'll still watch the 100m finals. The pool could be filled with floaters and I'll just respect the winner a little bit more. Poor athletes get an all expenses paid trip to Rio and complain that they won't have decent A/C or a plasma TV in their room. My shared hostel room of 12 had a window for A/C and two Dutch stoners for entertainment, but I still did a PB on an all-nighter at Carnivale 2006. So it might take the corporate patrons a bit more time to get from one event to another. Maybe our athletes will just have to compete in the same conditions most other countries are exposed to all their careers.

Nice.

And the 1980 and 1984 games being the most politicised of modern memory as well.

Barring any disasters in the form of something like a building collapse, as long as the competitors get to their events on time, who cares? As long as we see them compete, all will be fine. Giving the Olympics a permanent home anywhere would be the death of the Games as we know them. The opening and closing ceremonies (if that's what floats your boat) would become a non-event if hosted at the same place, presumably by the same people. The massive volunteer effort required from a host city would likely fall - especially over time. The number of tourists from around the world who flock to Olympic games every Olympiad would no doubt fall, "seen one Grecian games, seen 'em all". Money to fund the games would fall - host cities fund the games in a big way. Having the IOC fund them, whilst an attractive idea, would simply mean there is less money to fund the Games, resulting in a lesser product. As cool as it was seeing the field events among Grecian ruins, seeing competitors in different locales around the world has its own attraction. Remember the Barcelona pool, the London cycling events/marathon, not to mention the Sydney beach volleyball? Boneheaded and completely unrealistic idea.

The 1936 Olympic games were held in Nazi Germany, but yeah it's only this generation of fans that don't care about the politics...

hear hear and so say all of us.

Well it certainly sounds like we can't hold the NRL Grand Final in Rio.

No they don't. Only Samaranch said that. Rogge and Bach have made efforts to say other things. It made Beijing very angry when they learned Rogge was not going to say it. They begged and pleaded for him to say it, and he stood his ground.