Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘london’

A number of years ago, I remember hearing a debate on the radio. The question was whether they should have two separate Olympics: one for ‘clean’ athletes and one for those who openly took drugs.

Even as young as I was (this may have been ten years ago), I thought it was appalling that this was even considered. The drug-filled tournament would not be about breaking records. It would instead be a competition between drug companies on who could make Athlete A run faster, jump higher, throw further. And this assumes that every single drug an ‘athlete’ put into their body wouldn’t be damaging them for the rest of their lives. Drugs always have a price.

I have always had an anti-drug policy in sport, as, I hope, the majority of people have. Nonetheless, you can never completely keep drugs  away from competition. It has been present for as long as drugs were available, and I’m sure there have been one or two fortunate enough to never get caught.

Even the IOC (International Olympic Committee) President, Jacques Rogge, believes London 2012 will not be free of drug cheats. Certainly, a clean games is probably something we can only ever dream of. Rogge says “To say there will be no positive cases would be naive and misleading. I hope it’s the case, but reality tells me that there may be positive cases.” This implies that although there will be cheats, they will be caught. Rogge seems to believe there is enough testing. And so there may will be.

In April, the British Olympic Assocation (BOA) will challenge the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). WADA says that the BOA should not indefinitely ban all of its drug cheats from the Olympics after they have already served a ban, since this would be punishing the athlete twice. The BOA says it is a selection policy rather than a second punishment.

I don’t actually care if it is a second punishment. They deserve it. Let me make it clear, I’m not talking about athletes who take drugs  innocently from their food or without realising the ingredients of Aspirin had changed. I’m talking about those who knowingly and willingly took drugs to enhance their performance.

They should be indefinitely banned from the Olympics. I don’t care if it’s their livelihood and if they’ve already served a five year ban. The Olympic medal is the highest honour an athlete can hope to achieve. Drug cheats do not deserve an opportunity to win one.

The BOA’s policy is a good one. It means that the athletes that represent Great Britain in the Olympics are clean, have always been clean and therefore deserve all the accolades that come their way. I don’t want to see Dwain Chambers win a medal. I don’t even want to see him run at Commonwealth or European or World level, but unfortunately, the BOA don’t see that as a selection issue in these events.

Drug cheats keep rising youngsters off the track. Every time Dwain Chambers has an opportunity to run for a place in the Europeans, a drug-free British youngster is losing out on that chance.

They broke the rules and should face the consequences.

No drug cheats in the Olympics. It’s just not right.

Therefore, I am standing alongside the BOA and hoping that the Court of Arbitration in Sport will agree with them too.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

London is already hosting the Olympics in 2012, and so for some, the bidding for the Athletics World Championships in 2017 is unnecessary. After all, one of the biggest events in world sport is already coming to the UK.

The key word is ‘legacy’. It has been branded about ever since it was revealed London would bid for the 2012 Olympic Games, and the World Championships is a way of ensuring that legacy. If nothing else, it will mean the track will be maintained for at least the next six years. Maintaining the track is incredibly important. Next year, the Olympics 2012 will become part of Great Britain’s history. Keeping that track is an important reminder of the (hopefully) spectacular tournament London will host next year.

Having already watched the Football World Cup disappear off to Qatar, it is difficult to watch London battling them  to host another important tournament. Losing out to Russia was hard enough. Indeed, today, I told someone that the winner of the bid was going to be revealed today. They couldn’t care less. Then I told them Britain was going against Qatar. Then he cared.

For the IAAF, it has appeared as though they have been desperate to take athletics to as many parts of the globe as possible. The last tournament was in Daegu in South Korea and the next two will be Moscow and Bejing. The chairman of UK athletics, Ed Warner says, ““If this does not go to London, a number of other cities in western Europe that might have contemplated bidding for the championships will look at it and say ’What do I have to do to win? Is it impossible?’”

It is, of course, important that sport does go to different parts of the world, but it is also important that it goes to places where sport is already well-supported, and where crowds are guaranteed. The UK has a magnificent history of hosting world sporting events, and should not be prevented from hosting an event because it won’t be somewhere new.

Qatar have already put their money where their mouth is, and have offered to pay the IAAF £5 million to spend as they see fit. For Qatar, financial incentives are clearly their way of winning the tournaments they desire. In this respect, they are able to punch well above their weight. For many, the disappointing Football World Cup decision was indicative of Qatar’s desire to pay whatever it takes.

London, though, has a few important things in its favour.

Firstly, its temperatures aren’t 40 degrees, and conditions are very favourable for marathon runners and other athletes.

Secondly, it will attract the crowds. Qatar has a population of only 1.7 million people, compared to the UK’s 62.2 million. In theory, those that missed out on athletics tickets for the Olympics will be inspired to buy tickets for the World Championships instead. London also has a huge tourist-appeal.

Thirdly, the infrastructure is already in place. While Doha discusses where they will be building, the London bid can show what is already in place – a spectacular stadium which will already have a great history of its own by the time 2017 comes around.

London winning the 2017 games is vitally important if the Olympic committee wish to seal their legacy ideal.

A win also has repercussions for future tournaments, and indeed, other sports such as football. If sporting bodies such as the IAAF decide that sending tournaments to new parts of the world is the ideal, then they are going to begin to lose key support in Europe, North America and Australasia. By looking to attract new supporters for their events, they may actually ostracise the countries that can always guarantee their finances, magnificent stadiums, good human rights records and sold-out venues.

Read Full Post »

I feel so sorry for Sebastian Coe.

On 6th July 2005, I remember going to school with a portable radio so I could listen to the International Olympic Committee’s announcement on who would host the 2012 Olympics. In the cafeteria, the school had filled the room with British flags and put the TV on so the students could watch the announcement. It took a long time for the envelope to be opened, but when it finally was, we all celebrated. Winning the Olympics was a really, really big deal and excitement gripped the country (at least for 24 hours, because the London bombings brought everyone back down to earth the following day).

Since that announcement, the Games have received nothing but negativity. Led, it seems, by journalists who only want to present everything in a bad light, people have found themselves with many reasons to complain.

Too expensive, too much traffic, disruptive, pointless, mayhem on public transport, poor ticketing system, the Stadium will be a white elephant… The complaints are seemingly endless.

Supporting the Olympics in Trafalgar Square

Seb Coe and Boris Johnson are doing their best to deflect the complaints, and have been getting visibly annoyed with the persistent criticism.

In truth, since that day in 2005, I have been nothing but an Olympic supporter. As Boris likes to say, it is on budget, it is on time and it is going to show the best of British.

The fact is that the Olympics are going to cause disruption for a very short period of time. It will be annoying for commuters, and yes, if you’re not a sport fan, the BBC is going to drive you insane for a few weeks. But people need to stop complaining and start looking at what an amazing spectacle is going to be taking place in their country in under a year’s time. After all, it will probably never happen again in our lifetime.

Read Full Post »