Roll on 2012

NOT being a sporty type, I surprised myself by the excitement and elation I felt when I heard we’d won the fight to host the 2012 Olympic games.

A constant theme of news coverage and comedy shows at the moment is typical British self-loathing, the conviction that our Olympic games will be rubbish in comparison to Beijing’s because, after all, we’re British and we’re crap, etc, etc.

Well, the cynics are wrong. Britain deserves to host the next games because we put in the best bid. And after all the newspaper headlines about cost over-runs have been used as chip wrappers, the UK games will be immensely successful and – gasp! – will be something we will all feel proud of.

Having said all that, I did laugh a lot at a comment Jimmy Carr made recently on “9 out of 10 Cats”, when he described the money being spent on the games as “a lot of money for a bronze in cycling.”



Filed under Media, Society, Whimsy

4 responses to “Roll on 2012

  1. “… the UK games will be immensely successful and – gasp! – will be something we will all feel proud of.”

    First of all, don’t kid yourself that this is anything other than a London Olympics.

    And secondly, britologywatch has an interesting post here about how the future of Team GB.

    I’m not sure how holding the olympics in London at a cost of millions will make me proud … of course by that time London could be in a foriegn country, so I guess I’d be just as proud as if the olympics were being held in any other foreign country … which is how I’ll feel anyway.

  2. I couldn’t give a monkey’s about the olympics, billions of pounds wasted.

  3. Johnny Norfolk

    I just wish that Labour could apply the same principles to education. Over 40% of the medal winners have been privately educated, If it was left to Labour we would be back near the bottom. Lets thank John Major for setting the basics for this to happen. Thankfully Labour will be out of power when its our turn so there is a chance it will run ok.

  4. John Aston

    Being cynical I am wondering whether the games could be split into two!

    We could have a ‘Chemical Olympics’ where prizes are won by the competing drug companies who produce performance enhancing drugs. Or perhaps the ‘Mechanical Olympics’…. where the people who manufacture the equipment win prizes.

    Actually I have a serious point; I would love it if competing athletes would compete with the same basic equipment.

    I would suggest the following events:-

    Archery Long Bow ( no accessories just the basic bow) Several distances.

    Archery Horse back. Stationary target arrow released at the gallop.

    Cross-bow section (again no accessories).

    Throwing (e.g. a 5 oz hard ball similar to a cricket or base ball) Competitions for distance and accuracy.

    Spear… competition similar to above.

    Climbing. A vertical prepared wall. Distance, speed etc.

    Roller Skating, speed. No synchronised events. A discipline similar to Cycling!

    The events I would like to see consigned to history:-

    Synchronised diving.
    Snow boarding
    Synchronised swimming PLEASE!!!

    The original games concept was based on strength, speed, accuracy and so on.

    Can you imagine how fascinating the London Games would be if someone declared the competition open and the events began. No strutting and posing, electronic effects.

    Back to basics, save money, test people as it was originally intended.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s