Any figures on relative investment of corporates versus the public?
Then again Redgrave can hardly be called the greatest ever Olympian, I appreciate that you can only beat what's in front of you and he has been very successful over a long period but ultimately you simply can't think about making that claim if you're in a minority sport - ninety nine percent of the world has never had the chance to row one of those boats that Redgrave kept winning in, for all anyone knows I would have been better than him given the opportunity.
I heard, from a so far unauthenticated source (my brother, the other day) that a measly £1bn of the total bill has come from corporate sponsors.
About two-thirds of the organising committee's £2bn operating budget is raised from domestic and international sponsors.
Locog's budget is privately raised, but the Games take place in stadiums and infrastructure provided from the £9.3bn public funding package. Locog's budget is also underwritten by the government, which must make up any shortfall if it fails to balance.
They could save a lot of money by having events all round the country and using more existing stadiums and other facilities as they do in the World Cup.
Greatest ever Olympian? Dunno but seeing as you can win loads of events in swimming it's not comparable to sprinting that's for sure. Free-style is the fastest way to the end and back and compares well to a running race, having the other strokes as events in their own right is like having 100m hop or 100m running backwards as another event. They should get rid of breast stroke etc they're pointless.
Then again Redgrave can hardly be called the greatest ever Olympian, I appreciate that you can only beat what's in front of you and he has been very successful over a long period but ultimately you simply can't think about making that claim if you're in a minority sport - ninety nine percent of the world has never had the chance to row one of those boats that Redgrave kept winning in, for all anyone knows I would have been better than him given the opportunity. And if that seems like a stretch it's not unreasonable to suggest that one of the millions of people from Africa or wherever who never dreamt of rowing might well have been better.
For me, to be the greatest across all disciplines you need to a) be in a sport that is open to pretty much anyone (that rules out dressage or yachting but that should be self-evident anyway) b) win it by a long way or against the odds etc c) and do it more than once. Then once you've used those criteria to whittle it down you start talking about those extra factors that make them special.
Edit: there is some flexibility, a sport that's open to almost all is possible as long as the athlete excelled in the other categories and so on and so forth
Given a few weeks to get to grips with the variables, I bet Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would be able to compete as a world-class volleyball players. I doubt the reverse is true.
Oh man, I know what you mean. I could have been Usain Bolt if only I'd had the good fortune to be really, really, really, really, really good at running.
The comparison really doesn't hold though does it. Because running is a sport as accessable as having a body and rowing involves kinds of weather, equipment, etc that few people will have access to.
Paula Radcliffe for taking a dump during the marathon, and then coming to terms with the fact that it would be the number one talking point of her career from then on.
As far as "greatest ever olympian" stuff goes, agree, but as far as being pointless goes - well, the whole shebang is pointless in the grand scheme of things, it's just a question of pointless stuff that you're interested in vs pointless stuff that you aren't. If you want to take that line, all the fighting stuff could be replaced by a Mixed Martial Arts contest. Which the rifle shooting guys would probably win.Dunno but seeing as you can win loads of events in swimming it's not comparable to sprinting that's for sure. Free-style is the fastest way to the end and back and compares well to a running race, having the other strokes as events in their own right is like having 100m hop or 100m running backwards as another event. They should get rid of breast stroke etc they're pointless.
If you want to take that line, all the fighting stuff could be replaced by a Mixed Martial Arts contest. Which the rifle shooting guys would probably win.
Number Two talking point, surely?
Yeah, the whole thing is pointless, but even given that, the breast stroke is higher up the internal hierarchy of pointlessness than the 100m sprint or even any of the freestyle swimming events."As far as "greatest ever olympian" stuff goes, agree, but as far as being pointless goes - well, the whole shebang is pointless in the grand scheme of things, it's just a question of pointless stuff that you're interested in vs pointless stuff that you aren't. If you want to take that line, all the fighting stuff could be replaced by a Mixed Martial Arts contest. Which the rifle shooting guys would probably win."