The day was 6th July 2005. Raffles City Convention Centre in Singapore was the venue. The special occasion was the 117th Ordinary Session of the IOC (International Olympic Committee). The purpose was to meet and vote to pick the city to host the XXX modern Summer Olympic Games.
At first, there had been nine cities fighting to hold the 2012 Olympic Games. On the 18th May 2004, these were reduced to five main candidates. Havana, Istanbul, Leipzig and Rio de Janeiro had been ineffectual in their endeavors to influence on technical evaluation and were purged from the continuing procedure.
Five names were put forward to the concluding voting mechanism. The cities chosen for the crucial verdict were London, Madrid, Moscow, New York and Paris. Of these, Paris carried the influence of being the city most likely.
So, the fateful day in 2005 eventually arrived and the IOC met in Singapore to agree a decision that would carry with it colossal budgetary consequences.
The course of action was basic. Each of 104 suitable IOC attendees would take part in a consecutively held number of secret votes. After each ballot, if no candidate city had earned an conclusive majority of the votes cast, the city with the fewest votes would quit and a subsequent ballot be held.
After some anxious rounds of voting, the three topmost challengers emerged from the five short-listed hopefuls. London, Madrid and Paris. Moscow had fallen at the 1st hurdle and New York was eliminated after the 2nd ballot.
Contrary to the fact that Madrid and London had both polled somewhat more votes than Paris in the first two ballots, the French capital was still deemed by many as the favourite to gain the eventual prize. Due to the vagaries of the voting conduct of some IOC delegates, at the next to last voting stage, Madrid, which had lead the race at the 2nd ballot with 32 votes, was stopped polling just 31 votes. This left London confronting Paris in the concluding vote.
The widely held assumption of the press and professional soothsayers was that Paris "had it in the bag".
London's bid had previously been evaluated as having many positive elements in reports drawn up by the IOC in 2004 and 2005. However, the general opinion within the various IOC evaluation committees was that Paris held the advantage over its cross-channel opponent.
Heritage also seemed to be against Britain. Prior bids by Birmingham (1992) and twice by Manchester (1996 and 2000) had all failed rather poorly. Whereas, Paris had contended for the 1992 Summer Olympics and then again in 2008, when it came third behind hot favourite Beijing. The general emotion in the run up to the 117th IOC Session was that Paris was owed a triumphant bid.
The eventual judgement is now history. Celebrations by the GB team within the Convention Centre were more than matched by untamed cries of joy from a big crowd viewing the proceedings live on giant screens constructed in Trafalgar Square, Central London. The whereabouts of the home crowd was, possibly, predictive - the Battle of Trafalgar being possibly the most well known of British triumphs over their long time adversary.
So, London became the first city to have the privilege of hosting the modern Summer Olympic Games thrice, having had the privilege in the summer's of 1908 and 1948.
But, what will be the eventual financial burden to London and its taxpayers?
But, when the Games are seen in the light of history one question will surely remain: Who will end up paying for the 2012 London Olympic Games costs?
Can the British capital do the trick the unusual feat of hosting a modern Olympics and realistically make a profit from it? Or, will a bequest of debt persist long after the visual athletic glories, that surely await us in the Fall of 2012?
No comments:
Post a Comment