***The London 2012 Olympic Games Thread***

[Big_Rudy]

Blagh,blagh,blagh. The only reason to watch the Summer Olympics is the USA beach volleyball team. Need I say more!

Really? Ouch! Different standards, I guess .

 

[Danilo]

Especially love sports and i really enjoyed the Olympics Games in London, organization, opening, closing, games, athletes, congratulations UK!

But not like soccer in Brazil, i was ashamed of soccer players from Brazil National Team in Olympic Games, they do not represent the true brazilian soccer were careless, arrogant, irresponsible in the field and the result was the silver medal, and the Mexican National Team winning the gold, with merit,

that's what i always say here in Brazil:

This is the king:

This is only the court jester:

 

[Pothole]

Seriously? You son plays curling of all sports and you have the guts to come and piss on such physically intense, tactically complex and technically challenging sports like beach volley, water polo or field hockey? ???

Curling is the 2nd most popular sport in Canada behind hockey. and FYI, it's just my opinion, besides beach volleyball, which is popular for obvious reasons, water polo and field hockey are hardly 'popular' sports.

 

[onemorechance]

If we started kicking sports out of the Olympics for not being popular, we wouldn't be left with much

 

[Bowman]

Olympics 2012

My All-Time favorite sport in the Olympics is Poker. To see all peoples of all Nations come together and just take eachother's money with the greatest of hands or nothing at all, that's what it's all about. Well, it should be. This is my vote to get Poker into the Olympic's.
Wrestling would be the next of my favorites, along with the Swimming events.
Really sad to see that on the final day two Egyptian wrestlers were late so therefore disqualified from competitions. Abdou Omar Abdou Ahmed, a 66kg freestyle, and Saleh Emara a 96kg wrestler. You would think they at least have a friend with them making sure no one or nothing interrupts them from arriving in a timely fashion. Could there of been other reasons than them believing they were scheduled at 1pm, as the time had been moved up on the final day so the closing of the London Olympics all matches been played?
Instead of medals, they should be given watches maybe.

 

[Coffee]

If we started kicking sports out of the Olympics for not being popular, we wouldn't be left with much

So true.

For me one of the main thing about the Olympics, is to watch sports that I have not watched much in four years. Of course i look at my favorite sports as well. But it is the diversity that makes the Olympics special for me.

 

[Big_Rudy]

So true.

For me one of the main thing about the Olympics, is to watch sports that I have not watched much in four years. Of course i look at my favorite sports as well. But it is the diversity that makes the Olympics special for me.

Agree 100%. That's one of the main attractions of the Olympics for me.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

Synchronized swimming may not be a sport but it's absolutely hilarious.

 

[Pothole]

If we started kicking sports out of the Olympics for not being popular, we wouldn't be left with much

You misunderstand my meaning of popularity, countries who participated In mens water polo and field hockey 12 teams for both events. For women, 8 in polo and 12 in field hockey. The excuse given by the IOC for not allowing women to compete in ski jumping at the winter olympics, is that not enough countries compete.

 

[Colbefc]

I apologise, as someone pointed out there is one glaring omission from my list of sports that should not be in the Olympics, football should never be in it, and I agree that BMX being included is just a joke.
By the way Golf is included in the 2016 games

 

[Gesshoo]

Table Tennis has been in for years, so why not Tennis? And if cycling is in, why not BMX (actually enjoyed the little I saw of the BMX)...nobody really likes the synchronised stuff, but that's about all I have issues with....

 

[Big_Rudy]

I think was Col who felt that if the Olympics was not the pinnacle of your sport (e.g. there was a more important championship) then your sport should probably not be in the Olympics. I agree in spirit. Table Tennis, as far as I know, has no international championships that would supercede the importance of the Olympics. Tennis obviously does. If your sport considers the Olympics an afterthought to some degree, it probably shouldn't be an Olympic sport, imo.

 

[Egon Towst]

....... Field Hockey .........

Unfortunately, hockey doesn`t work very well on TV. It is difficult to follow the action, because it`s too fast and the ball is too small, but the Olympic hockey stadium was packed for every match.

If you ever get a chance to watch a live match between first class teams, I would recommend you try it. You might change your mind - I did. The speed of the game and the level of skill on display is impressive. It makes football look pedestrian (no pun intended).

 

[BelgoSuisse]

You misunderstand my meaning of popularity, countries who participated In mens water polo and field hockey 12 teams for both events. For women, 8 in polo and 12 in field hockey. The excuse given by the IOC for not allowing women to compete in ski jumping at the winter olympics, is that not enough countries compete.

You are such an ignorant fool. Team sports have a reduced number of countries taking part in the olympics because there is not enough time within two weeks to make a tournament with a large pool. The soccer world cup, for instance, requires a full month to host a 32 teams tournament. So instead, for the olympics there are pre-olympic tournaments all over the world that award the qualifying spots. Loads of countries do take part in these pre-olympic tournaments.

FWIW, in the history of the olympic field hockey competition, even though it used to be dominated by India, there have been olympic medalists from all continents: North and South America (USA and Argentina), Africa (Zimbabwe), Oceania (Australia and New Zealand), Asia (India, Pakistan, China, South Korea and Japan) and Europe (Netherlands, Germany, UK, Spain, Czeckoslovakia, Denmark, Belgium, Russia). That sounds pretty global to me.

The only sport that arguably does not deserve its spot in the olympics is men's soccer, as it is the only olympic sport where the very best players in the world do not take part in the competition. Every other sport where the very best in the world compete is worthy, imo.

 

[Coffee]

You are such an ignorant fool. Team sports have a reduced number of countries taking part in the olympics because there is not enough time within two weeks to make a tournament with a large pool. The soccer world cup, for instance, requires a full month to host a 32 teams tournament. So instead, for the olympics there are pre-olympic tournaments all over the world that award the qualifying spots. Loads of countries do take part in these pre-olympic tournaments.

FWIW, in the history of the olympic field hockey competition, even though it used to be dominated by India, there have been olympic medalists from all continents: North and South America (USA and Argentina), Africa (Zimbabwe), Oceania (Australia and New Zealand), Asia (India, Pakistan, China, South Korea and Japan) and Europe (Netherlands, Germany, UK, Spain, Czeckoslovakia, Denmark, Belgium, Russia). That sounds pretty global to me.

The only sport that arguably does not deserve its spot in the olympics is men's soccer, as it is the only olympic sport where the very best players in the world do not take part in the competition. Every other sport where the very best in the world compete is worthy, imo.

The "men's" soccer/football do stand out a bit. Nevertheless I still want to have it the Olympics. It really is not men's football but under-23 in the the Olympics today (with max 3 players over the age of 23 in each squad). But I may be in minority since i like to watch under-21 championships and so on.

Unfortunately I think it is unlikely to be changed to men's football, instead of under-23, anytime soon. (Some major leagues are up and running. So some clubs would probably not want to see there stars away.)

All this talk of only the best sportsmen in the Olympics. Time do change a lot, is not that long ago since all professional sportsmen was banned from the Olympics (1984/1988?) Back then only amateur (not making any money at all from sports, sometime not even a completely different sport) was allowed to take part. Thankfully that have changed

 

[Big_Rudy]

All this talk of only the best sportsmen in the Olympics. Time do change a lot, is not that long ago since all professional sportsmen was banned from the Olympics (1984/1988?) Back then only amateur (not making any money at all from sports, sometime not even a completely different sport) was allowed to take part. Thankfully that have changed

Depends on why you watch the Olympics, I guess. I much prefer the amateur days when you got to watch athletes that dedicated themselves to their sport simply for the love of sport and competition. Back then, if I wanted to watch the pros in any sport, there was always that sport's championships so I could still see the pros as much as I wanted. Nowdays, it just gets tougher and tougher to find true amateur athletics getting any kind of coverage. Unfortunately, times have changed .

 

[Coffee]

Depends on why you watch the Olympics, I guess. I much prefer the amateur days when you got to watch athletes that dedicated themselves to their sport simply for the love of sport and competition. Back then, if I wanted to watch the pros in any sport, there was always that sport's championships so I could still see the pros as much as I wanted. Nowdays, it just gets tougher and tougher to find true amateur athletics getting any kind of coverage. Unfortunately, times have changed .

True the amateur version had it's charm. But at least in the end (1984[I am to young to have any opinion about earlier]) it was not working fairly, with "state sponsored" "amateurs". Also i think it was a bit hypocritical to have sponsors for the 1984 games, but not allow sponsorship of the participant.

Regardless I think that the commercial way was the right way to go. I do not think we would have had so nice arenas (even the temporary one) and coverage lately with out it.

 

[Kenzie 96]

Synchronized swimming may not be a sport but it's absolutely hilarious.

Could someone place a warning on this post, christ, I'll have nightmares for a week.

 

[Big_Rudy]

True the amateur version had it's charm. But at least in the end (1984[I am to young to have any opinion about earlier]) it was not working fairly, with "state sponsored" "amateurs". Also i think it was a bit hypocritical to have sponsors for the 1984 games, but not allow sponsorship of the participant.

Regardless I think that the commercial way was the right way to go. I do not think we would have had so nice arenas (even the temporary one) and coverage lately with out it.

Well, that has been a debate going back quite some time. What, exactly, constitutes an amatuer? I think that's why, ultimately, they just opened the games up to the pros. Too hard to police who is and isn't an amatuer otherwise.

 

[Coffee]

Well, that has been a debate going back quite some time. What, exactly, constitutes an amatuer? I think that's why, ultimately, they just opened the games up to the pros. Too hard to police who is and isn't an amatuer otherwise.

I agree completely. To hard to put it in practices. Even if one managed come up with a good definition.

 

[BelgoSuisse]

This whole amateur >>> professional thing is ridiculous, imo. Requiring athletes to be amateurs is essentially a nostalgia of a past where only an aristocratic elite few had the means to dedicate their time and energy to sports, while working class scum was not meddling with the aristocrats' hobbies. To a large extent, that's 19th century class warfare and it pretty much disgusts me, tbh.

 

[Big_Rudy]

This whole amateur >>> professional thing is ridiculous, imo. Requiring athletes to be amateurs is essentially a nostalgia of a past where only an aristocratic elite few had the means to dedicate their time and energy to sports, while working class scum was not meddling with the aristocrats' hobbies. To a large extent, that's 19th century class warfare and it pretty much disgusts me, tbh.

Well, I see your point and I agree that that has always been an issue. Unfortunately, it always will be. Rich v. Poor has always been a struggle, and imo, divides people even more than race. An unintended side effect of allowing pros in the Olympics, though, has been the punishment of poorer countries. If you allow a wealthy nations' pros to play, and give them access to all the benifits available to them as multi-millionaires in an affleuent nation; how is even an amazingly talented amatuer from a poorer nation who can't afford all the specialized training supposed to compete with that?

 

[Coffee]

This whole amateur >>> professional thing is ridiculous, imo. Requiring athletes to be amateurs is essentially a nostalgia of a past where only an aristocratic elite few had the means to dedicate their time and energy to sports, while working class scum was not meddling with the aristocrats' hobbies. To a large extent, that's 19th century class warfare and it pretty much disgusts me, tbh.

Well I agree that amateur in the Olympics is in the past and that it is better this way. But I do not agree with the rest.

Money still matters regardless of amateur or professional. As Big_Rudy indicated, perhaps even more so now days.

The compare the Gross National Product list and the list of Olympics medals per nation reference is still relevant.

IMO amateur sport has a important impact on population health, as well as that it can be very fun to participate in and watch. So nothing wrong in promoting it.

 

[BelgoSuisse]

Money still matters regardless of amateur or professional. As Big_Rudy indicated, perhaps even more so now days.

The compare the Gross National Product list and the list of Olympics medals per nation reference is still relevant.

Yes, but on the other hand, you would not have so many Jamaican sprinters or Kenyan marathoners if it was not possible to become a professional in those sports.

The sports that the high GNP countries absolutely dominate are the truly amateur sports.

 

[t1tpfdc]

There were a few stories of true amateurs participating in this Olympics. But it is nearly impossible to distinguish amateur from professional these days.
If they have a contract with their club and are paid money for playing.
Students who get scholarships for playing a sport.
Athletes who are given sometimes large sums of money by their national sports federation to pay for training.
When the Soviet Union was almost unbeatable in ice hockey, their players were amateurs because they didn't have contracts and were not paid for playing the sport. They were in the Army! Does anybody buy that line?

Of the sports included this time, cannot understand how/why BMX got in there. Probably mountain bike also, but cannot say cuz I've never watched it.
And as I said before, beach volleyball should definitely not be there. Ass-watching is one of my favorite passtimes, bit it is not an Olympic sport! Saw an article that FIBA is pushing to get beach soccer added to the Rio games. I sure hope that does not happen ...
Just looked at the list again and see that Trampoline was in these games. Really? Is this their first time? Why?
There are a number of sports that look interesting. Land hockey is one for sure, but I can't see the damned ball! Same problem with ice hockey, unfortunately.
So far as many of the other sports that I don't watch; taekwondo, water polo, synchronized swimming, fencing, etc. Let them have their 15 minutes of fame every four years. I have no opinion.
Before these games, I would probably readily have voted to exclude Track cycling/velodrome. Now I am looking forward to seeing it again!
Don't care at all if football is in the Olympics, but if you exclude that, then you would have a good argument for excluding basketball also. And I Definitely do Not want that!