I like the idea of some random island being bought by the IOC, a massive development effort to build up hotels, venues, supporting infrastructure (roads/transport), then using that as the host 'country' every 2 years and otherwise maintaining it as a tourist attraction, a giant park for visitors to ski/surf/run/bobsled/skate to their hearts content.

Because the Greek economy is so robust and stable?

I would get all member nations to chip in for permanent facilities. As for why Greece, it's pretty obvious isn't it.

This is comedy.http://gawker.com/...re-fucked-1782463214[/quote[/url]]

Blatant. I say tragic/comic.

Here is another gem from Rio:

http://edition.cnn.com/...-security/index.html

"Rio police tell tourists they won't be able to protect them"
"The state's police officers vented their anger Monday with a sign saying, "Welcome to Hell," outside Rio's main airport. "Police and firefighters don't get paid, whoever comes to Rio de Janeiro will not be safe," the sign said."


On the other hand the official Rio Olympic site has a different massage:

https://www.olympic.org/...ead-of-olympic-games

"Michael Temer, Interim President of Brazil, says the host city has been transformed and is safe and ready to show its well-proven ability to host major international events."

Both are from the last 1-2 days. It is a comedy.

I agree and think of all the past hosting cities, Los Angeles is the best.

What would be better going forward for both FIFA and the IOC, is to do one of two things:


1. Go back to previous hosts that have all the facilities and infrastructure in place.


2. Only go to countries like China, that because of it's non-democratic and totalitarian government, it can just wave a magic wand and make everything just perfect! Cost be damned

For the world cup, this is an easier undertaking, since you'd just have to lower the bar to which they'd accept a passable stadium. Most of the competitive countries probably have the requisite 5-6 stadiums already in place since those same countries usually have a home league. Ok - so you'd probably need more stadiums than this, and you'd really need to lower the bar in terms of size/quality, but its doable. You're favouring Europe and the Americas if you do this, but if you don't need the shiny new stadium in the middle of nowhere that will never get used again, its doable.

For the Olympics, you're right - its probably former hosts and the odd totalitarian regime who could still pull it off. How after all - how many cities, let alone countries, have a world class swim venue within driving distance of a world class velodrome? Perhaps the solution here is just to allow countries to host, rather than cities while also lowering the bar in terms of facility quality.

Or maybe just add a sustainability criterion to the selection process. Host cities lose points if they blow a ton of money on a stadium in the middle of nowhere? In order to host, you need to prove how these facilities will continue to be used long after the Olympics have come and gone...

It's June less that 2 months before the games start and Brazil still have organizational issues.
https://www.theguardian.com/...y-olympic-games-2016

This has become standard fare now in the run-up to all recent Olympic Games - with the possible exception of Beijing.


With Brazil the situation does seem more acute than in the past - the political and economic situation in Brazil, probably leading to a lot of the problems.


Hosting the Olympic Games and the World Cup of Soccer are massive, and massively expensive under-takings. Recent studies have shown that no matter how you slice it or dice it, no matter what positive spin the IOC/FIFA and the local politicians and proponents put on it, these sports events are a net economic negative for the host country/region.


What would be better going forward for both FIFA and the IOC, is to do one of two things:


1. Go back to previous hosts that have all the facilities and infrastructure in place.


2. Only go to countries like China, that because of it's non-democratic and totalitarian government, it can just wave a magic wand and make everything just perfect! Cost be damned

Why the hell does the IOC care if the city can afford it or if they will properly use the facility afterwards? All they care about is that the job gets done, it is not their concern how it is paid for or if it is practical long term.

It's a good video. I like the part where they have a clear wall as you drive past the brand new school but concrete when you go by the slums.

Just reinforces how the IOC are a joke. The corrupt bidding process, the money spent on facilities that will end up sitting vacant and the incredible amounts of money spent while ignoring many of the residents again shows the value in having a single host.

the biggest irony on all of this fiasco, is that these Olympic games just illuminate and highlights all of Brazil's illnesses and problems as a country. A oppose to promote and enhance it. I think Rio set a new higher bar here with these Olympics.

So the Paralympics have a separate venue? I thought the whole point of having the Para's in the same city was to take advantage of the new infrastructure. Bizarre.

The kids from the Favelas have been an issue in Brazil for many years. Did you see the movie 'city of God"?
It was known that the police were simply killing them for years. This was the case before the world cup in 2014 and possibly now. I am not taking sides but it's tragic that this problem is increasing while they host those big events.

https://www.amnesty.org/...olympics-have-begun/

Let's concentrate on the positives per this WSJ article:
http://www.wsj.com/...-olympics-1467921052

note: "a new downtown......NBA players, who will be staying on a ship in the port, are expected to make regular appearances"