Victoria to Perhaps Host The 2026 Commonwealth Games

GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:02

9News papers are reporting this.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/melbourne-set-to-step-into-b…

"Melbourne has emerged as a likely host of the 2026 Commonwealth Games, with the Victorian government confirming an approach from a desperate Commonwealth Games Federation faced with the embarrassment that no other city in its community of more than 50 nations is willing to bid for host-city status."

Apparently feasibility studies are under way to determine if Victoria can justify hosting the event; some other states are not interested. Despite the headline, part of the feasibility is into which regional cities could be involved.

  1. Is the Commonwealth Games event still relevant in these times of continual international competitions, world championships, and of course the Olympic Games?
  2. Should Victoria host these games in 2026?
  3. What do you see are the benefits of doing so?
Sports & Outdoors Commonwealth Games

Comments

  • Muzeeb on 19/01/2022 - 11:05
    +15

    There's a reason no other Commonwealth nation wants it.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:09

      Most likely to be multiple reasons I would think.

      Is this a bit like being last picked for backyard sport teams?

      • Muzeeb on 19/01/2022 - 11:10
        +2

        There's a reason no other Commonwealth nation wants it.

        There are reasons no other Commonwealth nation wants it.

        FTFM

  • DashCam AKA Rolts on 19/01/2022 - 11:06
    +4

    Commonwealth Games; an attempt to keep the royal family relevant.

  • Jimothy Wongingtons on 19/01/2022 - 11:09
    +12

    The year is 2026, you're about to leave the house and put your hand into your coat pocket and find an old mask from 2022 - "Oh man 2019-2025, what a weird period that was,” you’ll chuckle to yourself. Then you’ll pick up your machete and continue across the wastelands via Swanston Street, keeping to the shadows to avoid the roving gangs of cannibal raiders headed by a robot Rupert Murdoch.

    (and it will somehow still be Dan Andrews fault according to the Murdoch Media).

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:11

      Do we need to factor in some new sports then?
      Maybe like those SAS survival tests or similar?

      • 87percent on 19/01/2022 - 11:14
        +2

        Game 1 - go to Coles, try and carry toilet paper, pasta, flour, without getting within 1.5m of anyone

        • Jimothy Wongingtons on 19/01/2022 - 11:20
          +2

          me getting to coles: TP/pasta/flour already sold out

          gunman raider: Sorry bud, the game was rigged from the start cocks gun

    • Ghost47 on 19/01/2022 - 11:11

      Sounds like a neat video game.

      • Jimothy Wongingtons on 19/01/2022 - 11:15

        hello i'd like to re-roll my character please, i've rolled a LOT of 1's when developing my hero..

    • DashCam AKA Rolts on 19/01/2022 - 11:14

      The year is 2026, you're about to leave the house and put your hand into your coat pocket and find an old mask from 2022 - "Oh man 2019-2025, what a weird period that was,” you’ll chuckle to yourself. Then you’ll pick up your machete and continue across the wastelands via Swanston Street, keeping to the shadows to avoid the roving gangs of cannibal raiders headed by a robot Rupert Murdoch.

      Saw that on Reddit, were you the OP? +1 if you were.

  • DemocracyManifest on 19/01/2022 - 11:10
    +2

    It’s a dated event but people will like it and go to it - and compete in it 🤷. International teams will come and spend money, Melbourne has the infrastructure, I can’t see many negatives for a business case. The republican cause won’t be getting off the ground any time soon so…

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:15
      +1

      A lot of Commonwealth countries don't have large economies; most of the athletes and their sporting organisations would need to extensively fundraise just to get to the games. Not much left over to spend freely.
      The article mentions potentially hosting athletes and officials in hotels rather than building a new village; that would limit how many observers would visit.

      • DemocracyManifest on 19/01/2022 - 11:20
        +2

        Building a athlete village would be batshit insane: surely just renting out hotels would be cheaper as suggested

        • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:21
          +1

          Seems logical to me. It just limits how many visitors can be also hosted in the city, which limits the economic benefits.

          • DemocracyManifest on 19/01/2022 - 11:24
            +1

            @GG57: Glamping is all the rage now haha, there’d be some people who would no doubt love it as a alternative to a hotel

  • Ghost47 on 19/01/2022 - 11:10
    +5

    Victoria hosted the Comm games back in 2006, we have all the facilities and infrastructure set up already, we are the sporting capital of Australia so I say, why not?

  • Halo375 on 19/01/2022 - 11:38
    +1

    It will be great… if they do it on the cheap.

    Make it more of a community and regional based affair, keep it low key and it should be good.

  • shaybisc on 19/01/2022 - 11:42
    +5

    It is gratifying to see that most of the world have finally figured out that events like this and its big daddy the Olympics are gigantic con jobs. But not Australia.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:51
      +1

      I think these large events reached a tipping point a couple of decades ago, when commercial sponsorships and similar arrangements such as broadcast rights were required to make them viable.

      Maybe Harvey Norman could sponsor this one?

  • kanmen on 19/01/2022 - 11:51

    Gross. Wouldn't care if it's the Olympics but the thought of anyone from the Royal family here is just ugh.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 11:52

      I'm pretty sure that if someone from the royal family were to attend, it would only be for a few days / events and could be easily overlooked if not interested. That isn't the focus of the games anyway.
      I have a similar feeling when politicians attend these events and get (or expect to be) treated like royalty.

      • kanmen on 19/01/2022 - 12:02

        Arguably it is the focus of the games though, members or former member states of the Monarch coming together in a sign of strength and solidarity under the watchful eye of the Monarchy. The whole thing is gross in general anyway.

        • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 13:22

          Ok, so your vote is a No.

          As devil's advocate, what are your views on the benefits these games bring in having athletes from less-developed countries, which have limited infrastructure and support etc., being able to compete against world-class athletes from UK, Canada, NZ, Aust, India, etc.

          • kanmen on 19/01/2022 - 14:33

            @GG57: Personally find that view a bit colonialist and white savourist which is precisely the problem with the ideology around the Commonwealth games. Why do people who come from developing countries need to participate in games as a reminder of the system and history of oppression that has resulted in their country being what it is now, when they are resource scarce enough as it is? Viewing the games as a means of uplifting and empowering to those in developing countries is as colonialist as it gets. People in developing countries don't need to participate in some empty and meaningless competition as a symbol of their relations to the Commonwealth, or to 'save' them- they need to be able to move forward from the shambles created by the Commonwealth.

            Other types of games exist such as the Olympics and most sports have World Championship competitions anyway.

            • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 14:44

              @kanmen: Fair enough.

              Other types of games exist such as the Olympics and most sports have World Championship competitions anyway.

              That is one of the questions I posed. These games do seem to be irrelevant now.

              Countries choose to remain part of the Commonwealth (or not). I know of at least one that was not even colonialised.
              I'm not saying this is right or wrong, but leaving the decision to the individual countries is surely better than pushing our own views on them.

            • trilby on 19/01/2022 - 16:44
              +4

              @kanmen: That's a bit condescending. Many countries don't fit into the 'white savourist' category. You also forget that Wales, Scotland, Northern Island, Isle of Man etc get to perform under their own country, not GB, and that small Islands like Jersey and Guernsey get the chance to compete on the world stage - I would hardly class them under the down trodden exploited set of nations. It also seems a less commercial that the Olympics (although that wouldn't be hard). The number of athletes competing has been growing, so don't think they would consider it a meaningless competition.

              • kanmen on 19/01/2022 - 16:55

                @trilby: The question was about less developed countries competing in the games. Please re-read the thread before putting words into my mouth. Your point is entirely irrelevant to mine. If those countries want to compete then they can- my criticism is at the notion of the games and what it represents, not the countries that compete in them.

              • DashCam AKA Rolts on 19/01/2022 - 16:58
                +1

                @trilby:

                I would hardly class them under the down trodden exploited set of nations

                A lot of Scots and Welsh would disagree.

                https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/jan/18/not-a-c…

                • trilby on 20/01/2022 - 09:48

                  @DashCam AKA Rolts: I was talking about Jersey and Guernsey - they're even tax havens.

                  • GG57 on 20/01/2022 - 10:05

                    @trilby: I don't understand the correlation with tax haven status.

                    • trilby on 20/01/2022 - 10:08

                      @GG57: Jersey and Guernsey (as well as the other Channel Islands) are filled with the very rich, many of whom use it as a tax haven, even though they enjoy the benefits of being part of GB

                      • GG57 on 20/01/2022 - 10:19

                        @trilby: It's confusing, as we have Great Britain, United Kingdom, and the Commonwealth.

                        Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man are part of the British Isles. England, Scotland and Wales make up Great Britain, while the United Kingdom includes Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
                        Jersey and Guernsey are British Crown Dependencies.

                        Many other countries within the Commonwealth are tax havens (including the United Kingdom). A lot are less developed countries.

                        • trilby on 20/01/2022 - 13:22

                          @GG57: Yes, it is confusing and you are correct - they get the benefits of being a crown dependency without having to pay for it through taxes. And I agree there are many more tax havens where the rich poor divide is a lot greater. Just think it's one of a few outlets where many of these much smaller nations can play without feeling overwhelmed.

  • orangetrain on 19/01/2022 - 11:58
    +1

    The sporting organisation needs to provide proof that it's worth it to government and public with past evidence. Why does a private organisation get to privatise profit with taxpayer money investments? It's bizarre to see the government saying it's worth it to spend with a loss.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 13:23

      I don't think the Commonwealth Games organisation even pretends to be a sporting organisation any more.

  • rektrading on 19/01/2022 - 12:43
    +1

    The Commonwealth Games doesn't make money in a good year. There is no chance for that now that Rona is here to stay.

    Tokyo Olympics primed to lose $30 billion with no way to recoup losses
    By Elizabeth Karpen July 30, 2021 9:35pm Updated
    https://nypost.com/2021/07/30/tokyo-olympics-expected-to-los…

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 13:27

      That article appears to have been published whilst the Tokyo Olympics were still going on. Are there any subsequent stories published about the final (financial) outcome for Tokyo?

      • netjock on 19/01/2022 - 14:17

        Nobody makes money from the Olympics (except for the IOC rip offs). Everyone is left with stadiums and sports facilities that nobody uses enough to justify the cost.

        • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 14:35

          That is the general consensus, but I was hoping that rektrading had a link to a definitive article rather than one that had an expectation.

  • mskeggs on 19/01/2022 - 13:55
    +1

    The government is currently struggling to keep the bread coming, so at least let them organise a circus.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 14:06

      Victoria has an election this year; it may well be a circus if the current government commits to this and if the ruling party changes in that election.

  • netjock on 19/01/2022 - 14:16
    +1

    Send it up to Wodonga and jointly hold it with Albury.

    Best part is all the athletes can get to Wodonga in 2hrs, Melbourne airport to the city is 1hr so makes a lot of sense! Melbourne is already grid locked as it is.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 14:36

      The article suggests that holding some sporting events in key regional areas is under consideration.

  • ifyareckon on 19/01/2022 - 14:29

    Could do without building the athletes village this time around, should be plenty of room at the yet to be completed quarantine facility at Mickleham.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 14:40

      The article suggests using hotels rather than an athletes village.

    • DashCam AKA Rolts on 19/01/2022 - 17:04

      Could do without building the athletes village this time around

      Would be one possible benefit to the average tax payer, housing available after the games. First home-buyers only, no investors.

  • bongom on 19/01/2022 - 14:46

    Was the AFL season impacted in 2006 when they laid the athletic track on the MCG? I remember they had to slightly modify the boundary fence so it would fit.

    • GG57 on 19/01/2022 - 16:41

      Oh no, I forgot that we can't impact the precious AFL!!!

      Obviously, the AFL would have the final say if the games were to be held in Melbourne. And, obviously, there would have to be events held at Docklands stadium (AFL owned) at a hefty price.

  • Trying2SaveABuck on 19/01/2022 - 22:24
    +1
    1. no , it has never been relevant no one cares, it is a pretty rubbish event has been for at least the past 2 decades
    2. no - Olympics and commonwealth games are money pits traditionally thus is why nations dont really want to host the com-games at least some the Olympics has a 'prestige' factor to it which the com-games doesnt….
    3. perhaps some benefits to tourism but the cost of the event would far out weight any benefits due to nations like the usa not being part of it the only main 'travelling' fans you would get would be from the uk

    unbiased opinion most major sporting events dont make money or help nations in the modern era - i think the fifa world cup is still worth hosting due to the high influx of football made tourist but the cost of bribes probably makes it not worth it to get the hosting rights. Every other event is a waste of money the money would be better spent on grass roots sports which long term benefits the nation.

    note i love sport - but the cost of infrastructure, hosting rights etc is simply insane - Commonwealth Games would be low on the pecking in regards to broadcast 'deals' which is where most events make there $$$ from.

  • saltypete on 20/01/2022 - 08:47
    +1

    If it swings a few bucks to Victoria, particularly regional - why not?
    Maybe there is also the option of leveraging some Fed money to build some affordable housing and using it initially as competitor’s accomodation. Every bit helps….

    Will our King Charles bring the horse?

    • cloudy on 20/01/2022 - 11:18
      +1

      Historically, hasn’t it been the case games like this is a drain on the host state instead of bringing it in?

      • jacross on 20/01/2022 - 17:09

        Yes but that's normally to do with the infrastructure cost I think (but don't know).

        • cloudy on 20/01/2022 - 19:01

          Nope

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join