Apologies to all or any of you who have simply rushed back from your closest Westfield looking centre, grabbing the most recent Olympics-themed burger from McDonald's on the manner home to settle in for the evening's action from London.
This is an unashamed critique of the sham called the Olympics - a sporting spectacular that's extremely an over-commercialised celebration designed for the profit on an previous boys network, additional intent on creating cash than celebrating sport.
Where to start? perhaps the $54m gap ceremony. What a waste of cash. every Olympics puts pressure on successive host to form this extravaganza larger, higher - and dearer. At what cost? London and England have enough troubles in their back yard than to gloss them over with a glitzy celebration.
Think back to the not-so-long-ago riots that enveloped and scarred the country. pay the money on upgrading those awful housing estates. No? Oh well, simply lightweight the flame and find on with the show.
And what have the primary few days thrown up?
Plenty of empty seats is that the lasting impression. way too several empty seats when general fans cannot get them as a result of events have apparently been sold out. It's a humiliation. begin staring at the allocations given to those on the "gravy train" who then fail to point out.
Swimming heats that feature 3 competitors? These appear to be designed to cater for the athletes who don't have any show of advancing. It saves them the embarrassment of finishing to this point behind the real contenders that viewers marvel why they're there the least bit. and that is the question - why are a number of these athletes concerned once they are therefore clearly not up to standard?
What concerning the questionable sports. Why do the Olympics glorify shooting? because the world reels in horror at the most recent mass-murder in Colorado and yankee gun laws are once more questioned, Olympic viewers are inspired to applaud girls with pistols larger than those carried by "Dirty Harry" firing at targets. Sport?
The men's soccer competition? Why ought to the Olympics embody an age-restricted class, particularly when it involves the world's biggest game? Having under-23 squads boosted by "a few previous men" makes a mockery of soccer. Roger Federer and Serena Williams are at the tennis, Tour de France winner Bradley Wiggins rode cycling's road race nonetheless most of world's best soccer players are absent. maybe petty it's Olympic jealousy at FIFA's World Cup; world sport's alternative major sham when it involves commercialism and previous boy networking.
The predictable doping scandals that have already reared their ugly heads and nobody has even started running round the track nonetheless. it is a unhappy indictment on what the Olympics became - a necessity to try to to something to do to induce a gold medal.
It's early days for the London extravaganza however way too several anomalies are already hidden amongst the real achievements to appease the sensation that the Olympics leave themselves way too exposed to the mercies of the sporting cynics.
This is an unashamed critique of the sham called the Olympics - a sporting spectacular that's extremely an over-commercialised celebration designed for the profit on an previous boys network, additional intent on creating cash than celebrating sport.
Where to start? perhaps the $54m gap ceremony. What a waste of cash. every Olympics puts pressure on successive host to form this extravaganza larger, higher - and dearer. At what cost? London and England have enough troubles in their back yard than to gloss them over with a glitzy celebration.
Think back to the not-so-long-ago riots that enveloped and scarred the country. pay the money on upgrading those awful housing estates. No? Oh well, simply lightweight the flame and find on with the show.
And what have the primary few days thrown up?
Plenty of empty seats is that the lasting impression. way too several empty seats when general fans cannot get them as a result of events have apparently been sold out. It's a humiliation. begin staring at the allocations given to those on the "gravy train" who then fail to point out.
Swimming heats that feature 3 competitors? These appear to be designed to cater for the athletes who don't have any show of advancing. It saves them the embarrassment of finishing to this point behind the real contenders that viewers marvel why they're there the least bit. and that is the question - why are a number of these athletes concerned once they are therefore clearly not up to standard?
What concerning the questionable sports. Why do the Olympics glorify shooting? because the world reels in horror at the most recent mass-murder in Colorado and yankee gun laws are once more questioned, Olympic viewers are inspired to applaud girls with pistols larger than those carried by "Dirty Harry" firing at targets. Sport?
The men's soccer competition? Why ought to the Olympics embody an age-restricted class, particularly when it involves the world's biggest game? Having under-23 squads boosted by "a few previous men" makes a mockery of soccer. Roger Federer and Serena Williams are at the tennis, Tour de France winner Bradley Wiggins rode cycling's road race nonetheless most of world's best soccer players are absent. maybe petty it's Olympic jealousy at FIFA's World Cup; world sport's alternative major sham when it involves commercialism and previous boy networking.
The predictable doping scandals that have already reared their ugly heads and nobody has even started running round the track nonetheless. it is a unhappy indictment on what the Olympics became - a necessity to try to to something to do to induce a gold medal.
It's early days for the London extravaganza however way too several anomalies are already hidden amongst the real achievements to appease the sensation that the Olympics leave themselves way too exposed to the mercies of the sporting cynics.
No comments:
Post a Comment