[thecookiemonster]

(Original post by TRS-T)
I think you'll find it is.

1 million people live in Birmingham.

no reply? what a surprise.

[Kolya]

(Original post by TRS-T)
1. Birmingham is not small.

In global terms, it's small.

A global sporting festival needs a large, globally-recognized city.

Birmingham has a small population and nobody's heard of it. London, on the other hand, is one of the largest cities in the world and is universally known and admired.

At least people around the world have heard of Manchester (because of its football clubs). Birmingham doesn't even have that.

[thomas101]

Major events will always go to London. How the rest of the world sees the UK:

[Soft Cat]

(Original post by Kolya)
In global terms, it's small.

A global sporting festival needs a large, globally-recognized city.

Birmingham has a small population and nobody's heard of it. London, on the other hand, is one of the largest cities in the world and is universally known and admired.

At least people around the world have heard of Manchester (because of its football clubs). Birmingham doesn't even have that.

Not to forget to mention its industrial heritage, musical heritage, the birthplace of the computer, the splitting of the atom, the site of the first working railway line etc.

If ever there was an ideal candidate as an alternative to London for a major event it would be Manchester then followed by Glasgow and even Edinburgh despite it's size and unreliable weather. Heck I'd consider Liverpool over Birmingham or even a joint bid from Oxford and Cambridge.

[jerseymackem]

I reckon Jersey 2024 has a nice ring to it ;D


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Astronomical]

Hold up: why would we, the UK, ever even want it to be anywhere but London?

No other city has the infrastructure, size, or reputation to compete with London.

[EnigmaticSpirit~]

(Original post by Astronomical)
Hold up: why would we, the UK, ever even want it to be anywhere but London? The rest of the UK is almost third world in comparison...

Firstly, how can you speak for the whole of the UK?
Secondly, how is the rest of the UK remotely like third world countries? That is a vast exaggeration of the facts on your part.
Finally, cease this insipid snobbery.

[Astronomical]

(Original post by EnigmaticSpirit~)
Firstly, how can you speak for the whole of the UK?
Secondly, how is the rest of the UK remotely like third world countries? That is a vast exaggeration of the facts on your part.
Finally, cease this insipid snobbery.

I didn't say the UK is third world. I said that the rest of the UK is almost third world in comparison to London, the same way that a starving African is poor relative to somebody on minimum wage, or a millionaire is poor relative to a billionaire.

Which is undeniably true. London has better transport, better facilities, is much larger, is far more affluent, and has a global reputation. Nowhere else in the UK even comes close, not even in terms of population.

And snobbery? I'm not even from London.

[AbominableSnowman]

(Original post by TRS-T)
For anyone living north of Birmingham it is invariably "down south".

The reality is that Birmingham is neither north nor south - it is in the Midlands.

If you say so. But if one were to look at Birmingham's position on the globe, one would find that far more people live south of it than north of it; so I stand by my original statement.

[HappyBappy]

Really surprised by the number of people saying Glasgow. I'm from Glasgow, and even I have never given the idea much thought. I'm painfully aware that Glasgow is pretty much unheard of outside the UK. I've actually encountered many people from the UK who have never heard of it- and when they have, gang violence, alcoholism and poverty comes to mind apparently. The IOC wants "sexiness" in Olympic hosts- something that cities like London, Paris, Tokyo etc have. Glasgow just can't compete. It does have a decent transport system though...

Other "candidates"

Birmingham- Not a chance. It's got its population and nothing else that I'm aware of. The Greater Manchester area is likely to overtake the West Midlands in population anyway. No offence, just the perspective of someone who doesn't come from the city.

Edinburgh- Seems quite well known, thanks to its status as "capital" and it's festival. It's just too small, in my opinion, and lacks the infrastucture and topography to stage the event. The entire city is a UNESCO World Heritage Site, limiting potential development as well.

Manchester- In my opinion, the most likely city. Thanks to its football team, its existence is recognised throughout the world. It successfully hosted the Commonwealth Games in 2002 and it has succeeded in re-branding itself in recent years.

[Clip]

The IOC clearly said that they would only consider a UK bid from London.

As for Chichester - we may laugh, but most of the venues for the successful Qatar World Cup bid are smaller than Chichester. One of them is a fishing village smaller than Bembridge on the Isle of Wight.

[YMLT]

(Original post by Clip)
As for Chichester - we may laugh, but most of the venues for the successful Qatar World Cup bid are smaller than Chichester. One of them is a fishing village smaller than Bembridge on the Isle of Wight.

Proud of my little city

We bid for 'UK Capital of Culture' the other year. Think it was probably a bit of banter, but still...

[zippyRN]

(Original post by Acidedge)
I see someone has updated the Summer Olympic Games Wiki entry with Tokyo, Madrid and Istanbul today! It wasn't there when I looked earlier.

I can't believe it'll go to Madrid, with the state of the Spanish economy at the moment, but I wouldn't count Istanbul out of the runnings. The Japanese hosted the Summer Games in 1964 and the Winter Games in 1972 and again in 1998, so it would be "fairer" to give the games to the Turks.

also the last european Olympics before 2012 was the 92 games in Barcelona which might be a little too close for comfort in the eyes of some for Madrid to get 2020

Australia was 1956 and 2000, The Uk is 1948 and 2012 so 1992to 2020 is quite close together especially given the number of places in Europe that could stage an Olympics.

[TM94]

(Original post by TRS-T)
Says the Geordie...

Yes...

[ollier4]

manchester bid twice in the 90s and birmingham bid once in the 90s as well (or maybe it was the otherway round) but both were rejected in the first or second rounds of voting so i guess the IOC views it as london or nothing (bit sad really)

[CJAW]

(Original post by Soft Cat)
Cities I reckon could host an Olympics but have never done so;

New York
Washington DC
Chicago
Dallas
San Francisco
Manchester
Birmingham
Glasgow
Istanbul
Cape Town
Jo'Burg
Delhi
Mumbai
Shanghai
Osaka
Madrid
Milan
Sao Paulo
Buenos Aires
St Petersburg

A St Petersburg Olympics would be incredible.
Edit: Not sarcasm!

[The_Great_One]

Manchester and Liverpool could do it but they wouldn't as they don't have enough money to do so.

[goape]

(Original post by Organ)
So is the East End of London...

Which is far from 99% of London

[Soft Cat]

(Original post by CJAW)
A St Petersburg Olympics would be incredible.
Edit: Not sarcasm!

Well Russia has never hosted an Olympics (Summer) post-Soviet era so I would not be surprised to see Moscow or St Petersburg be in the running in the future given the Winter Olympics in 2014 and then the World Cup in 2018.

[TRS-T]

(Original post by Soft Cat)
More chance of Scunthorpe hosting it than Birmingham.