What is an athletics stadium for?
Friday, November 7th, 2008Next year the world Athletics Championships will be in Berlin. Now every two years, these championships were kicked off in 1983, intended to be held every four years, and the first host city was the Finnish capital and athletics hotbed Helsinki. Last year it was Osaka, Japan. In 2011 Daegu in Korea will play host. After Helsinki it was Rome, then Tokyo, Stuttgart, Gothenburg… not in the UK, and not the US either, surprisingly. 2013 will be Moscow, by the way.
The London Olympic bid was won because it promised a legacy, for London and for Britain. The International Olympic Committee were very close to handing the games to Paris because the French infrastructure is so good: the transport system is in need of little improvement, and the main stadium is already there. But the IOC was swayed by the gaggle of smiling little Londoners who featured in the bid, and with their future in mind, awarded the 2012 Olympic Games to London. That legacy is about participating in sport, getting fitter and healthier, against a tide of vacuous, shallow, materialsitic, self-serving X-Factor aspiring, Premiership ogling ambitions that promise millionaire status for one or two, and obese oblivion for the rest.
Since that day, the question of what to do with the London stadium after the three weeks of the Olympcs has been a knotty one. To pay for itself, and hence avoid the taxpayer being heavily out of pocket, the stadium must go to a big football club, with the all the attendant huge revenue that that would imply, ran the first argument, and then it seemed to be just a question of seeing whether that club would be West Ham, or Leyton Orient, or whoever.
Then it looked like one or two people remembered why that stadium is being built in the first place - to provide a legacy for those little Londoners - and then the talk was of keeping the stadium for athletics.
Then IOC boss Jacques Rogge, bless him, said it was probably better to have the stadium converted to some big professional sport (football, maybe?), citing the stadium built for the Atlanta Olympics (remember them?) in 1996 now being used for pro baseball - ‘which keeps people interested in sport’, he says. Keeps fat Americans interested in sitting in a stand eating hotdogs, keeps dollars going into the same old pot of pro baseball, gets kids to think of how they will spend their dollars and behave when they are older, on watching baseball, some might say. Not a great legacy for the future health of kids in Atlanta, but there are so many good college tracks that access to facilities for the few who choose to run and jump and throw is not a huge problem.
Now IAAF President Lamine Diack has expressed his great regret that this is the case. The USA does not have an athletics stadium, he says, that can host the World Championships. This despite the fact that the USA has hosted two recent Games. In both cases the stadiums are now used for pro sport, LA for American football, Atlanta for baseball. This is ‘nothing to be proud of’ says Diack, pointing out that athletics is the core Olympic sport, yet it is struggling to attract kids to it, when football in the UK, and basketball and football in the US, for example, have such a stranglehold; and urging London to keep a venue where world class runners can duke out a World championship and where kids who watched them can turn up and train or compete a week later.
Let us keep the Olympic Stadium for athletics. Dual use is a possibility - the success of the Stade de France, which has hosted an Athletics World Championships, and World Cup finals in rugby and football, is a shining example. I like football a lot - hate how it is developing, though - and if the end result of all these Olympic shenanigans is more football, more money going into the same pot, more promotion for Sky and Nike and adidas, then I won’t be held responsible for my actions. (Only joking, arson was the furthest thing from my mind.)
Happy campaigning!
