each team is an under 23 years old team, which may have some of the Pros, and could have 3, though if training with thier clubs is soooo imporatant It would be my guess that these players are doing so.
Players under 23 still play for their clubs, and there are the extra three overage players in each squad. Craig Bellamy was on the British team for example, while his club was already playing the qualifiers for Europe. There are often arguments when international football clashes with club football - the African Cup of Nations causes these problems even more, since it takes place in the middle of the Premiership season.
I think it only partially clashes with real football, as 0 European teams have made it to the medal round (BTW its Korea, Japan, Brazil, and Mexico).
I dunno maybe I misunderstood your point.
Which country you represent isn't the same as which country you play in normally. All four teams in the semi-finals have at least one player playing in Europe - in Brazil's case it's half the squad.
1. East London communities, where working class people lived, have been displaced. How long will they stay on a waiting list for new public housing. I think the Chinese who lived in century-old Hutongs are still waiting for their new housing, how wonderful the virtue of patience is.
2. Did the usual Olympic's promise of jobs and development happen? Prime Minister Cameron's future agenda is laying off government employees, and raising taxes to pay down the national debt. Will the reduction of 50,000 people in the National Health Service still happen? If so, was it worth having minimum--wage Olympic hawkers temporarily selling T-shirts and glow-in-the-dark bracelets?
3. Olympic size-debt will be added to England's already crippling economic crisis. The price tag of the games might reach 24 BILLION pounds. If gold is currently being sold for $1600US an ounce, would Britains say that the price of 24 BILLION pounds for 29 olympic gold medals a 'smashing good' deal?
3. Wonderful new surveillance toys now in place. Probably won't be removed, how surprising. Scanners, car-number-plate and facial-recognition CCTV systems, biometric ID cards, disease tracking systems, new police control centers, and checkpoints. How wonderful. Will the rooftop missiles at least be removed? Well, if the BBC doesn't remind the Brits about them, I suppose the Brits will just get used to them like america's patriot act or america's expanding drone use or america's torture policy. M'eh, perhaps it's best to just aquire Britney Spears' mindset and fully trust your government in everything.
4. At the least, can Brits just answer this one question: Will you still feel the "prestige" from hosting the olympics a week or even a month from now?
BTW, I see from the "2012 Olympics" thread that, as I predicted, the Olympics have once again promoted nationalism/patriotism, a hateful discriminating tool which helps divide a loving and inclusive climate which will lead to world-wide humanity and happiness.
East London communities, where working class people lived, have been displaced. How long will they stay on a waiting list for new public housing. I think the Chinese who lived in century-old Hutongs are still waiting for their new housing, how wonderful the virtue of patience is.
I don't know a great deal about it, but I believe most of those people have found accommodation, some better, some worse. I think there might still be a few in temporary arrangements.
Did the usual Olympic's promise of jobs and development happen?
Prime Minister Cameron's future agenda is laying off government employees, and raising taxes to pay down the national debt.
I don't think it was ever a stated plan that the Olympics would enable us to avoid laying off government employees in times of economic hardships.
They were elected on the back of promises to cut government spending.
Will the reduction of 50,000 people in the National Health Service still happen? If so, was it worth having minimum--wage Olympic hawkers temporarily selling T-shirts and glow-in-the-dark bracelets?
Just because something doesn't save the jobs of NHS workers, that doesn't mean it is therefore worthless.
Olympic size-debt will be added to England's already crippling economic crisis. The price tag of the games might reach 24 BILLION pounds.
I guess someone wasn't paying attention to the closing ceremony. Jessie J emphatically insisted we 'forget about the price tag'. Jeez, some people!
The price tag of the games might reach 24 BILLION pounds. If gold is currently being sold for $1600US an ounce, would Britains say that the price of 24 BILLION pounds for 29 olympic gold medals a 'smashing good' deal?
I'm pretty sure hosting the Olympics is a global status symbol. There may be other reasons to do it too, I guess, but it certainly isn't done to win medals.
Probably won't be removed, how surprising. Scanners, car-number-plate and facial-recognition CCTV systems, biometric ID cards, disease tracking systems, new police control centers, and checkpoints. How wonderful.
I guess I out-cynical you on this count. Number plate recognition has been with us for a long time, but as for the rest - I'm pretty sure it would have come Olympics or no.
Will the rooftop missiles at least be removed?
I hope so.
Well, if the BBC doesn't remind the Brits about them, I suppose the Brits will just get used to them
The BBC is not our only media outlet, you know.
But anyway, the last mention I found about them was on August 13:
quote:Security concerns always loomed over the London Olympics and some of the steps taken - including the missiles on rooftops - were questioned.
At the least, can Brits just answer this one question: Will you still feel the "prestige" from hosting the olympics a week or even a month from now?
I don't remember feeling any prestige from it, so perhaps I'm not your target audience. I would have been happy they were in the UK if I'd scored tickets, but I didn't. The only advantage to them being at home for me, is that the events occur in my time zone for once, which is mildly convenient.
BTW, I see from the "2012 Olympics" thread that, as I predicted, the Olympics have once again promoted {nationalism/patriotism, a hateful discriminating tool which helps divide}
Really? Other than onifre being onifre of course, I must have missed that. Mostly I see discussions about how to measure success, cheering for other countries, some tongue in cheek discussions about this or that. I don't see any terrible division, at best I see exactly what I said - the divisiveness and nationalism is most commonly to be found coming from people in the States. And of course, this is EvCforum, a thread that doesn't devolve into some 'divisive' argument would be an outlier!
The US military has developed a powerful new weapon in the ongoing war in Afghanistan, a "thermobaric" bomb which can suck oxygen out of the cavernous hideouts and render the combatants inactive.
Like the "thermobaric" bomb", your reply sucked all of the oxygen out of my arguments when you compartmentalized each section down to its molecular components. Whether you did this consciously or unconsciously, I feel you neglected the overall spirit of my post. Dronester feels sad. Abandoned. Lonely. Cold.
Nonetheless, let's first quibble and then conclude:
Mod writes:
I don't think it was ever a stated plan that the Olympics would enable us to avoid laying off government employees in times of economic hardships.
Hee. No, it probably was not explicitly stated, thanks for confirming that. But the important part of my argument that you marginalized is that it is a bad choice to order lobster for dinner when one already has not paid for previous meals.
Mod writes:
Just because something doesn't save the jobs of NHS workers, that doesn't mean it is therefore worthless.
Uh, huh. When the 50,000 people in the National Health Service lose their jobs find out about the 25 BILLION pound Olympic cost, do you think they will have as generous a mindset as yours?
Drone writes:
The price tag of the games might reach 24 BILLION pounds.
Mod writes:
I guess someone wasn't paying attention to the closing ceremony. Jessie J emphatically insisted we 'forget about the price tag'. Jeez, some people!
I am unsure who you are referring in your first sentence. A little less encryption please. But, IF the remainder of your paragraph supports the first, then I am concluding you also think the cost is outrageous.
Mod writes:
I'm pretty sure hosting the Olympics is a global status symbol. There may be other reasons to do it too, I guess, but it certainly isn't done to win medals.
We seem to concur then, prestige is likely the best (only?) reason for hosting the olympics. Ok, good.
Mod writes:
The BBC is not our only media outlet, you know.
Yes, thanks for informing me. But I have been repeatedly corrected (usually in very mild tones ) that the BBC is the most liberal, most forthcomingly honest media outlet, and nearly always acts for the public's best interests. Thus, the British most be the best informed culture in the world. (Although your simple, one-sentenced example doesn't exactly support the BBC's typically deep analysis of subjects such as its recent lengthy support and presentation of the DOW corporation, makers of fine products like napalm and responsible for the Bhopal disaster, and proud green sponsor for the Olympics.)
Mod writes:
I don't remember feeling any prestige from it, so perhaps I'm not your target audience.
YOU wrote that the only reason you can imagine for hosting the olympics is a global status symbol. Yet you felt no prestige. It would then seem that 24 BIILION pounds were entirely wasted. Yes?
Mod writes:
Really? Other than onifre being onifre of course, I must have missed that.
Yes, the discussions in the other thread were mostly good-hearted banter. I should have used a winking emoticon to downplay its inclusion in my post. Sorry.
Mod writes:
the divisiveness and nationalism is most commonly to be found coming from people in the States.
Hee, your divisive and nationalistic accusatory reply is very funny and ironic. I likey. But if that wasn't a joke, I think you might be conveniently forgetting the intense rivals in sports matches in Europe that has sometimes erupted in violence and riots.
Sooo, let me try to confirm your stance . . .
Considering both the already fragile economy and liberties, the costS (as described in our posts) of the olympics in London was NOT worth the prestige, because you didn't feel any. Yes?
Yes, thanks for informing me. But I have been repeatedly corrected (usually in very mild tones ) that the BBC is the most liberal, most forthcomingly honest media outlet, and nearly always acts for the public's best interests. Thus, the British most be the best informed culture in the world.
Was this by Americans? It doesn't sound like a typical British view.
(Although your simple, one-sentenced example doesn't exactly support the BBC's typically deep analysis of subjects such as its recent lengthy support and presentation of the DOW corporation, makers of fine products like napalm and responsible for the Bhopal disaster, and proud green sponsor for the Olympics.)
The BBC doesn't do deep analysis. It tends to have fairly superficial news stories. Channel 4 TV news in the UK advertises itself explicitly as giving the deep analysis lacking on the BBC.
Was this by Americans? It doesn't sound like a typical British view.
Perhaps Panda or Straggler can comment.
caffeine writes:
The BBC doesn't do deep analysis. It tends to have fairly superficial news stories. Channel 4 TV news in the UK advertises itself explicitly as giving the deep analysis lacking on the BBC.
I have not watched the actual report but I'll happily concede your confirmation that the BBC does not do deep analysis. And if this is true, I don't know how people can then state they are being fully served by the BBC.
It is theoretically possible the following was an 'accident':
quote:BBC 'slip' gave free ad to Dow Chemicals during Olympics opening ceremony
Dow Chemical, which has been held responsible for the killing of thousands of innocent during the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, has paid more than a million pounds for a giant billboard, to wrap around part of Westfield for a 12-week period covering the Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Hee. No, it probably was not explicitly stated, thanks for confirming that. But the important part of my argument that you marginalized is that it is a bad choice to order lobster for dinner when one already has not paid for previous meals.
I wasn't marginalizing that argument. If you had just said 'The Olympics was a big waste of money the UK government didn't have to waste.', I probably wouldn't have responded. It was your framing of the point I was mostly being critical of.
Uh, huh. When the 50,000 people in the National Health Service lose their jobs find out about the 25 BILLION pound Olympic cost, do you think they will have as generous a mindset as yours?
I'm sure they were consoled by having the NHS referenced in the opening ceremony. We should also note that the financial impact has yet to be fully analysed. We have the cost, but we don't know if there was an associated benefit and how much it was. The chances are, there won't be. Most Olympics end up as a net loss.
I'd have sooner avoided a protracted and incompetently fought war in Iraq than avoided the Olympics.
I guess someone wasn't paying attention to the closing ceremony. Jessie J emphatically insisted we 'forget about the price tag'. Jeez, some people!
I am unsure who you are referring in your first sentence. A little less encryption please.
I was referring to this:
quote:It's not about the money, money, money We don't need your money, money, money We just wanna make the world dance Forget about the price tag
Ain't about the cha-ching, cha-ching Ain't about the ba-bling, ba-bling Wanna make the world dance Forget about the price tag
It made me smile when they put that in the Olympic Closing ceremony, I trust you find it equally amusing.
But, IF the remainder of your paragraph supports the first, then I am concluding you also think the cost is outrageous.
Absolutely, I love the games, but I've never really got the desire countries have to host them. Maybe it should be like the Eurovision song contest, we should find some arbitrary and flawed system to determine who 'won' the Olympics and make them host it next time
But I have been repeatedly corrected (usually in very mild tones ) that the BBC is the most liberal, most forthcomingly honest media outlet, and nearly always acts for the public's best interests.
I wouldn't go that far, but I think they're pretty decent in this modern world of vapid and ridiculous excuses for journalism.
YOU wrote that the only reason you can imagine for hosting the olympics is a global status symbol. Yet you felt no prestige. It would then seem that 24 BIILION pounds were entirely wasted. Yes?
I wouldn't say it was wasted. It could have been spent better elsewhere, naturally. But when I said 'global status symbol' I meant in the sort of international relations sense, not the individual sense. That is, the Olympics is a costly display of wealth. "Look world, we can piss all this money up the wall just for the honour of so doing! Haha!'. But we're primates, and costly advertisements are probably hardwired into our psychology, so maybe it makes sense in that light.
Hee, your divisive and nationalistic accusatory reply is very funny and ironic. I likey.
Well, yes. But I think America gets Olympic patriotic pride more than most other countries, perhaps because they are competing to come top of the tables or something, I don't know. Most countries, I think, know that in most events, they don't have a medal hope, so they enjoy watching those of other nations do well. I don't know if it gets to the point of divisiveness over there, I've never been during an Olympics. I was there during the Athens Athletics World Championships, but didn't notice anything particularly.
But if that wasn't a joke, I think you might be conveniently forgetting the intense rivals in sports matches in Europe that has sometimes erupted in violence and riots.
But those aren't the Olympics. Of course sporting events can result in ridiculous 'clan warfare' type outbursts, a problem that can occur in any number of regions - but yes, Europe is particularly notable for (particularly some, including us) becoming nationalistic anti-social bastards over whose country has assembled the most skilled ball kickers.
I don't think any nation gets as worked up about the Olympics as some do about football. We might wave our flags a bit more, 'root' for people who live in our nation, but generally my experience has been a general congeniality between nations.
No. Definitely a conspiracy, like those so called moon landings.
Hee. Yeah, you're right bluegenes, it was crazy for me to think the Olympic organizers or a major corporate network would actually care about a very, very, very, very, very rich sponsor/client. As if money could somehow be, . . . . gasp, . . . influential or corrupting. What was I thinking?
I'm sure [the National Health Service workers] were consoled by having the NHS referenced in the opening ceremony.
Hmmm. Are you sure? I should think they would be hardly consoled at all if their imminent job loss was merely referenced at an extremely expensive and unnecessary party.
Mod writes:
Most Olympics end up as a net loss.
"Most?" Was ANY Olympic a profit maker?
Mod writes:
It made me smile when they put [Jessie J's song] in the Olympic Closing ceremony, I trust you find it equally amusing.
Really? You found it "amusing?" We may have different senses of humor Mod.
Mod writes:
I wouldn't say it was wasted . . . That is, the Olympics is a costly display of wealth. "Look world, we can piss all this money up the wall just for the honour of so doing! Haha!'.
You say the money wasn't wasted but then followed up with a ridiculous reason why the olympics were valuable.
Mod writes:
But those aren't the Olympics. Of course sporting events can result in ridiculous 'clan warfare' type outbursts, a problem that can occur in any number of regions
It seems you are suggesting that the Olympics aren't sporting events.
Mod writes:
We might wave our flags a bit more, 'root' for people who live in our nation, but generally my experience has been a general congeniality between nations.
Well, I guess my only point remains: Is there so much peace/love in this world that we can afford the time, effort and money to wave flags? 24 BILLION pounds for flag waving?
Hee. Yeah, you're right bluegenes, it was crazy for me to think the Olympic organizers or a major corporate network would actually care about a very, very, very, very, very rich sponsor/client. As if money could somehow be, . . . . gasp, . . . influential or corrupting. What was I thinking?
If you want to make the case that the BBC was breaking the rules under which it operates, and intentionally highlighting the DOW billboard, then make it.
The article you linked to in the Indian Express wasn't making that claim. It's you who seems to be implying it, but actually making the case needs more than childish sarcasm.
I'm sure [the National Health Service workers] were consoled by having the NHS referenced in the opening ceremony.
Hmmm. Are you sure? I should think they would be hardly consoled at all if their imminent job loss was merely referenced at an extremely expensive and unnecessary party.
That was earth humour. You didn't seriously think that I thought someone who just lost their job (or was about to), would be consoled that their old job was glorified in a ceremony?
"Most?" Was ANY Olympic a profit maker?
I'm not really qualified to do a full analysis. I've heard that Barcelona was one of the more successful games financially, but whether or not it was a net profit I don't know. Here is a paper on the subject, maybe you can be arsed where I cannot
Really? You found it "amusing?" We may have different senses of humor Mod.
Yes, probably. Not only do I like the cynical irony - a controversially expensive party where 'forget about the price tag' is sang, but I'm also capable of laughing at my own countries pretences. Think of it as black humour, the kind of amusement you might find when it transpires you paid 150 for a pair of shoes you'll never wear or something.
You say the money wasn't wasted but then followed up with a ridiculous reason why the olympics were valuable.
That wasn't the only value in the Olympic games - there was all the buildings built, and infrastructure improvements, and the sport itself, of course.
But those aren't the Olympics. Of course sporting events can result in ridiculous 'clan warfare' type outbursts, a problem that can occur in any number of regions
It seems you are suggesting that the Olympics aren't sporting events.
Why would I do that? Did you think I'm a fucking moron or something? Just because I said 'sporting events can result in', that doesn't mean I'm saying that 'sorting events do result in'.
What was actually saying was that the Olympics aren't the kind of sporting events that people get violently worked up about in the same way they do about other sporting events such as football. Maybe they do in the States, but as much fervour and patriotism/nationalism it might generate over there, I don't see riots.
Well, I guess my only point remains: Is there so much peace/love in this world that we can afford the time, effort and money to wave flags? 24 BILLION pounds for flag waving?
I think the human race and human experience would suffer if we decided to cancel the Olympics.
) that the BBC is the most liberal, most forthcomingly honest media outlet, and nearly always acts for the public's best interests. Thus, the British most be the best informed culture in the world. (Although your simple, one-sentenced example doesn't exactly support the BBC's typically deep analysis of subjects such as its recent lengthy support and presentation of the DOW corporation, makers of fine products like napalm and responsible for the Bhopal disaster, and proud green sponsor for the Olympics.)
™ Version 4.2
