Should the two cities bid be allowed go forward as 'co-hosts' of the Olympics? Can Hiroshima and Nagasaki pull it off or is it just a pipedream?
On the one hand it seems like a great idea. In an age when peace is more and more on the minds of everyone, the two cities have a unique place on the world stage. And as the last bidding war final scenes in Denmark showed, it's not really a city bid as much as a national honor. Presidents and Prime Ministers don't usually fly off to international venues just to help out local cities with their issues.
The idea also has merit in these financially stressed times when one city, no matter how large, may no longer be able to afford to pay the overwhelming cost of such an international event.
There is precedent. Japan and Korea co-hosted the Soccer championships a few years ago and that seemed to work, but with such a large event as the Olympics, there are some basic practical matters that seem to need working out before a bid could be taken seriously.
Where would the openning and closing ceremonies be held, one on each city? That actually sounds fantastic. But how would crowds be moved from their hotels in one city to venues in another?
More problematic would be, where the Olympic village will be? Will there be two? Will the national team atheletes be divided with, say gymnastic atheletes living in one city and track and field participants in a different city? If they live together, how will they get to their venues in the other city? Will there be private high speed trains between cities or will they have to spend tiring hours on buses each way everyday?
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not 'twin cities' like Tokyo and Yokohama or Osaka and Kobe. There is a sizable distance between them which, unless adequately addressed, would be a show stopper.
I hope they come up with a plan, it would be cool to see it happen, but like some in the IOC, I'm a bit dubious of success.
No comments:
Post a Comment