"Please stay in the room. There is plenty of ice cream left and snacks and beverages."

This was the anything-but-grandiose public statement made by International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Jacques Rogge straight after announcing a few days ago that the race to win the 2018 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games had been achieved in the first round of balloting.

It was hardly a remark to send shockwaves through the Olympic Movement and prompt calls for an immediate inquiry into corruption. More, perhaps, akin to a dinner party host pleading with guests to stay a while longer; or a thoughtful parent giving gentle advice to an innocent child as to how to pass the time.

But that is exactly the point. With over an hour to go before the official announcement of Pyeongchang's victory and with no second ballot needed, Rogge had to find the right words to keep his IOC colleagues in the cavernous Durban conference room.

He could have shut off the sound system from inquisitive reporters and told delegates behind closed doors not to leak the name of whoever had won. He could have been far more formal.

Instead he asked them to simply be patient and wait for the outcome. Rogge was not talking down to IOC members. Far from it. He was treating them with the kind of relaxed and respectful informality that has become the hallmark of IOC proceedings in recent years.


Tellingly, sitting a few feet away from Rogge was Sepp Blatter, not for once wearing his FIFA President's hat as such, attending instead as an IOC member. Was he listening?

Blatter, as everyone knows, has become embroiled in the biggest bribery scandal in FIFA history, preceded by the most contentious World Cup vote in living memory.

It was that vote, which controversially selected Russia and Qatar as World Cup hosts, that prompted Blatter to announce new reforms for future World Cup elections, to open up the voting to the entire FIFA membership – big countries and small - instead of giving carte blanche to an elite cartel of self-important and self-interested Executive Committee members.

As someone who has covered World Cup votes for years, it was so refreshing to witness the transparency and lack of covert skullduggery with which the IOC now operates.

Some things of course remain sacrosanct. The IOC, like FIFA, votes by secret ballot and Franz Beckenbauer, as reported by insidethegames, was distinctly unhappy with the way some of the IOC members ignored Munich's case.


But listening to the three 2018 Winter Olympic bid teams being quizzed from the floor in open forum straight after their final presentations, with IOC members needing to have certain i's dotted and t's crossed before deciding which way to vote, was in stark contrast to the flawed, behind-closed-doors system used hitherto by FIFA.

Revealing the numbers of votes each candidate received within minutes of the outcome was another element that has become de rigueur for the Olympic Movement yet which caused such a rumpus in Zurich last December.

Dick Pound, one of the most respected IOC members, pulled no punches as to why his organisation had to act when it did.

"We got ourselves into deep trouble," Pound told insidethegames. "In our case we either got the solution right or the Olympic Movement was in danger. The process seems to be working now. FIFA clearly have a problem. Maybe here is a model for them."

One can only hope Blatter took note of the entire process in Durban, coming as it did six months after FIFA's wretched performance over 2018 and 2022.

Andrew Warshaw is a former sports editor of The European, the newspaper that broke the Bosman story in the 1990s, the most significant issue to shape professional football as we know it today. Before that, he worked for the Associated Press for 13 years in Geneva and London. He is now the chief football reporter for insideworldfootball, our sister site. You can follow him on Twitter by clicking here.

It was clear to many of us in the build-up to this week's International Olympic Committee Session that Pyeongchang was leading the race to host the 2018 Winter Olympics.

So Operation Durban meant, above all, making sure that they kept their noses in front.

Accordingly, the South Korean bid team took few risks in their time on South African soil, either in the last few days of sparring or in the final presentation itself.

When Annecy belatedly hit on a theme that had some traction – the risk of sport becoming overcommercialised – Pyeongchang reacted not in a confrontational manner, but by appearing to quietly downplay ties with Samsung, the longstanding Korean IOC sponsor.

This was in contrast to its unsuccessful bids for the 2010 and 2014 Games and illustrated the sort of confidence and good judgement that comes only with prolonged exposure to the Olympic Movement and its idiosyncratic ways.

"We are competitive enough just with Pyeongchang," said Byoung-Gug Choung, South Korea's Sports Minister, when asked if downplaying Samsung was a deliberate tactic.

Pyeongchang's media conference two days before the vote was all slick formality, in contrast to their European rivals who went for a more relaxed approach – something notoriously difficult to get right, particularly when operating primarily in a language that is not your native tongue.

As it was, this relaxed tone too often tipped over into amateurishness.

Pyeongchang was relentlessly professional, even if it was professionalism with a human touch.

Like its rivals, the Korean bid adopted the modernday lingua franca of the Olympic Movement, English, ensuring that those with the greatest fluency did most of the talking.

Even so, it was a surprise when Lee Myung-Bak (picutred), the South Korean President, delivered almost all his lengthy contribution to the closing presentation in English.


He had already underlined his dedication to the cause by touching down in Durban last Saturday (July 2), before most IOC members, bringing with him an extensive entourage and a giant heap of boxes of Korean produce.

This insistence on a meaningful commitment to a bid from the national leader has become a hallmark of campaigns worked on by Mike Lee, the communications guru, who helped Rio de Janeiro to land the 2016 Summer Games with very considerable contributions from then Brazilian President Lula.

The winning Pyeongchang presentation was shot through with trademark Lee touches.

These included the use of flags in background images to catch the eye of targeted voters; the inclusion of a very personal athlete's story – in this case that of Korean-American Toby Dawson – to tug the heartstrings; and, above all, the use of a map showing how the Winter Olympics has been a virtual monopoly for established winter sports markets over the years.

While its rivals sought to portray old bids as ancient history, Pyeongchang placed its faith in the values of patience and perseverance.

This was hardly a surprise, given its history of failed bids.

Madrid may do the same if it bids again for the Summer Games in the approaching race for 2020.

What, frankly, was a surprise was that the Koreans cracked the best joke in the three presentations.

This came when YS Park, the avuncular President of the Korean Olympic Committee, apologised to the newly-married Prince Albert of Monaco, an IOC member, for having to spend his honeymoon watching Pyeongchang's presentation - for a third time.

"It was even better the third time. Don't worry," the loquacious Prince, traditionally the most persistent inquisitor of anyone in the IOC, replied.

Pyeongchang can now embark on its own extended honeymoon, prior to preparing itself to welcome the world in six-and-a-half years' time.

David Owen worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup and is now freelancing, including covering the 2008 Beijing Olympics and 2010 World Cup. Owen's Twitter feed can be accessed at www.twitter.com/dodo938

They were jammed in shoulder to shoulder in the foyer of Durban's idiosyncratic Playhouse last night, as the 123rd International Olympic Committee Session got underway, with the best Opening Ceremony I have witnessed.

The pomp and ceremony that saw IOC President Jacques Rogge invested with the Order of the Companions of O R Tambo, South Africa's highest national honour, was followed by a spectacular display of vibrant African rhythms and colours.

This somehow married Ravel's Bolero with traditional Zulu dance, and the Indian-inspired Tribhangi Dance Theatre with the international rock anthem The Final Countdown.

"It was a national display of 'We Can Do'," was the verdict of one very senior and inveterately hard-to-impress IOC member.

The question on many minds was whether this 123rd Session will prompt a change of heart from the South African Government and act as a prelude to a Durban bid for the 2020 Summer Games.

Well, the evening was attended, in the front row of the stalls, by South African President Jacob Zuma.

And the formalities were laced with hints that the authorities - many of them at least - are itching to throw South Africa's and, by extension, Durban's hat into the ring.


Most of these hints were placed in the mouth of SASCOC President Gideon Sam, who told dignitaries including the newly-married Prince Albert of Monaco that "hosting events like this gives us the courage to carry on bidding for more prestigious events".

"South Africa is well aware of the need to continue hosting big events," Sam went on. "Many key decisions that will have an impact on sport in the years ahead of us will be taken at this Session."

But, given the national and international debate that has gone on since the country hosted the first African FIFA World Cup a year ago, over whether the tournament produced anything of enduring value for ordinary South Africans, it was interesting too to note the comments of President Zuma on that subject.

Reflecting on the "extraordinary four weeks", Zuma described the World Cup as "an event that brought lasting benefits to our country and continent".

But the evening also underlined the huge challenge that will face the city if it is to stand the slightest chance of piecing together a competitive Summer Olympic bid.

The crowded state of the foyer was hardly conducive to effective lobbying on what would have been the last chance for the three 2018 Winter Games Candidate Cities to bend the ear of IOC members before today's vote.

And the décor of the auditorium, with its kitsch fake starlit sky and fake Tudor-style house-fronts, reeked, to me at least, of first-half-of-the-20th-century colonialism.

It was hard to imagine anything less in keeping with the new South Africa.

Suffice to say that, while the city's sporting infrastructure and natural amenities are already extremely impressive, its general infrastructure is patchy and will need considerable investment if Durban is to become the first African host of an Olympic Games.

Since I was last here last year, I have, moreover, detected some disconcerting cracks opening up in what previously appeared to be solid relationships between local leaders.

Lesson number one for Olympic bidders in this competitive age is that a united political front is indispensable.

And this political commitment needs to be enduring, since, while first-time success is a tall order, even a failed bid can put significant credit in the bank for future bids.


On the other hand, with the world economic crisis taking its toll on national economies, 2020 is shaping up to be a less daunting contest than recent Summer Olympics races.

With powerful cards in its hand such as the IOC's failure to award a single Olympic Games to Africa in more than a century of existence, some will feel it a shame - and potentially a wasted opportunity - if South Africa decides against entering the fray.

The country has, after all, staged just about every other major sporting event in the course of the past 20 years.

Just before the lights went down for last night's show, a leading city figure assessed the chances of a bid being launched privately to me at around 60 per cent.

As things look today, I would say that's not too wide of the mark.

David Owen worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup and is now freelancing, including covering the 2008 Beijing Olympics and 2010 World Cup. Owen's Twitter feed can be accessed at www.twitter.com/dodo938

Winning a bronze medal at a prestigious international tournament in Malaysia last month was great. However, we felt that we should have pushed for a higher finish.

Getting in to the final was an objective for us. We were disappointed that we did not achieve this as in the build-up to London we want to be experiencing finals and getting used to the pressure. But at least it was good to push on and prove that we are strong enough to play in these pressured medal games.

Personally, these last few months have been a massive learning curve for me.

I have had conversations with our nutritionist, Dan Kings, and we investigated the idea of trying to trim down some of the fat on my body. We created a strict diet that was designed to strip the body fat away. The diet was only for a maximum of two weeks but I had reached my goal in 10 days. A total of 6.5 kilograms were lost and that was all fat. I then had discussions with our head coach and strength/conditioning coach and we looked at a new bespoke conditioning programme to enable me to be in the best shape come London.

I would love London to be slightly less eventful than Beijing where I scored a goal (that was the top of the rollercoaster) but then became embroiled in controversy after a deemed bad tackle. I need to use what happened there to produce in London. I had some amazing highs in Beijing, especially when I scored in two minutes against Pakistan. But my enthusiasm and will to win meant I went a little too far.

After making a clean tackle against Canada I then went to attack and found myself "removing" a Canadian player that had got balanced on my shoulder. It seemed that moving him by dropping him was not the best way to handle the situation. I was sin-binned and we ended up drawing the game. That result meant we struggled to progress from the group stages.

My enthusiasm and mental control have vastly improved from the guy that was in Beijing. This calmer mind state will enable me to be a stronger and more influential player come London.


In the meantime, we have a busy year. We play in the London Cup later this month - a four-nation tournament against Belgium, New Zealand and Korea - to start whipping up local support for 2012 and are looking to retain our European Championship in Germany in August, as this will be a good way of measuring our progress. We were fortunate to win the gold in Amsterdam two years ago, but we are a stronger, more experienced team now and so we feel we can start to be successful without luck playing such an important role. It would be great to think that Chelsea FC - I'm a season ticket holder - might follow in our footsteps with European success next season too.

Hockey is now such a fast, competitive, skill-heavy game that we train harder, I would guess, than most footballers I know. But we do need to occasionally let our hair down. Lucky for us then, that Richard "Ratman" Alexander is in the squad. If you search "Ratman Dance for Sultan" on YouTube then you will understand why. Ratman also has done a video for Wrappz Hockey. Check it out for use of the word "OK" - close to 30 times in two minutes.

Personally, I think it's crucial to have a distraction that resets the mind after all the stress of training and competition. Along with Rat and another of our players Matt Daly, I've become involved with Wrappz Hockey, a fun product that enables people to personalise their hockey equipment.

It has not gone unnoticed either that 11 members of the team took part in a topless photoshoot for a glossy men's magazine's search to find a cover model. We don't know the results yet, but it had better not be Rat.

To follow James Tindall on Twitter click here.

See James Tindall in action at The London Cup from July 12-16. Book now to see England take on New Zealand, Korea and Belgium on home turf a year before London 2012. Please click here or call 08444 99 32 22 to secure your tickets.

James Tindall, who plays for Surbiton, has won 35 caps for Great Britain and was named as the Hockey Writers Club Player of the Year in 2005

British Hockey is represented by www.davidwelchmanagement.com

About halfway through today's slick – and gobsmackingly brightly-lit – presentation by the Pyeongchang bid team, I found my mind drifting back 10 years.

Something about the extreme formality of the occasion – which contrasted sharply with the relaxed demeanour of the Korean bid's two European rivals - and the assured air of those taking part reminded me of Beijing's performances at the International Olympic Committee Session in Moscow in 2001.

That campaign ended with the Chinese capital comfortably winning the right to stage the 2008 Summer Games in what was a landmark moment for the Olympic Movement.

Will the race for the 2018 Winter Olympics be a similar success story for an Asian candidate?

We shall have to wait and see – but having witnessed presentations on Monday by each of the three candidates, that still appears to me the most likely outcome.

Announcement of the day came from Munich, with confirmation that former German football captain Franz Beckenbauer – almost certainly the world's best-known Bavarian – was on his way to Durban to lobby for the bid.

I shall be genuinely interested to see how this pans out.

Such is the Kaiser's stature that the German team had little option but to ask him: it would have been interpreted as a sign of weakness if he hadn't come, just as French President Nicolas Sarkozy's absence is being seen as a signal that not even the French truly believe Annecy can win.

On the other hand, football is not a sport that features in the Winter Olympics.

Would, say, a Canadian city use ice hockey legend Wayne Gretzky to help out on a Summer Olympic bid?

I don't know the answer to that question, it is possible that they would, but I think it would be a pretty close judgement call.

If the Germans have summoned another global sporting superstar to supplement the efforts of bid leader Katarina Witt, Annecy's big achievement since arriving in South Africa has been to unearth a compelling message.

In their beach-front marquee, opposite the local casino, a venue housing more white furniture than the average Premiership footballer's living-room, Annecy Mayor Jean-Luc Rigaut built fluently on bid President Charles Beigbeder's plea from the day before to keep the Games "authentic".


"We are not there to get a trophy for a company or a country," Beigbeder (pictured) said, in one of the more aggressive soundbites of noticeably good natured campaign.

As a former white-water canoeing champion, Rigaut's warning that Big Sport was in danger of becoming overcommercialised, of losing its soul, will strike a chord with some of the 100 or so IOC members who will decide the outcome of this contest.

Mieux vaut tard que jamais (Better late than never) is an aphorism as common in French as in English.

And the hard-hitting tactic has certainly set tongues wagging in Durban.

But it is hard to envisage it doing enough to get the French candidate seriously back into the race.

'Relaxed' can be good in the sometimes pompous and overformalised parallel universe of Olympism.

But there is a fine line between appearing relaxed and appearing amateurish and, based on yesterday's events, I have to say the European bids at times came across as amateurish compared with their well-resourced Korean rivals.

It was amateurish of Annecy to confer among themselves at considerable length before answering one of the questions posed by journalists.


And while it may have been intended as a joke, it appeared amateurish to me for Witt (pictured) to ask her media conference mediator, "Am I allowed?" after he invited her to announce that a certain German footballer was on his way to Durban to add his weight to Munich's cause.

A further small symptom: Pyeongchang's table in the main media room is groaning under the weight of brochures and Olympic pins.

Annecy's and Munich's? Empty.

Now it might be that they have been stripped bare by voracious journalists.

But I somehow doubt it.

Who wants this most? I am sure all three bid teams are working – and praying - for victory with identical intensity.

Who appears to want it most? Based on the past couple of days, there can only be one answer to this question.

David Owen worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup and is now freelancing, including covering the 2008 Beijing Olympics and 2010 World Cup. Owen's Twitter feed can be accessed at www.twitter.com/dodo938

It has become one of the International Olympic Committee's more endearing habits to choose its Winter Olympic hosts in the most incongruous places imaginable.

Thus, four years ago, the choice of Sochi to stage the 2014 Winter Games was made in tropical Guatemala.

And this week's selection of the 2018 Host City has brought us to Durban.

With its flat urban thoroughfares, palm-fringed beach-front and climate mild enough for South African surfers to be out frolicking in the Indian Ocean breakers even in midwinter, this long-overlooked city has about as much in common with a classical Winter Olympic setting as, well, Munich has in common with Pyeongchang.

Perhaps it is just me, but I find it hard to focus on the finer points of the three competing speed-skating venues when they're playing beach volleyball outside.

On the other hand, perhaps the California-esque backdrop – along with a certain wedding that has taken many heavy hitters to Monaco – helps to account for the rather flat atmosphere which, as I write this on Sunday afternoon, still overhangs the three-cornered contest pitting the aforementioned Munich and Pyeongchang against France's Annecy, seen almost universally as the long-odds outsider.

My most exciting moment to date came at about 8.30pm last night, witnessing the arrival of Lee Myung-bak (pictured below right), the South Korean President, and extensive entourage, at the beach-front hotel housing the bidding cities.


My most surprising came immediately afterwards when I saw that the sleek dark car parked outside the door, with South Korean flag fluttering, appeared to be of Bavarian manufacture.

That plus today, when I thought I saw a couple of bid team members hurry across the foyer loaded up with electric blankets.

Then again, it does turn chilly at night here.

I wrote in February that I would be surprised if Pyeongchang did not win.

Now within hours of the July 6 vote, I still see them as the most likely victors.

But Munich is putting up a good fight.


The German city has a strong ecological card to play, is impeccably connected, via Thomas Bach, whom many observers see as the next IOC President and is, perhaps, the IOC's best chance of putting on a truly blockbuster event to revive what many of us still see as a distinctly second-division sporting property.

Then again, there is no escaping the fact that the Winter Games has yet to visit Asia – fast-becoming the key business-zone in the world for multinational companies in search of growth – in the 21st century.

And while few non-Asians would have heard of Pyeongchang if it weren't for its efforts to win the Olympics, the Korean candidate should know the drill, having lost out consecutively to Vancouver and Sochi.

If they do not win here, it can safely be said it will not be for lack of manpower, with the main Olympic gathering-points at times taking on the appearance of Seoul-by-the-Sea.

The IOC had better hope that the flat atmosphere is a by-product of the South African sun.

The other theme starting to emerge here is the surprising paucity of candidates for the 2020 race to follow Rio de Janeiro in hosting the main event, the Summer Games.

Rome is in; Tokyo, Istanbul and at least one Middle East candidate look likely to follow, though there remains doubts.

And, for the moment, although more bidders, most notably from Europe, may emerge in coming days, that looks to be about it.

Many of us were thrown when the South African Government announced in May that it would not be bidding, hence apparently thwarting any prospect that Durban may have had of following a successful staging of this IOC Session with a strong Olympic bid.

There have since been suggestions that it could yet change its mind - but it has only until September 1 to do so.

Unusually, there seems next to no chance of a US bid.

If the 2020 race-card does not fill out, I am starting to wonder if we won't come to regard Durban as the beginning of the end of a golden age of Olympic bidding, brought to a close, in large part, by the crisis still affecting big chunks of the global economy.

For now, this is only a tentative conclusion.

There is still time for both these races – one on its final lap, the other not yet officially under way - to liven up.

David Owen worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup and is now freelancing, including covering the 2008 Beijing Olympics and 2010 World Cup. Owen's Twitter feed can be accessed at www.twitter.com/dodo938

The Henley Royal Regatta course, give or take a few adjustments, hosted London's Olympic regattas in 1908 and 1948.

And while London's 2012 Olympic racing will take place on Eton's man-made Dorney Lake rather than the River Thames, there is still a distinctly Olympic buzz about this year's Henley, already underway and heading towards Sunday's finals, as crews from all over the world have converged on an event which Sir Steve Redgrave once described as "the nearest rowers every get to racing in a football stadium."

Olympic rowing tickets may have sold out, but the Henley Royal Regatta, an annual event since 1839 other than in times of war, offers the chance of seeing some of the world's top rowers - including all the GB men's Olympic boats - in action on British waters before 2012.

Extra importance has been added to the Regatta this year with many overseas and British crews seeing it as part of their build-up to the World Championships, starting in Slovenia in late August, which doubles as the Olympic qualifying regatta.

Britain's Olympic gold medallists Tom James, racing in the Stewards' Challenge Cup for men's fours, and Andrew Triggs-Hodge and Pete Reed (pictured), competing in the men's pair event, are joining top-flight boats from the United States, Australia and Germany amongst others on the stretch of water that hosted the last home Olympics in 1948.


Those post-war Games saw the host nation finish 12th in the medals table with just three golds. Imagine the outcry if that were to happen next year. The shame. The ignominy. I'm already looking into the possibility of switching nationality in the event of such a catastrophe.

Back in 1948, however, many of Britain's Olympians were content to epitomise the maxim uttered by the founder of the modern Games, Baron Pierre de Coubertin: "The important thing in life is not the victory, but the contest; the essential thing is not to have won but to have fought well."

One of those three rare British golds was secured on this tradition-steeped borderland of Oxfordshire and Berkshire through Bert Bushnell, whose family ran a local boat hire firm, and Richard Burnell (pictured), Oxford Blue and future president of the Leander Club, home to rowing's great and good, not to mention a long stint as The Times rowing correspondent.


This unlikely combination set to in the weeks preceding the Games to secure the double sculls title.

As another generation of Olympians sets to in anticipation of London 2012, Henley will offer the 1,600 rowers involved its own unlikely combination of ancient and modern - a watery Wimbledon, in fact.

The Regatta chairman, Mike Sweeney, has this week described the peculiar fascination that this historic occasion offers.

"Henley is very special and the great thing is the atmosphere on race days", he said.

"The crowds are almost on the end of the rowers' blades along the river bank. It's side-by-side and quite gladiatorial. It's just a tunnel of noise and quite amazing".

It is an atmosphere that the Australian team have not experienced for five years, but they have brought their largest-ever Henley Royal Regatta contingent this year - 43-strong, with most of its Olympic contenders in that number, including include double Olympic champion Drew Ginn, a member of the fabled Oarsome Foursome.

"It's worked out perfectly for us to be able to row here at Henley and then the world cup finals in Lucerne next weekend", said Ray Ebert, the team manager. "It's the first time since 2006 that we've been here and we're really looking forward to it."


Like Wimbledon, which persists, for instance, in running the Gentlemen's Doubles, Henley reveres and cherishes its traditions.

Dress code within the Steward's Enclosure at Henley is famously strict. Only twice has the temperature been deemed sufficiently high to permit the removal of jackets – once in the hot summer of 1976, and again in 2009, although another upward spike of heat might yet see a hat-trick completed this year.

Race commentator John Friend recently tried to explain the Henley position to me, and ended up using the example of the draw. This is conducted in Henley Town Hall and involves small bits of paper which are fished out of the giant silver edifice that is the Grand Challenge Cup – something the GB eight, which races this year as Molesey and Leander and includes the 39-year-old comeback kid Greg Searle, is anxious to get its hands on ahead of Hansa Dortmund, the German crew which narrowly beat them at last year's World Championships.

Yes, the Henley Stewards could certainly conduct the draw electronically. But they prefer a more old fashioned version of digital.

"It's part of our tradition," Friend explained. "It's one of those things you could do differently if you so wished, but it would not be so much fun."

And there you have the Henley Royal Regatta philosophy which, perennially, attracts the finest of Olympians.

Mike Rowbottom, one of Britain's most talented sportswriters, has covered the last five Summer and four Winter Olympics for The Independent. Previously he has worked for the Daily Mail, The Times, The Observer, the Sunday Correspondent and The Guardian. He is now chief feature writer for insidethegames. Rowbottom's Twitter feed can be accessed here.

I'll be honest, I headed to Sri Lanka and Hambantota with a rather preconceived idea of what I would find. I had just spent a spectacular week in the sun-drenched Gold Coast as I followed the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) Evaluation Commission in their four-day inspection of the Australian city where I could not find a single, tangible fault in their bid for the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

I boarded my plane to the Sri Lankan capital Colombo - which is where the Commission were based for the majority of their inspection - armed with what I assumed were some key facts around the Hambantota 2018 bid.

Only one potential 2018 venue, the Mahinda Rajapaksa International Cricket Stadium - which is down to host the 2018 Opening and Closing Ceremonies -has been built, the area had been devastated by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the coastal city is one of the most rural parts of Sri Lanka.

In fact, I had been informed that the reason that the Commission would be based in Colombo rather than Hambantota - with only a one day helicopter visit to the latter - was because there are virtually no hotels within 10 miles of the city.

Having arrived at the Delhi 2010 Commonwealth Games last October shortly before the event began, I remember only too well the manic chaos in the final few days before the competition when the Indian capital, which had fallen a mile behind schedule, had to summon every last resource to get the Games ready in the nick of time.

In Sri Lanka, I thought I would find another India and a 2018 bid concept that would provide far too much of a risk to the CGF just eight years after the Delhi debacle.

However, I will leave with quite another view: Sri Lanka is not India and Hambantota is not Delhi - not even close.

They are very real contenders in this two-way fight for the 2018 Commonwealth Games and they have far more than a punchers' chance against the Gold Coast.


Through a very fortunate set of circumstances that saw me call in a few favours - nothing underhanded I assure you - I was invited to join the Commission on their helicopter visit of Hambantota.

I was actually relegated to the "smaller" helicopter that followed the Commission's gargantuan flying machine but one can't complain too much when the alternative would have been a six-hour bus ride from Colombo to Hambantota through the wilderness!

It was not long after taking to the air that we quickly left the metropolitan Colombo behind and flew over the most picturesque and colourful landscape I have ever seen.

The beautiful, largely untouched land below was pierced only by the $600 million (£375 million) highway - The Southern Expressway - which is currently under construction and will open later this year where it will help reduce the drive-time between Colombo and Hambantota to less than two hours.

Some 50 minutes later, we arrived in Hambantota at our first stop which was the piece of land that will be Hambantota International Airport. Even as a building site, it is a highly impressive scene. Construction on the $209 million (£131 million) project is set to be completed by the end of 2012 and it would be by far the most important facility in taking athletes to and from the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

But another way to Hambantota is through the $360 million (£225 million) seaport in Hambantota, which is already in use to service ships travelling along one of world's busiest shipping lines. But the real reason for taking the Commission there was to show that Hambantota is well on the way to becoming an economic powerhouse.

When it came to the discussion of the venues, things were largely made up of presentations - as understandably they had to be.

The plan is to build and complete all the venues, aside from the existing International Cricket Stadium, between 2014 and 2016, ahead of the 2016 South Asian Games.

This includes a 40,000 capacity athletics stadium, a 7,500 capacity international aquatics centre, a 7,000 capacity hockey stadium, a 2,500 capacity exhibition centre, a 5,000 capacity main arena, a multi-sport complex and a velodrome.

The interesting fact is that all of them, except the velodrome, will be developed regardless of the outcome of the Hambantota 2018 bid for the South Asian Games.

The compact nature of the concept is also a huge plus as 90 percent of competition venues are within one kilometre of the Games Village and training venues are either in the Games Village or 0.2 kilometres away in the adjacent training village meaning that athletes will have both training and competition venues on their doorstep.

You may be getting the impression that Hambantota is a city under construction with the 2018 plan currently a virtual bid.

Well you would be right.

But the key fact is that Hambantota correctly see that as a positive.

Due to the amount of work needed, the 2018 Commonwealth Games is set to generate $8 billion (£5 billion) for the economy and create up to 100,000 jobs in the region.

And with the venues set to be complete by 2016, it doesn't appear there will be the same problems seen in Delhi as two years gives a rather large margin of error.


The presentations that followed during our stay in Hambantota were largely of a technical nature but the bid team had intelligently saved their trump card and secret weapon until last as our helicopters landed in the middle the perfect pitch at the Mahinda Rajapaksa International Stadium (pictured).

This awe-inspiring stadium is not only the crown jewel of Hambantota but the very symbol of the 2018 Commonwealth Games bid.

Not because it will potentially host the 2018 Opening and Closing Ceremonies, not because it has a 35,000 capacity which will be expanded to 60,000 when the Twenty20 Cricket World Cup comes here next, but because it is stands gleaming brightly in the sun as proof of what can be done.

In order to host matches at the 2011 Cricket World Cup, it was built from scratch in just 11 months and it was fascinating when no less than Namal Rajapaksa, the son of the Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa and also the MP for the Hambantota District, explained this to me.

"I remember well when people said that Hambantota couldn't host matches in the 2011 Cricket World Cup," he explained.

"But we built this fantastic stadium which was praised by everyone and hosted one of the most memorable games of the whole competition when Sri Lanka beat Canada. I think that this shows what we can do in Sri Lanka and why we can stage a magnificent 2018 Commonwealth Games here."


What I found particularly interesting is that the President's son (pictured above) was happy to call Hambantota a "jungle" when I thought it was a negative connotation. He actually embraced the term and saw it as a huge benefit.

He explained that "Hambantota is a simple, clean area" which means there is no problem with planning permission, no problem with existing housing to manoeuvre around and quite simply, as Namal puts it, no "red tape", which was the Achilles heel of Delhi in their attempt to renovate old stadiums.

Delhi 2010 is clearly a tag that infuriates the Hambantota 2018 bid team and for good reason.

During my stay here, I have continually heard Mahindananda Aluthgamage, Sri Lanka's Sports Minister and co-chairman of the Hambantota 2018 bid, passionately state that: "We are not like other countries. We are Sri Lanka and we always deliver."

The words are said with such conviction and force that they are hard not to believe.

Aluthgamage himself, and his fellow co-chairman Ajith Nivard Cabraal, the Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, have actually been the shining stars of the Commission's inspection.

Despite their high-ranking positions and hectic schedules, they have been with the Commission for every step of the four day inspection, with the charming President's son also spending a large chunk of his time with them.

It shows tremendous political support right from the very top for the Hambantota 2018 bid and it is an advantage over the Gold Coast who could never be in a position to have their country's highest ranking political figures follow the Commission round and have police and armed escorts clearing their every step.

Quite simply, the backing of the Sri Lankan Government for the bid couldn't be higher.

The closing press conference saw Scotland's Louise Martin, the chair of the five-person Commission, praise the Hambantota 2018 bid as she stated: "We have been impressed with the vision for Sri Lanka and Hambantota and now have a clear view of where the hosting of the Commonwealth Games could fit within that vision."

She finished by stating that the Commission "have no doubt about the resolve to deliver the necessary infrastructure by 2016".

The Commission didn't say it publically, as clearly they are not in a position to, but I get the strong impression that they were, like me, far more impressed with the Hambantota 2018 bid than they thought they would be.

The Commission now tasked with producing a report on the two bids which will be published before October 11 this year. I assure you that neither city will fail it that but it will be interesting to see how they articulate their views in the report.

However, the real crunch time comes when the CGF meets at its annual meeting in St Kitts and Nevis on November 11 to vote on the host city.

So where would my vote go?

Last week, it was with the Gold Coast without hesitation. Now, I might just toss a coin as I genially find the two complete contrasting concepts so hard to separate.

The Gold Coast offers a tried and trusted safe option; Hambantota offers the option of the Commonwealth Games in a brand new country with a brand new style.

Do I see the Gold Coast as favourites?

Probably.

But this is no walkover - this is a contest between two heavyweights with very different styles.

And with the voting delegates themselves set to visit the two cities between now and the November 11 vote, the opening bell has only just rung.

Tom Degun is a reporter for insidethegames

Is there anybody at FIFA minding the shop? Sepp Blatter, the President, clearly does not give the impression he is.

He may strut about as if he is the head of a unique Vatican-style sporting state, no territory or army, but through football, as the Vatican does through religion, reaching out to places no politician can. But the FIFA corruption crisis has exposed the fact that while Blatter is a master tactician who can turn almost every short term situation to his advantage, he is not a strategist.

Blatter desperately needs to have a strategy to cope with the FIFA corruption crisis, the worst in the organisation's history. But not only is there no evidence Blatter has a strategy, he does not even seem to appreciate the need to develop one. At every step he has given the impression of reacting to events, rather than being in charge.

This has marked everything Blatter has done since the FIFA crisis broke last October when the Sunday Times investigation started the corruption story rolling. That had led to two Executive members, Amos Adamu and Reynald Temarii being suspended, but in the sort of short term gesture that Blatter loves, the paper was criticised for its journalism, to the fury of the journalists concerned. They felt they had gone out of their way to help FIFA and instead of being thanked, were kicked for their efforts.

The result was, despite the action FIFA took, it still gave the impression it had much to hide and did not like outsiders telling it what it should do. This was further reinforced when the Sunday Times produced a whistle blower who claimed to have further evidence of corruption. His allegations were not even examined.

Perhaps the most damaging evidence of Blatter's short-termism came in relation to the evidence Lord Triesman gave to the House of Commons Select Committee about the alleged favours he was asked by four members of the FIFA Executive Committee- Jack Warner, Nicolás Leoz, Worawi Makudi and Ricardo Teixeira. The Committee wrote to FIFA and this was followed by the Football Association sending FIFA the report James Dingemans QC had produced on the Triesman allegations.

Dingemans made it clear he was not conducting an inquiry. To quote his words: "It should be noted that it was no part of the terms of reference to determine whether the allegations made by Lord Triesman were well founded or not. Indeed, it would have been wrong and unfair to do so because it is fundamental to any system of justice that a person against whom an allegation has been made is given an opportunity to answer the allegations before adverse findings are made. The FA does not have jurisdiction to require answers from the Four Executive Committee Members who were the subject of Lord Triesman's evidence to the Select Committee. As between FIFA and the FA, FIFA is the relevant body for those purposes."

His inquiry, conducted in little over a week, was limited to people in Britain involved in the bid who could throw some light on what Triesman said. He could not get quite to the bottom of everything Triesman told the MPs, but found some of what he had said stacked up. What he was doing was making sure that before the FA passed Triesman's ball to FIFA, it was filled with more than just one man's word. But the intention was clearly for FIFA to carry on running with the ball and conduct a proper inquiry.

And to help FIFA, Dingemans concluded FIFA's World Cup bidding rules needed to be more transparent to help generate more confidence in the bidding system. Also, "There is a need for an updated and detailed Code of Ethics which deals with both lawful and unlawful approaches to and from members of the FIFA executive committee. There is need for a system where by the relevant rules can be seen to be imposed in a transparently independent manner".

However, Blatter immediately dropped the ball, making the extraordinary claim that Dingemans had cleared all four Executive members, when the QC had not even inquired into their alleged actions. In Blatter's words: "We were happy that there are no elements in this report which would prompt any proceedings." The impression created was this stance was necessary as this report had come just days before the Presidential election and the FA were arguing the election should be postponed. It was hard to argue with the conclusion, this was a whitewash, one that suited Blatter as he was seeking re-election.


Blatter and his supporters could argue that FIFA did act when members of the beloved FIFA family, in this case the Caribbean Football Union (CFU), presented evidence of wrongdoing. True, the Ethics Committee was on to it like a flash as soon as these family insiders, turned whistleblowers, claimed they had been offered bribes by Mohammed Bin Hammam at a special CFU meeting in Trinidad organised by Jack Warner. And since then its mills have been rolling slowly but relentlessly. The result is Warner has resigned and Bin Hammam, who is suspended, is reported to be facing a possible ban when the Ethics Committee report is published in July.

But observe how this process has been going on. Warner resigns and the FIFA website puts up a message of thanks to him, as if a great man of football has reluctantly had to step down with no stain on his character. Then within days, the Ethics Committee report is leaked and this says, "The FIFA Ethics Committee is of the primary opinion that the accused [Warner] had knowledge of the respective payments and condoned them. It seems quite likely that the accused [Warner] contributed himself to the relevant actions, thereby acting as an accessory to corruption."

All this does is increase cynicism about FIFA. It does nothing to stop the drip, drip, drip corrosive effect of the never ending story of corruption. And as FIFA is a body with world events always being held, like the Women's World Cup in Germany now and the 2014 World Cup Draw next month in Brazil, there are always opportunities for the further drip, drip, drip of corruption allegations and stories to surface. Indeed, next week when the Commons Select publish their special report on World Cup bids, there will be another turn of the FIFA corruption story, this time the British MPs take on it.

What must worry Blatter is the way the Ethics Committee has begun to leak. This gives the impression that there are FIFA insiders not at all happy with the way the corruption story is being handled. FIFA has not leaked like this since back in 2001-2002. Back then, UEFA and Michel Zen-Ruffinen, Blatter's own general secretary, were against him. Those leaks, following the crash of FIFA's marketing company ISL, were part of an intense civil war. Blatter won that war with magnificent short term strategy. But that does not work now and the leakers seem to be telling him that.

So also are the new lot who control UEFA, not best pleased to be associated with an organisation which the world sees as filled with people who are always on the take. Indeed, Blatter is on what amounts to a warning by UEFA that he needs to show he has a strategy to deal with corruption and clean FIFA up. That runs out in September.


The new FIFA executive member from Germany, Theo Zwanziger (pictured above with German Chancellor Angela Merkel), who even asked for Qatar winning the 2022 World Cup to be reopened, gives every impression of being the sort of man Dingemans may have had in mind when he spoke of the good men of FIFA. In a little noticed para in his report he said, "It is apparent from the materials I have read that there are members of the FIFA Executive Committee who enjoy worldwide respect and against whom no allegations have ever been made. These realities are obscured because of the persistence of rumours and lack of transparency."

If Blatter did not read this part of the report, he would do well to do so. Now that he has been re-elected and this is his last term, he does not have to worry about seeking allies, however dubious, to remain in power. But for the short term tactician to develop a long term strategy is like asking a defender to become a centre forward. It is not very likely.

More likely is Blatter remaining football's version of Harold Wilson, the former British Prime Minister. Wilson was famous for short term tactical victories but never developed any long term vision and in the end it proved Wilson's undoing. Blatter has a long way to go before he can prove he is not another Wilson.

Mihir Bose is one of the world's most astute observers on politics in sport and, particularly, football. He formerly wrote for The Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph and was formerly the BBC's head sports editor

www.mihirbose.com

http://twitter.com/mihirbose

Any Parliamentarian strolling past the open door of the Attlee Suite in Westminster on Monday evening would have been startled to see one of the Hon Members engaged in a punch-up in front of a cheering crowd. What's more, it was a woman throwing the meanest of right hooks that was doing most of the biffing and banging.

No worries chaps. The lady in question happened to be the new political champion of the fight game, and it was all quite legit. Charlotte Leslie MP was merely demonstrating that she is pretty nifty herself with her fists, donning the gloves and sparring with the captain of the GB men's boxing team Tom Stalker, as well as anyone else who fancied a round or two with the blonde bomber from Bristol.

A remarkable sight. A Tory she may be, but the slim and feisty Ms Leslie, whose appointment as chair of the All Parliamentary Boxing Group was exclusively reported by insidethegames, is actually a leftie. A southpaw who enjoys having a brawl.

The bash, if you'll pardon the phrase, was certainly a novel way to launch the re-born body, attracting a standing room only crowd of well over 100 boxing and political bigwigs, which included two world champions and 54 MPs who have signed on as members of the group.

Boxing may have had its nose bloodied in the past by the PC brigade but Charlotte (pictured) is on a mission to show that it has now become politically very correct indeed, an ideal vehicle for keeping wayward youngsters of the streets and teaching the discipline and sportsmanship.


Moreover, at both amateur and professional levels it has re-established itself as one of Britain's most popular and successful sports, with five current pro world champions, a record-breaking Olympics in Beijing and a best-ever European Championships in Turkey.

The cauliflower ears were sponged and pressed for a stylish occasion supported by the British Amateur Boxing Association (BABA), which saw MPs joined by a host of people from all walks of boxing, celebrating the achievements of a sport which consistently delivers medal success and increased participation and is widely regarded as a valuable tool in combating a host of social problems.

Barry McGuigan was there, as eloquent as ever in promoting the virtues of the sport, so was Duke McKenzie, another former world champion newly honoured with an MBE for his work in teaching boxing skills to wayward kids.

Rob McCracken, Team GB's head coach came fresh from Ankara where two of his Welsh charges, Andrew Selby and Fred Evans, won Euro golds, while Scouser silver medallist Stalker, a self-confessed ex-scally who used to go "on the rob in Liverpool" before boxing straightened him out, came with the latest rising star, fresh-faced 17-year-old Charlie Edwards, who won a bronze in his first major tournament and according to MC Jim Rosenthal, could be 2012's new poster boy.

The Sports Minister Hugh Robertson lent support together with two of his Labour precessors, Richard Caborn (now Amateur Boxing Association of England (ABAE) President) and Gerry Sutcliife - all are ardent fight fans.

But the bill-topper unquestionably was Charlotte Leslie, who says she watched boxing "in awe" on the telly as a kid, fell in love with it when she saw Lennox Lewis work out in Bristol and took it up seriously herself "when my mother took me to a gym as an angry 13-year-old and it saw me through to my GCSE's. I owe boxing awful lot".

Subsequently she has taught girls how to box and has sparred with Britain's premier professional female fighter Jane Couch.

The critical eyes watching her jab and move on Monday were approving.

I'd certainly back her to beat John Prescott over three rounds.

"Boxing is a pulsatingly tangible example of The Big Society," argues the MP who is undoubtedly one the Conservative's answers to the Blair Babes, a veritable "Cameron Cutie".

"I say to anyone who asks what the Big Society is, go to your local amateur boxing club and if you are standing in the wrong place it will literally hit you in the face."

The 32-year-old Oxford graduate, a freshman MP for Bristol North West, is also a national standard swimmer and qualified lifeguard. Future Sports Minister material?

In the meantime, the present incumbent calls boxing "a fantastic sport". Robertson adds: "In recent years it has emerged as one of Britain's most successful sports through its ability to increase grassroots participation, nurture talent and provide pathways for its most outstanding athletes.

"I know from visiting boxing clubs and seeing the pivotal role they play in their communities that in raising participation and developing talent, the sport is delivering across a range of social agendas and addressing issues such as knife crime, educational attainment and bullying."

The launch included contributions from the Charter Academy in Portsmouth, a secondary school for 11-16-year-olds, which introduced boxing, initially the non-contact version, into the school curriculum, for both boys and girls, with the result being that bullying has significantly declined.

It is now one of the first schools in the UK to include boxing in the curriculum as part of the GCSE-equivalent ASDAN CoPE (Certificate of Personal Effectiveness) qualification.

As McGuigan (pictured) told the audience: "I know from my own experiences, and the work I do now with young people through my academies, that boxing delivers an enormous amount of good to society. It creates opportunities, provides people with a purpose and teaches them about life and the things they need to do to get on and succeed."


Of course he was preaching to the converted, but a sport which has always needed to fight for survival, now has some powerful allies in parliament.

It is also a timely show of feminine muscle with the advent of women's boxing in the Olympics and politically when the blinked dinosaurs of International Amateur Boxing Association (AIBA) refuse to bow to pressure from BABA, the British Olympic Association and the IOC's Craig Reedie to revoke the seemingly vindictive ruling which will bar pro-coach McCracken from assisting British boxers in his customary corner position in the world championships and Olympics.

The case now looks certain to go to the Court for Arbitration in Sport (CAS).

Unless, of course, larruping Leslie can sweet-talk them into submission. If not, there's always the right hook.

Alan Hubbard is an award-winning sports columnist for The Independent on Sunday, and a former sports editor of The Observer. He has covered a total of 16 Summer and Winter Olympics, 10 Commonwealth Games, several football World Cups and world title fights from Atlanta to Zaire

It is slightly difficult to be objective when writing about the Gold Coast.

The place is the very definition of sun, sea and sand and despite the fact that it is supposedly winter here, the beach is full every day, the majority of people walk around in bathing costumes and I have not yet seen a cloud in the sky.

But perhaps most importantly of all, the city does not appear to have put a foot wrong in their critical four-day inspection from the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) Evaluation Commission as they step up their bid to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

And with the vote for the event on November 11 this year in St Kitts and Nevis moving ever closer, the Gold Coast has certainly thrown down the gauntlet to their only rivals, Hambantota of Sri Lanka.

Hambantota are soon set for their own four-day inspection of their credentials to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games, with formal evaluation proceedings in Sri Lanka set to get underway next Monday (June 27).

But they will undoubtedly have had at least half-an-eye on the inspection of the Gold Coast and must now be slightly unnerved after Scotland's Louise Martin, the chair of the five-person Commission made a rather telling closing statement at the press conference, which marked the conclusion of the official inspection of the Australian city.

"Having been here and experienced four glorious days, we understand why the Gold Coast is one of Australia's tourist capitals," said Martin.

"Overall, we can tell you that the proposition of staging the Commonwealth Games in the Gold Coast is an exciting one and appears, based on our initial analysis, to be sound.

"Not only does it appear that the basic infrastructure requirements can be met, it also seems that in meeting these Games requirements important legacies can be generated for the city and region."


The theme of the closing press conference continued in this manner with Martin, who was joined on the top table by fellow 2018 Commission member and CGF chief executive Mike Hooper, failing to pick any notable flaw in the Gold Coast 2018 bid.

For what it is worth, I too fail to see any obvious problems.

After the well-documented problems with the Delhi 2010 Commonwealth Games, with high-profile athlete boycotts, major delays in the construction of venues and fears over health and safety at venues, the Gold Coast looks to offer the CGF a much needed safe option in 2018.

When it comes to the Gold Coast, a lot of the venues are already in place or need only minor overlay before 2018 to reach competition.

A lot of the infrastructure is also in place - there is a hotel on pretty much every street corner - and, as far athlete boycotts go, very few competitors would be foolish enough to turn down a trip to the Gold Coast.

The weather is almost always perfect, the never-ending beach is a two-minute walk from anywhere, the people are ridiculously friendly and it doesn't appear that filling up stadiums will be a major problem.

"We are a little sport crazy in Australia," Mark Peters, the chief executive of the Gold Coast 2018 bid, explained to me.

"If there was a game of marbles going on, over 10,000 people would go to watch it as long as two countries were playing against each other.

"Australians are sport mad, the Commonwealth Games is a major event for Australians and you can be sure that whatever event, they will turn up in their droves."

The only problem with the Gold Coast is that I fail to see how people get any work done.

I write this on the balcony of my hotel room overlooking the most stunning of beaches and I admit I am finding it difficult to maintain concentration, while watching a game of beach volleyball going ahead!

The surfer-look is the accepted dress-code in the Gold Coast and the times that I walked in to press conferences dressed in a suit were the times I have never felt so out of place in my life.

What made up for that small embarrassment though was an amazing helicopter ride over the city.

I still haven't quite got over it and from the air there is no vocabulary to do the view of the Gold Coast any real justice.


I feel I am having far too much fun here and this is the one time I was disappointed to hear that the recent ash-cloud from a Chilean volcano, which has been halting flights across the region, has now cleared.

There are far worse places to be stranded than the Gold Coast.

The next stop for me, as I follow the Commission in their work, is Sri Lanka and I feel that will be the most intriguing of trips.

Unlike the Gold Coast, Hambantota does not really exist at present.

Their plan is almost to construct an entire city, with a central theme of sport, from scratch for the 2018 Commonwealth Games.

They have well-advanced plans to do this and it is something that will be done regardless of whether they win the bid for the 2018 Commonwealth Games as they will host the prestigious South Asian Games in 2016.

In fact, on paper, Hambantota will be ready to host the Games a year before the Gold Coast with the Australian city aiming to complete final preparations for a potential 2018 Games in 2017.

But it is still a tough task for them, even with a number of high profile big-hitters, not least Hambantota 2018 co-chairman and Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka Ajith Nivard Cabraal, fully behind the plans.

The Mahinda Rajapaksa International Cricket Stadium, which opened in February 2011 and staged two matches during the ICC 2011 World Cup, is the only proposed 2018 Commonwealth Games venue to have been built so far in Hambantota where it is scheduled to host the Opening and Closing Ceremonies and the archery if the bid is successful.

The lack of existing facilities in Hambantota is actually the reason why the Commission will be based in Colombo, Sri Lanka's largest city, for the majority of their stay in the country with only a one-day visit to Hambantota.

A lot of the visit in the Gold Coast was made up of boardroom presentations, which hypothetically could have been done in Sydney, Melbourne or in fact any other city with electricity on the globe.

But this is a fact that has not gone unnoticed in Australia with the term "virtual bid" being levelled at Hambantota in the Gold Coast press as they look to highlight the fact that their Sri Lankan rivals have very few tangible 2018 Commonwealth Games venues to show the Commission.

But it would be very foolish to write Hambantota off.

It is 71 Commonwealth countries who will determine the winner of the 2018 bid and you can be certain that, if nothing else, Sri Lanka will put on one hell of a show for the Commission.

The Commission themselves face an interesting task of writing a report on two such contrasting cities. They will release that crucial report on the two bid cities in September this year and their take on two bids will be fascinating.

Will Hambantota 2018 be too big a risk after Delhi 2010?

Will the Commonwealth countries want to take the Games to a new country rather than Australia for the fifth time?

So we head to Sri Lanka with perhaps more questions than answers but very much in the knowledge that the Gold Coast has set an intimidatingly high bar for Hambantota to match.

Tom Degun is a reporter for insidethegames

Earlier this week Sky Sports News broadcast its latest "Special Report" - the latest media attempt to examine the success or otherwise of the promised Olympic legacy of increased sports participation. I had hoped that, at last, the matter would get a proper airing in the media, that in-depth research would lead to probing questions and the fallacy of the sports participation legacy would be laid bare.

Unfortunately, the report was far from "special", failing to answer, or even summarise, views on the single, poorly researched, question it posed.

Of the programme, Sky Sports News stated: "We explore why amateur sports clubs are facing closure as their funding is cut. Should Olympics organisers be doing more to ensure a sustainable legacy?"

The programme pointed out that of the £9.3 billion Olympic budget not a penny is for legacy. The point that Sky's researchers appeared to have missed was that at no stage had any of the Olympics budget ever been allocated to legacy. So, when the programme reported that Haringey Council were cutting the £50,000 required for the upkeep of the Finsbury Park athletics track and that Councils up and down the country were doing similar, they were trying to tie two separate stories together.

Sebastian Coe quite rightly pointed out that "those are Borough priorities and it would be entirely wrong of me to start inserting myself in the local politics."

So, if the Olympic budget doesn't have a responsibility to legacy, whose budget does?

The answer to that question was provided in the first few minutes of the programme when Sport England's chief exeuctive, Jennie Price, told the viewers about Sport England's £230 million per annum budget of which £135 million is specifically earmarked for legacy because of 2012. It sounded very clear to me but somehow Sky's researchers had missed it and their presenter, Julian Waters, continued down the wrong road.

Early in the report, it became apparent that Sky were taking a scatter gun approach to the promised legacy issue but, lacking decent research, even a scatter gun approach lacked aim.

As part of our bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games, Coe and his bid team as well as the Government had repeated time and again that no Olympic Games had produced a legacy of physical activity simply by being staged; that no stadium had inspired a young person to take up sport. The evidence was clear; hosting the Olympics will not provide a legacy of increased participation in sport unless that legacy is specifically planned for. That plan is what we were promised, that plan is what we still await. Sky failed to pick up on this.

So when Coe said "our teams are preparing for 2012 and they will be of huge inspiration to local athletics clubs the length and breadth of this country," he was telling us something he knew, in legacy terms, not to be true. Sky failed to pick up on this so the question as to why he suddenly thought the Games would now produce this legacy where before he didn't went unasked and unanswered.

Next in the sights of Sky Sports' scattergun was the Centre for Social Justice's (CSJ) report into legacy. Cue Hugh Robertson the Sport and Olympics Minister (pictured below right with Price and Coe) telling the camera that he thinks that they [the CSJ] are wrong. However, where the CSJ offered a report and researched evidence, Robertson offered none.


Instead he went on to inform us that we - I assume the Government - are only in the early stages of putting the sports legacy together, something former Sports Minister Richard Caborn would disagree with but, although he was among Sky's panel of experts, was never asked to comment on.

Robertson was right on one point, in explaining that no one would expect them to have secured the promised legacy 14 months out from the Games. However, this is the same Minister who promised that he had a strategy for the development of sport a year ago but has yet to produce it. The same Minister for Sport who - correctly - criticised the previous Government's lack of strategy and use of "initiativeitis" - a term he coined - before going on to employ a policy of, you guessed it, initiativeitis in the hope of producing a legacy of some undefined sort. We still await the strategy.

Laying the ground for the likelihood that the promise made to us all in 2005 was unlikely to be delivered, Robertson stated "no other Olympic City has ever delivered big increases in mass participation on the back of an Olympics so we're trying to do something very new here."

He's right, of course, on both counts. It has never been done before, ergo it is something new. Unfortunately no one from Sky thought to ask him "How?" That is, what is the plan?

Sky Sports News had assembled a panel for the programme of former Sports Minister Richard Caborn, Times reporter and former Olympic table tennis player Matthew Syed and former NBA star turned basketball developer John Amaechi. It should have been a good panel but the debate was fairly aimless, the presenter allowed direct questions to go unanswered and statements went unchallenged and unexamined.

Waters asked: "Whose responsibility is it to make sure that next summer's Olympics are not just 19 [sic] days of sport and nothing more?"


It's a straightforward question and easy to answer. As part of the bid Tony Blair (pictured with David Beckham) sought and received support and commitment from all parties for the promised legacy of more people participating in sport. It was a Government promise which made up part of the bid. Responsibility therefore sits fairly and squarely with Government, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and with their quango Sport England.

The panel chose to ignore the question and so the viewer never found this out. Instead, Caborn decided to tell us about the legacy delivered through School Sports Partnerships. A component of a lasting legacy maybe, but Caborn demonstrated blind faith in his initiative failing to explain the need for the integrated approach he referred to later in the programme. Regardless, School Sports Partnerships are scheduled for termination by the current Government in September.

The former Minister did try to bring us back to the matter at hand pointing out that the £50,000 per annum needed to maintain the Finsbury Park athletics track used as the programmes backdrop, was a local authority issue.

He went on to state that he would "argue very forcibly that investment into these facilities is good for health, good for social inclusion, good for education and it is also good for sport as well." He went on: "I don't think that message has got across as firmly as it ought to have done in Whitehall."

Why not? As the Minister for Sport wasn't that part of his responsibility? Isn't this a key component in making the case for legacy and wasn't that legacy promised by all parties in 2005?

Sadly, none of those questions were asked. Instead we returned to the Olympic budget of £9.3 billion. Yes, it is a huge sum but we had already established that the promised participation legacy didn't come from that pot. Nevertheless, the panel were asked: "Should Coe speak out on legacy?"

Frankly, we all should; and Coe speaking out, provided he avoids the usual spin and sound bites pre-approved by his PR people, would be welcome as he does have the ear of politicians. And remember, forget the £9.3 billion Olympic budget, it is politicians of all parties and the DCMS who promised the legacy and Sport England - not London 2012 - who hold legacy budget.

Instead, courtesy of Syed, we returned to the old chestnut of there being no evidence of the Olympics ever having any kind of legacy effect on young people and participation. Everybody knew that and acknowledged it at the time of the bid. That is why the plan for achieving the participation legacy is key: The still absent strategy.

Syed (pictured) did introduce a suggestion that something underhand was going on. He told us that "in fact Game Plan, a Government document that wasn't published at the time, said all this but we were not told as a public when we were being looked at for support for the Games."


I'd have hoped for better from an established sports journalist who works for The Times. But never let the facts get in the way of a good story, or do the research to check what you are saying is correct. For the record, the Olympic bid was won in 2005, three years after Game Plan was published and available to one and all via Sport England's website.

No, and apologies for repeating myself, we - the nation - went into the bidding process with our eyes open, we knew that just holding the Olympics would have no effect on sports participation levels. We were promised that legacy would be delivered via an additional plan.

Amaechi brought us back on track reminding us that sports participation legacy work has, successfully been taking place. Unfortunately he was referring to International Inspiration, another part of the promised legacy; that of increasing sports participation in other countries.

Back to the UK, Amaechi questioned the promise that had been made pointing out that "you can't promise the country a certain type of result, young people playing in Olympic facilities was the image dancing in everybody's head, and then deliver on the other hand the idea that young children simply looking at Olympic venues from their estate is a result."

So, have we established that? It seems clear that no one believes buildings will inspire participation. But then, no one ever did. So did the programme now move on?

No such luck. Without boring you with the full details the point was regularly returned to. I, on the other hand will move on.

Caborn proceeded to inform us about the UK Schools Games at which 1,300 young people will compete and which is now in its fifth or sixth year - he appeared uncertain. On to legacy at last, even if 1,300 is not exactly mass participation.

Caborn told us: "That is part of a legacy for sport as far as the Olympics is concerned. It would not have happened had it not been for the Olympics." As a former Minister for Sport one would have hoped that he had heard of the English Schools Athletics Championships, an event that was first run in 1925. Athletics - along with many other sports - had its own version of the School Games 23 years before even the last London Games in 1948. So why something like the UK School Games would not have happened without the Olympics is not entirely clear and whether they are adding new participants to what existed is, at best, questionable. Unfortunately Waters appeared to lack the knowledge to question Caborn's assertion.

Instead, Syed picked Caborn up on whether the Schools Games would add anything to the legacy aim of increasing participation pointing out that 16-35 year olds are playing less sport now than they did in 2007. As Syed put it: "The words are great but the evidence doesn't back it up."


Caborn chose to respond by talking about schools sport, ignoring the 16-35 age group and talking about the increase in quality PE participation enjoyed by school children under Labour. Forget the debate - he had a political point to make.

Caborn did show an understanding that schools, clubs, elite, coaching and more all need integrating to generate a genuine lasting participation legacy. Unfortunately neither his nor the current Government applied that sound thinking to any integrated planning for the development of sport in this country.

He pointed out that in not integrating our planning we are missing the trick, "for example, like the Germans and French have done."

I hoped we were now getting there. Where? Pay attention!

Remember the cuts to funding for sports facilities, the £50,000 per annum required to keep the athletics track at Finsbury Park open, somewhere for the population to play sport?

I hoped because in France and most of Western Europe sports facilities, sports development and community sports clubs enjoy statutory protection. Not in the UK. I hoped that Caborn or maybe the ineffective Walters could introduce this apparent gap in UK sports provision to the discussion. It is something this blog has regularly suggested should be a key component of legacy planning; statutory protection for sport.

Without such protection it is inevitable that Councils like Haringey will cut funding to facilities like Finsbury Park when funding is tight. Why? Because by law they have to preserve those other services which do afford statutory protection. They might not want to cut sports provision, but that is not the point.

But having brought Germany and France into the debate, they were forgotten and not mentioned again.

Amaechi skirted the issue by talking about the cost of playing sport and how the fees add up and can be a deterrent. He raised the issue that the CSJ had previously reported about coaching needing to be relevant and appropriate -  "kids don't stick around just because the ball is shiny.....they want somebody that they can connect with."

His comment hinted at the need for an integrated, planned approach not the expensive and unproductive initiativeitis relied on by Governments past and present.

The first half of the programme ended and I was left wondering what was the point? Surely it would improve? Surely Sky's researchers had dug up some facts? Surely they were going to speak to someone who had a deeper understanding of sports development and of strategy?

The second half started promisingly. Double Olympic steeplechaser, school teacher and coach John Bicourt openly questioned the participation figures Sport England produce - which this blog has discussed - and which do not bear any sort of close examination. The programmes second reporter, Geraint Hughes, was not interested. Bicourt was cut short and we returned to the panel.

Amaechi wasn't playing and suggested that the way participation is measured is "problematic" that to get meaningful data measurement of consistent participation is needed whereas Sport England's measure is "episodic."

Caborn, the Minister under whose party's stewardship the measurements were introduced, speaking about boxing - he is the President of the ABA - suggested the figures don't represent the real picture. He told us that if we are talking about more people being active the figures are moving in the right direction but if we are talking about participating in sport they are probably going down.

However if Bicourt, Amaechi and Caborn are all correct - and the evidence suggests they are - and the way the figures are gathered is "problematic". How we know any of this with any degree of certainty was not explained. Thanks to independent research we do know that the data for athletics are grossly over exaggerated, so must assume the same for other sports in the absence of further research. An important element of judging the success or otherwise of any strategy is the ability to measure accurately.

But let's get back to the point at hand, the promised legacy. The panel were asked: "Are their two sides to this, supply and demand? Supply of facilities and demand from people to use them?"

We're back to needing an integrated strategy again without anyone really grasping and making the point. Syed did inadvertently pick up on a vital element of strategy though; that it is based on sound research and consultation, that what it sets out to achieve is achievable. He talked of picking figures from the air referring to the now abandoned target of one million more people taking part in physical activity. He talked of how randomly the figure had been chosen.

John Amaechi described the possibility of returning to the Finsbury Park athletics track just before the Games start to find it closed as "criminal if we have promised one type of legacy from the Games and, because we've decided certain facilities have to go, that doesn't get delivered."

Pointedly, he went on: "What's going to happen here at the Olympics could be worse even than just people not participating afterwards, it could be that you excite young people to play, they go out into their communities to look for where to play and they come here and they realise it's grassed over, it is no longer a facility where they can get the right kind of coaching and the right kind of development. That would be a true tragedy."

Indeed it would John.

Amaechi's poignant statement aside Sky Sports News Special Report failed to address the issue of the promised legacy of more people playing sport. It rambled; it failed to zero in on salient points when raised. It suffered from a lack of research, misunderstanding and failing to establish who is responsible for the legacy; it's planning and its delivery. Ultimately it didn't just fail to answer the question it had posed, it failed to offer any conclusions at all.

So what should the programme have addressed?

Having clearly identified that simply holding the Olympics will not increase participation the programme should have asked; how are we planning to deliver the legacy we were promised? Where is the legacy plan?

A sharper more focused programme might also have asked why, as part of that plan, sport in the UK is not afforded the same statutory protection it receives from many of our European neighbours.

And if they really wanted to probe they might have asked why the fixation with structure when, without clear strategy we have yet to define what structure would best benefit direction, management and delivery of that strategy?

We are not talking about anything more than sound sports development principles and sports development planning. We are talking about the need for a fully, vertically integrated, strategy for the development of sport in the UK.

Perhaps next time Sky Sports News commission a "Special Report" into this area they should ask: Olympics or not, with the millions of public money funding sport in this country why have we never had such a strategy?

Jim Cowan is a former athlete, coach, event organiser and sports development specialist who is the founder of Cowan Global, a company specialising in consultancy, events and education and training. For more details click here

If Seb Coe was driving back to his Surrey home late on Saturday night and had the car radio tuned to LBC 97.3 his eardrums would have been assaulted by a volley of abuse coming from disgruntled Londoners.

Mostly from those who had lost out on the initial ballot of Olympic tickets but also others who thought what is about to engulf the city next year is a total waste of time, space - and money.

For a good couple of hours the airwaves crackled with ire and invective as the regular phone-in conducted by the excellent Nick Abbot became awash with epithets like "scandalous", "outrageous", "disgraceful", even "criminal".

I appreciate that these phone-ins are more often little more than a repository for nocturnal nutters with nothing better to do. But the volume of hostility towards Coe and the Games organisers was astounding. And actually quite worrying.

This was not just because the likes of "Pissed Off of Peckham" hadn't got a ticket for the 100 metres final, or even the preliminary rounds of the water polo, but because suddenly Londoners had awoken to just how much disruption there will be to their lives when the five-ringed circus starts to hit town a year from now. And how much it will cost.

Many miles of road closures, oppressive security, daytime deliveries to shops curtailed and prices hiked for almost everything.

It was always going to be this way, of course (it happens at every Olympics) but few seemed to have realised it - until now.

There are those, myself included, who believe it will be worth it, but clearly there are hundreds of thousands of Londoners who don't.

Judging from the vehemence of the callers their beef wasn't simply about those who aren't getting tickets - but those who are: VIPs, sponsors, corporate fat cats, politicians, and, yes, the media (some 11,000 of us).


As someone pointed out, Boris Johnson jokily made great play of missing out in the ballot but the Mayor's office will be allocated 2,000. So there's fat chance of Bojo, should he be re-elected, having to hover outside the Olympic Stadium asking a scalper the price of two nice ones together.

Similarly, the Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, political overlord of the Games, claimed not to have got any either, but his Department of Culture, Media and Sport will end up with £750,000 worth for "special guests". No doubt a Mr and Mrs J Hunt will be among them.

On a more positive note it is good to see the British Olympic Association will be allocating tickets to former Olympians. The Tickets for Troops scheme is laudable, though surely there are equally deserving cases, not least nurses and firemen.

However, I believe where LOCOG have gone wrong is in not having more tickets available to the general public, thus making them more of the People's Games we were promised they would be, and reserving fewer for the hospitality hoo-rays.

It may have cost a bit more but it would have been good PR and saved a lot of the current aggro.

Apart from the ticket situation, what seems to be getting up Londoners' noses more than anything is the 56 miles of roadway that will be exclusively for the use of the "Olympic family". Venture into these lanes if you dare and you'll instantly be £200 poorer.

Fair enough. Something similar happens in all Olympic cities, but London seems to have decided on a more aggressive approach, with such an extensive network and a longer period for which parts of the city will be a no-go area.

Supervising it will be a jobsworths' charter.

What is becoming increasingly apparent is, while for the majority these Olympics will be a fabulous, memorable experience, others will continue to see them as an unaffordable irritant.

No doubt Coe has seen all this coming. When I last interviewed him he was well aware that while the bouquets had been showered on him and his team virtually since the day the bid was won in Singapore six years ago, barring the odd hiccup, the brickbats lay in waiting along the road to 2012 in the final year of preparations.

As I have said before, no-one has greater admiration than me for what Coe has achieved so far but he will need to keep a flak jacket handy during the next 12 months.

The ticket situation has been a PR disaster, even though it is hard to argue when he insists that technically it could not have been handled in any other way - except perhaps making more available to the genuine punters and not raking in the money before people actually knew what tickets they would be getting, if any.

London may be well ahead of the Games, rightfully basking in the glow of praise from the IOC for organisation that so far has been impeccable, arguably the best-ever.

But the Olympic honeymoon is over. As Coe knows only too well, the last lap will be the most hazardous, with himself and all at LOCOG under microscopic scrutiny from an increasingly forensic media and the more sceptical elements of the public.

One irksome question that will run and run is why so many roads need be affected, some by up to three months, by the introduction of those Olympic lanes, which will necessitate costly reconstruction, with the removal of pedestrian crossings, installation of special traffic lights and new signage.

Most Olympic competitors will be housed in the Games village within the Olympic Park, so who will use them?

Why, the IOC bigwigs of course, transported to Stratford in their chauffeured limos from their five-star hostelries in and around Park Lane.

So why are they ensconced in the West End and not the East End, where the Games are taking place?

Funny, I thought 2012 was all about boosting the regeneration of East London, with the hearty approval of the IOC.

There are some pretty good hotels in Docklands where jolly Jacques and slippery Sepp could bed down for the night.

But, supremely comfortable as they are, they aren't called the Dorchester, the Savoy, the Hilton or the Lanesborough, and for so many sybaritic IOC members they are rather a long way from Annabel's, the Ivy and the pole dancing lovelies at Spearmint Rhino.

Alan Hubbard is an award-winning sports columnist for The Independent on Sunday, and a former sports editor of The Observer. He has covered a total of 16 Summer and Winter Olympics, 10 Commonwealth Games, several football World Cups and world title fights from Atlanta to Zaire.

Rory McIlroy's exuberant victory in the US Open has been greeted exuberantly across Ireland – all across Ireland.

Golf is one of the most open and integrated of sports in that island, and so the exploits of the 22-year-old from the Belfast suburb of Holywood have been celebrated north and south of the border, as were those of that other Ulsterman and US Open winner from last year, Graeme McDowell.

McIlroy's sport is a uniting force in Ireland. But this fresh-faced young champion will face an awkward divide a little way down the road when he comes to choose who to represent at the 2016 Rio Games, at which golf will be a part of the Olympics for the first time since 1904.

Under the terms of the Olympic Charter, any sportsmen or women living in Northern Ireland have the choice of competing at the Games for either Great Britain and Northern Ireland, or for Ireland - just as they have the choice of holding a British or an Irish passport, or both.

If McIlroy builds on his first major win in the way most observers fervently hope and believe, he will be among the world's top 15 golfers promised automatic entry into the Rio Olympics, where the field will be extended to 60 for both men and women with players from different nations who do not already have two representatives.

"Rory McIlroy, of Great Britain and Northern Ireland....Rory McIlroy, of Ireland..."

Which will it be?

As you might imagine, both the British Olympic Association (BOA) and the Olympic Council of Ireland (OCI) are eager to claim the Boy Wonder for Rio.

"While golf's exciting re-introduction to the Olympic Games is still five years away, we would of course be delighted for Rory to make himself available for selection to Team GB to represent Great Britain and Northern Ireland at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games," a BOA spokesman told insidethegames today.

Meanwhile the view from Ireland is equally hopeful.

"It will be a very interesting selection if Rory is planning to compete when the 2016 Games come around," an OCI. spokesman told insidethegames. "Obviously we would very much hope that Rory chooses to compete for us.

"We would love him to be in Brazil representing Ireland, but it will be his personal choice and nobody will be putting him under any pressure over it."


Canvassed on the topic in September 2009, shortly before golf was voted back into the Games by the International Olympic Committee, McIlroy commented: "It's a bit of an awkward question still, but I have a British passport and it would be Great Britain for me."

But will he still feel the same way when Rio's sporting carnival begins to get itself in motion?

The man from the OCI laid much store by the way in which the Golfing Union of Ireland (GUI) have guided and supported McIlroy since he began playing tournaments as an amateur at the age of 16.

As amateurs, all golfers compete for Ireland whether they are from the north or south of the border.

And since turning professional in 2007 McIlroy has also represented Ireland in the World Cup because, while England, Scotland and Wales compete separately, there is no Northern Ireland team in the event.

The Irish camp will have drawn much encouragement from McIlroy's graciously offered thanks in the course of his post-victory press conference: "And a big help to me growing up was the Golfing Union of Ireland and the help that they gave me throughout my junior career and amateur career, enabling me to go and play in different places in the world, learn about different conditions, different cultures, which really prepared me for coming out on tour."

Eugene Fayne, President of the GUI, who was at Congressional to see McIlroy's win, commented: "Our coaching systems and our elite programme has been a huge factor in Rory's development and that of many other young Irish players. I think it's reasonable for us to take pride and enormous satisfaction from that."

The OCI spokesman added: "There are other things in our favour, too. For instance, Rory's caddy, JP Fitzgerald, is from Dublin."

What is not likely to be a factor in McIlroy's decision is religion.

"I wouldn't like to comment on Rory's religion," said the OCI spokesman. "Holywood is a very nice, mixed area of Belfast, and the golf club is too. Once you mention religion, people start putting you into political boxes. Everybody in Ireland – north, south, east and west - was thrilled for Rory about his win. And the same was true for Graeme last year."

While some of Britain's finest Olympians are from Northern Ireland - Mary Peters, the 1972 pentathlon champion, Alan Campbell, single sculler extraordinaire from Coleraine – McIlroy would be very far from isolated should he choose to represent Ireland.

Over the last 30-odd years, around 25 per cent of the Irish team have come from Northern Ireland.

Thus, at the 2008 Beijing Games, Britain took the silver medal in the 3km cycling pursuit through Wendy Houvenaghel, originally from Londonderry. But Ireland fielded their first triathlete at the Olympics in Emma Davis - who came from Bangor.

What is not open to any doubt is the glorious and growing wealth of golfing talent with the island of Ireland right now.

"It's very early days yet," mused the man from the OCI. "But if we were able to field Rory, along with Graeme and Padraig Harrington – well, I think we'd do OK!"

Mike Rowbottom, one of Britain's most talented sportswriters, has covered the last five Summer and four Winter Olympics for The Independent. Previously he has worked for the Daily Mail, The Times, The Observer, the Sunday Correspondent and The Guardian. He is now chief feature writer for insidethegames. Rowbottom's Twitter feed can be accessed here.