[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by abailey3313

The Olympics have never done anything for me.

Same here for the most part. Though part of the reason for me is there being too many sports in the Games relying on judging to produce a winner. This is particularly bad in the Winter Games, where it seems almost every sport requires judging.

I dislike judged events for the most part because I'd rather see the result determined objectively by the athletes directly in the competition rather than by the post-performance subjective opinion of a panel of judges. Given the brouhaha at the last Winter Games vis-a-vis the judging in figure skating events, having lots of judging-dependent sports doesn't interest me. There's just too much room for argument as to whether the judging was fair or not, whether the right critera were really being judged or not, and so forth.

[randomlefty10]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoPadres19

Well in that case, lets ditch Table Tennis. China has ruled in ping-pong so lets ditch it.

http://tabletennis.about.com/od/tour...bl_olympic.htm

It just doesn't make sense. They would rather have nothing then softball and baseball. What in the world would the harm be in having those sports. I could somewhat understand if they had sports replacing them, but they don't.

Something is always better than nothing.

Ugh.

The harm in baseball/softball would be in the extra cost it takes to build baseball and softball fields in countries that for the most part do not care about baseball/softball.

So because China is really good at Table Tennis so the IOC should get rid of it? Ok, lets ditch Gymnastics too because the Romanians are really good at that. The chinese are good at diving, so that goes. America in track and field, guess we don't need those events either.

The harm in baseball/softball would be in the extra cost it takes to build baseball and softball fields in countries that for the most part do not care about baseball/softball. (maybe if someone keeps saying this enough, people will get it??)

Something is not always better than nothing, but it's certainly always more expensive.

The harm in baseball/softball would be in the extra cost it takes to build baseball and softball fields in countries that for the most part do not care about baseball/softball.

The harm in baseball/softball would be in the extra cost it takes to build baseball and softball fields in countries that for the most part do not care about baseball/softball.

Have I mentioned the cost of the Olympics? Someone want to look up what the Athens games cost? I believe it was something around 11.7 billion dollars http://www.suntimes.co.za/zones/sund...t/finish1.aspx

[SanDiegoPadres19]

Ugh right back.

If they couldn't afford it, that is something they should have thought about when they bid for the Olympics. **** this is stupid. And you totally took out of context what I was saying about Table Tennis. The poster before me said the reason baseball and softball was nixed was because we are so good at it. So if you look back, China has dominated pingpong so I said lets get rid of it for an example. On top of that, Who the hell cares about pingpong. 12-year-olds.

It shouldn't be about money. It should be about the games. Maybe if someone says that enough, others will get it.

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by Long_Long_Name

Baseball shouldn't have been part of the Olympic program anyway. It has no place there. It's not very "global", and a poor team can easily beat a good team - which is ok during a 162 game season, but a short tournament is not doing a service to the game. Sure, the games give baseball exposure, but I don't think baseball needs to be part of the Olympics.

Rare as this is, I agree with Jean.

[Long_Long_Name]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Rare as this is, I agree with Jean.

It's rare?

[randomlefty10]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoPadres19

Ugh right back.

If they couldn't afford it, that is something they should have thought about when they bid for the Olympics. **** this is stupid. And you totally took out of context what I was saying about Table Tennis. The poster before me said the reason baseball and softball was nixed was because we are so good at it. So if you look back, China has dominated pingpong so I said lets get rid of it for an example. On top of that, Who the hell cares about pingpong. 12-year-olds.

It shouldn't be about money. It should be about the games. Maybe if someone says that enough, others will get it.

London can afford it otherwise the IOC couldn't and wouldn't have given the bid. The sports were cut afterwards and nobody knew for sure it was going to happen.

No, I didn't take it out of context, because the poster before didn't say that. Here's that entire post for people who don't want to scroll up.

Originally Posted by Post in question

Quote:
Originally Posted by enuttage
So just the 3 make up 8-9% of the world's population. What do those other 10 make up?

What's the percentage of the world that plays squash competitively?

-E

Can you please point out where he said baseball was cut because America dominates it?

"Who the hell plays pingpong?" Apparently, lots of people. http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/pro...p?SportCode=TT

Originally Posted by IOC

Table tennis has become the world's largest participation sport, with 40 million competitive players worldwide and countless millions playing recreationally.

Your relentless attacks on other sports in terms of "who the hell cares" is infantile. Try backing up some of your claims with facts, maybe someone will care.

Finally, it shouldn't be about the money? Everything is about money. And when you have a glaring inefficiency in the budget, you correct it. Baseball and softball added more cost than they made up in revenue, simple as that.

[Dargone]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Rare as this is, I agree with Jean.

Agreed...

[Giantsfan]

OK, i am English so i may be biased about the removal of baseball from our Olympics, but i wrote the 'article' below to try and just...well...i dont know, vent some feelings i guess! Its a small issue in terms of life and death (which we in Britain are obviously familiar with atm), but its a very disappointing decision none the less.



Major League mistakes have worldwide ramifications

Sunday 10th July, England – At 12.46pm on Wednesday afternoon, London, and the whole of Great Britain, was celebrating the magnificent achievement of winning the 2012 Olympic Games. Two days later, and one small part of that Olympic dream was shattered for the dedicated followers of baseball in the United Kingdom. The IOC’s decision to exclude baseball and softball from the Olympics is a disastrous blow to UK baseball and its followers, ending the hopes of a baseball venue in Regent’s Park, as well as the chance to grow the game on a national level. Baseball Softball UK executive John Boyd summed up the dismayed mood by describing the ‘shocked’ feeling as well as the ‘cruel’ decision to remove baseball from the list.
Of course, the simple fact is that for the majority of people around the globe, including those who love baseball, the sport seems to be intrinsically linked to Major League Baseball. MLB dominates the baseball landscape with its ever-growing world name and its huge prestige, but for all it has done to promote the game worldwide, it may have delivered the cruellest of blows. Without doubt, the International Olympic Committees decision was based around three important elements. One, that the best players in the world do not compete at the Olympics. Secondly, an anti-American bias that emanates throughout the world’s political structures, and finally the issues of doping.
Based on the IOC’s reasoning above, many other sports should be being discarded to the Olympic trashcan, the reason why they are not though is because baseball, unlike other sports, has all its attention focussed on one professional league, MLB. It is a mistake made by virtually everyone of us, automatically thinking of baseball as a Major League organisation, where the Commissioners Office can run everything to do with the game. This is a wild falsity. Even in the USA, the Minor Leagues represent a semi-independent form of professional baseball. The sport is hugely popular in South America, in the Caribbean, has a growing market in Europe, has a solid market in Australia and rules over much of the Far East. All are hurt by the IOC’s decision.
Players from far more countries from America play the game of baseball. America’s past time it may be, but the sport is now a worldwide game. The best MLB players may not attend the games, but what about stars from Cuba, or teams from the Netherlands, who strive for Olympic gold. Olympic soccer certainly does not have its best starts showing up, nor even all top tier countries competing, yet it survives as an Olympic sport. To remove baseball because some players do not want to come and play is illogical, biased and bordering on ridiculous. Did anyone see Shaq in Athens for team USA basketball, or did the world simply enjoy watching the players who were there giving it their all?
The issue of doping was also mentioned by IOC chief Jacques Rogge as a possible reason for the removal of the sports. Of course, you have to be living on the moon to realise that MLB has not had a big problem with performance enhancing drugs in recent years, but then professional soccer leagues in Europe have been found guilty of match fixing. Also, without wishing the make ill-educated statements, are you seriously trying to convince me that sports like ‘weightlifting’ have not been under the worldwide steroid cloud. In using doping as a reason to kick away baseball, the IOC has done a disservice to competitors from Japan, from Australia, from Italy, from virtually every baseball federation in the world. To look at the problems of one league, even if it is the premier one, and judge the worldwide sport on their actions, shows ignorance from IOC members.
Baseball and softball barely survived for the 2004 games in Greece, now Beijing could be their last appearance, at least until 2016, when it will be too late for Britain. The big losers in this poor decision are baseball players from over the breadth of the globe, including those in America, who miss the opportunity, too represent their country in the games. In addition, softball loses. Seemingly for no reason, softball was lumped in with baseball because they look like similar sports, despite the fact they are clearly separate entities. If softball was not played predominantly in America, or even had a different name, then I have little doubt it would have survived for London. The biggest loss though, is almost certainly for Great Britain. BSUK and the sports followers were perhaps more jubilant than most on Wednesday because of the unimaginable boost baseball would receive in the UK, now, we are resigned to the fact baseball will still go without a real venue, and any attention in the sporting market.

[edrooney]

"Secondly, an anti-American bias that emanates throughout the world’s political structures"

I assume you're going to back up that statement with proof.

The decision, as confirmed by London's Olympic Organisers, was one of cost. For the other sports mooted to replace it, there are either existing facilities, or facilities which will remain in existence after the Olympics have finished.

A diamond in Regents Park, or some other location, would be removed after the 2012 event simply because there's not much point having a permanent baseball field in a country that doesn't support the sport to much of a degree.

I'm also disappointed that baseball isn't going to be a part of the London Olympics. But it's just the logical continuation of my ongoing disappointment that baseball is not taking off in this country.

The decision is one of cost and reward. Pure and simple. Although MLB's refusal to take the issue of drug-taking seriously despite pretty much every other sport in the world doing so should also be a factor.

[edrooney]

dola,

I assume that softball was also discarded not because "softball was lumped in with baseball because they look like similar sports", but because it would require similar (if not the same) facilities as baseball, and so we have the cost / revenue reason again.

I could be wrong about this though - I know nothing about softball. Is it like rounders?

[Giantsfan]

If cost were such a large factor, then how could London's bid accomodate baseball and softball in the first place? Whether cost is used as an excuse (valid or not), the games could have accomodated both sports. Also, many other sports have costly arena's, as well as temporary arenas (ie beach volleyball) yet they survive. I fail to see why baseball should have been singled out for any logical reason. Applying the logic of cost and temporary stadiums would eliminate other sports also.

[edrooney]

Originally Posted by Giantsfan

Applying the logic of cost and temporary stadiums would eliminate other sports also.

Fair enough. As an example, they'll be having Beach Volleyball in The Mall (I think I heard). I assume they'll be clearing away the sand in time for the Queen (or King Charles III as it might be) to open Parliament.

I think that cost and infrastructure are the reasons, as they've stated. My guess is that they looked at the sports for which these were problems, saw baseball as a minority sport (globally speaking) and dumped it.

I understand and share your disappointment. I imagine ardent enthusiasts of Beach Volleyball would be equally disappointed if that were shelved. As a silver lining, this decision is only relevant to 2012. Baseball is still an Olympic sport, and would not need to be reinstated for 2016 (as I understand it), but would naturally come back into the fold.

[Thunder044]

As far as venues go, we dont have(and didnt have then) a national baseball league, but the Sydney venues were purpose built, with a view to use beyond the 2000 games, even the sports we arent exactly competitive in. I am disappointed about the dropping of certain sports, I just hope prohibitive location costs arent the overiding factor in their demise.

[reds1]

So I guess the venue that now presents the best of international baseball competition are the Pan-American Games. But perhaps this is fitting, since the baseball powerhouses are located mainly in the Americas anyway.

However, they are not as widely visible as the Olympics. (Next Games: Rio in 2007).

[Jonzard]

The World Baseball Classic should help fill the hole left by the olympics. I for one am more excited about it than I ever was for the olympics. It is too bad for the college players that would be olympians though.