Positives & Negatives of the London 2012 Olympics...So Far !!

[Bold Dave]

How long to recruit, interview, train , test, get qualification, get documentation, allocate role accommodate and transport to post?? Obviously less than 8 days according to head of G4S as that is when they realized they may be a few short.....

Sorry but too many people wanted too few tickets whatever they did someone was going to be disappointed that issue is sad but understandable. However planning to recruit qualified staff for a fixed contract on a fixed day is pure logistics and project planning and these guys could not cut it!

As I predicted the hints of "the government moved the goalposts on numbers and locations" is being whisper no doubt we will here more on that front as G4S look to go Teflon and pass the buck.

[Bold Dave]

Originally Posted by comeondarlo

Your judgement is clearly clouded by your dislike of JT and I don't disagree he's a vile man.

That doesn't alter the fact that the case shouldn't have gone to court but it did and he was found not guilty......impervious to the law?? I don't think so.

Remind me next year (where ever it's held), I'll debate you to death on this one.

Good luck to yours also, I'll be watching the results.
btw I've spotted a great young flyer coming through (imo of course)

Sorry guys but I mean what I say, there is no doubt that money can buy you "better law" we have seen a succession of footballers be caught on video never mind witnessed beating people up assaulting nightclub staff with bottles and still walking away "innocent" after the court case. And you really think the local yob from the council estate would get the same result with a court appointed lawyer on legal aid???
A good lawyer and barrister can make all the difference what about "Mr Motor" the specialist at getting the rich off speeding and alcohol charges. Call me a cynic but you can skew things in your favor if you have the money (Redknapp Dog Monaco??) then they can find the technicality that suits - Did JT say it - Yes, but the Judge said they must show malice??? if that was the case why did CPS put it forward as that would be difficult to prove in the extreme?? However should he get less that 8 match ban (Liverpool Suarez - on testimony of opponent alone no video) then this is a travesty. Liverpool lost key player during critical part of season JT had his case postponed to suit Chelsea then again to suit England???

Sadly I expect to be disappointed here as well.

[comeondarlo]

Originally Posted by Bold Dave

Sorry guys but I mean what I say, there is no doubt that money can buy you "better law" we have seen a succession of footballers be caught on video never mind witnessed beating people up assaulting nightclub staff with bottles and still walking away "innocent" after the court case. And you really think the local yob from the council estate would get the same result with a court appointed lawyer on legal aid???
A good lawyer and barrister can make all the difference what about "Mr Motor" the specialist at getting the rich off speeding and alcohol charges. Call me a cynic but you can skew things in your favor if you have the money (Redknapp Dog Monaco??) then they can find the technicality that suits - Did JT say it - Yes, but the Judge said they must show malice??? if that was the case why did CPS put it forward as that would be difficult to prove in the extreme?? However should he get less that 8 match ban (Liverpool Suarez - on testimony of opponent alone no video) then this is a travesty. Liverpool lost key player during critical part of season JT had his case postponed to suit Chelsea then again to suit England???

Sadly I expect to be disappointed here as well.

I agree with most of that apart from the very last line but I except that you maybe right with this too.

The burden of proof needed is a lot less for the FA and on the balance of probabilities JT is guilty imo. So following that through JT should get a lot longer than Suarez, afterall Suarez admitted it!

[Linny]

I don't understand how a black man can be upset or offended by some one calling him black. I do understand how a black man can be upset or offended by some one calling him a f***ing c***.

I therefore cannot understand how, when a black man gets called a f***ing black c*** the only thing that anyone seems to find upsetting or offensive (or worth pursuing in court) is the use of the word black - incidentally the only word that doesn't need censoring on here or before the watershed.

Had the use of the word black been accompanied by "f*** off back to (insert country or habitat here) you f***ing black c***", I would agree that this could be seen as racist, upsetting and offensive (a bit how Eric Cantona felt a few years back and was given his ban for reacting) but without that I don't understand why this abuse is racist.

[swimclublurker]

Linny, please stand for Parliament, the common sense party. I would vote for you!

[BIGBrian]

Originally Posted by Linny

I don't understand why this abuse is racist.

I don't think that was the issue, was it? There are a whole slew of offences related to racism and racial abuse, but he was charged with a "racially aggravated public order offence"

Calling someone a f***ing c*** in a public environment is presumably a public order offence if someone hears it and complains about it.

Adding the word "black" into the mix sounds like it fits the criteria for "racially aggravated". Its not whether the word "black" is offensive in itself....he just didn't need to say it at all.

[SwimMumx2]

Originally Posted by Linny

I don't understand how a black man can be upset or offended by some one calling him black. I do understand how a black man can be upset or offended by some one calling him a f***ing c***.

I therefore cannot understand how, when a black man gets called a f***ing black c*** the only thing that anyone seems to find upsetting or offensive (or worth pursuing in court) is the use of the word black - incidentally the only word that doesn't need censoring on here or before the watershed.

Had the use of the word black been accompanied by "f*** off back to (insert country or habitat here) you f***ing black c***", I would agree that this could be seen as racist, upsetting and offensive (a bit how Eric Cantona felt a few years back and was given his ban for reacting) but without that I don't understand why this abuse is racist.

I have spent a lot of time discussing these issues, and the point is whether words used are intended to be demeaning by the user. A person in a wheelchair if crippled, might find a taunt 'crippled c***' offensive, although the first word, just like, 'black' in your post is merely a matter of fact. I have seen black men refer to one another as 'N*****', and laugh. This however, is unlikely to be acceptable from some one of another race unless the person being spoken to has no doubts that the speaker does not intend to demean them.

Back to Pros and Cons:

Another Pro - all the excitement in the air about London
Another Con - the meanness of the organisers - wanting people to ferry athletes and others around in their cars for free (my cousin said when she was interviewed as a volunteer, she was asked if she was happy to do this. She is not licensed to do this, and as she wouldn't have been reimbursed her fuel etc. costs, she said no. A friend of hers said yes, and was accepted to do this, but after speaking to my cousin, also pulled out. Not sure if this was before Addison Lee got involved...)

[BIGBrian]

Originally Posted by SwimMumx2

I have spent a lot of time discussing these issues, and the point is whether words used are intended to be demeaning by the user. A person in a wheelchair if crippled, might find a taunt 'crippled c***' offensive, although the first word, just like, 'black' in your post is merely a matter of fact. I have seen black men refer to one another as 'N*****', and laugh. This however, is unlikely to be acceptable from some one of another race unless the person being spoken to has no doubts that the speaker does not intend to demean them.

Back to Pros and Cons:

Another Pro - all the excitement in the air about London
Another Con - the meanness of the organisers - wanting people to ferry athletes and others around in their cars for free (my cousin said when she was interviewed as a volunteer, she was asked if she was happy to do this. She is not licensed to do this, and as she wouldn't have been reimbursed her fuel etc. costs, she said no. A friend of hers said yes, and was accepted to do this, but after speaking to my cousin, also pulled out. Not sure if this was before Addison Lee got involved...)

She should check her insurance also. Some insurance companies won't regard ferrying people around like that, even on a volunteer basis, as "Social Domestic and Pleasure". There are more than a few companies that will take it as "business" use, even if it's unpaid other than expenses

[broomhillsaved]

Negative: huge tax breaks for corporate sponsors of the Olympic Games:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/page...ition#petition

See longer article here:
http://ipswichspy.wordpress.com/2012...pic-games-9-2/

Double negative: HMRC are currently pursuing five-a-side football for 20% VAT on pitch hire (see Daily Telegraph campaign)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...he-nation.html

[broomhillsaved]

A small facebook group has been started by those who wanted to work for G4S:
http://www.facebook.com/groups/249251515177229/

It describes some of the difficulties they've encountered.

[BIGBrian]

Without wishing to sound too "I told you so", I said months ago that there would be a lot of empty seats at the Olympics and it's proved to be the case.

Hundreds of empty seats at the pool for the first session, (one of the sessions I failed to get tickets for because they were apparently all sold).

They've been allocated to corporates and dignitaries who were never going to show anyway. The cheap seats higher up are crammed, but the more expensive seats are empty.

Absolute disgrace

[johnhy]

Totally agree - but its the empty seats in the higher parts thats more upsetting

Did anyone else think Ryan Lochte should have been taken out in the 400IM - breaststroke turn he definitely hadn't started the arm stroke (there'd been no movement of the hands) before his fly kick.

[comeondarlo]

Originally Posted by BIGBrian

Without wishing to sound too "I told you so", I said months ago that there would be a lot of empty seats at the Olympics and it's proved to be the case.

Hundreds of empty seats at the pool for the first session, (one of the sessions I failed to get tickets for because they were apparently all sold).

They've been allocated to corporates and dignitaries who were never going to show anyway. The cheap seats higher up are crammed, but the more expensive seats are empty.

Absolute disgrace

Aren't the seats that you are on about for swimmers and coaches?

Good news (for me anyway), I got a call yesterday afternoon with an offer of three free swimming tickets for tomorrow morning. Happy days!

[BIGBrian]

Originally Posted by comeondarlo

Aren't the seats that you are on about for swimmers and coaches?

No

[comeondarlo]

Originally Posted by BIGBrian

No

Where do they sit?

It's ok, Mark and Claire have just explained it to me