IOC chiefs 'make secret plea' to use London 2012 venues as Rio 2016 Olympic Games fall behind schedule
An informal approach has been made by IOC chiefs to ascertain whether enough of the London 2012 Olympic venues could be brought back into use, report claims
So worried are Olympic organisers by how far behind schedule the 2016 Rio Games has fallen, London has reportedly been asked, in secret, if it could host the event at the last minute.
According
to the London Evening Standard, an informal approach has been made by
IOC chiefs to ascertain whether London's 2012 Olympic venues could be
brought back into use.
The build-up to the Rio Games has been labelled a shambles, with every venue
badly behind schedule, spiralling costs and accusations of negligence.
IOC vice-president John Coates has already called Brazil's preparations "the
worst I've experienced", with just two years to go and a football World
Cup to host in between.
An "unprecedented" special task force has been set up to try and
speed up preparations but the situation on the ground is said to be "critical".
A source told the Standard: "At a comparable planning stage in
2004 Athens had done 40 per cent of preparations on infrastructure, stadiums
and so on. London had done 60 per cent. Brazil has done 10 per cent - and
they have just two years left. So the IOC is thinking, 'What's our plan B?'
"Obviously, the answer would be to come back to London. It's very unlikely but it would be the logical thing to do."
London has hosted the Olympics in an emergency before. In 1908 the event was due to be held in Italy, but Mount Vesuvius erupting forced a move.
However, 'London 2016' would be a "worst-case scenario" because many of the 2012 sites have already been converted into public use. The cost of upgrading them to competition-standard again would cost millions, not to mention that the athletes' village is now populated by private residents.
Indeed, a spokeswoman for the International Olympic Committee said the question of the Rio Games being moved to London was a "non-starter and unfeasible".
OS COMENTÁRIOS DOS LEITORES SÃO AINDA MAIS HUMILHANTES: