Choice of Olympic city not about money, IOC chief says

If it was, 'we would have have come to Chicago,' Rogge claims

The Olympic movement doesn't choose host cities on the basis of who offers the best marketing opportunities, International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge said Monday.

If that was the case, Chicago would now be celebrating as the host of the 2016 Summer Games, he said.

"It is clear that the IOC in its choice has not chosen, as it was criticized many times before, for the money. Had we had big money as a consideration, we would have come to Chicago, that is quite sure. That shows that money is not the driving force in the choice of an Olympic city," he insisted.

Rogge's comments came as questions about Rio de Janeiro's victory took over the closing press conference of the 13th Olympic Congress. The three-day conference, which followed the selection of the host city for the 2016 Games, looked at the values of the Olympic movement and how it can become more relevant in society.

But delegates at the congress raised questions about the growing expense and bureaucracy of the bidding process.

Several influential IOC members -- including Sweden's Gunilla Lindberg and Switzerland's Denis Oswald -- said changes are needed, especially to prevent "sympathy votes" from members for bids that have no real chance of success.

It is believed those "sympathy votes" were partially responsible for Chicago being knocked out in the first round of voting on Friday, even though it was widely considered a favourite alongside Rio.

Rogge said while the congress wasn't supposed to deal with such matters, he heard the concerns, especially since they related to the 2016 process.

"The congress is concerned there is a need to control the cost, size and complexity of the Games, but to also get it to a level that it would allow candidate cities of emerging countries to be selected."

The IOC may look at cutting the year-long applicant process in half, as well as other measures, he said.

Insiders have said the selection of Rio, with its untried sponsorship markets and emerging economy, could jeopardize the Olympic movement's financial stability. About half of the money the IOC gets from broadcast rights and sponsorship fees is used to support sport development through national Olympic committees and sports federations.

"I don't think personally there will be a significant diminishing of the revenues of the Olympic movement. But wait and see," Rogge said.

The thorny issue of human rights, which became a central public theme during the 2008 Beijing Games, also arose during the congress. Minky Worden, a delegate from Human Rights Watch, proposed the IOC establish a broad commission on human rights that would examine countries' records. Her recommendation was not adopted.

"We have the responsibility to work for the respect of human dignity within the sphere of sport. We cannot be held responsible for everything that happens in the world," Rogge argued.

Within the sports sphere, however, the IOC will seek "the best possible, objective unbiased information" and advice from human rights organizations, including groups such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the United Nations Human Rights Council, he said.

He also said the Olympic movement continues to be strongly opposed to "the trading of nationalities and passports" by rich countries seeking athletes who can deliver gold medals.

The congress wants a code of conduct and certification system to protect athletes' rights when dealing with agents, managers and sponsors.

The congress also raised concerns about the treatment of athletes during and after their Olympic careers, and about the growing digital divide that threatens to separate the Olympic movement from young people. It tabled 66 recommendations, all of which will now be studied, Rogge said. - source

***
This is good to hear that the decision on the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro was not based on money alone. The Olympic spirit is more than that.