New Delhi, Oct 1 (IANS) Following the storm is the calm, and excitement and expectations are building up as the countdown for the 2010 Commonwealth Games nears its finish.
A majority of contingents from across the globe have given the thumbs-up to the facilities, the environment and of course the security, yet it is a moot point whether these are comparable to the best elsewhere or are, at least, of the highest class.
India has certainly gone the distance to put on a show that would project a positive image of a country that has the wherewithal to host a Games of this size and magnitude, the 2008 Beijing Olympics being a reference point.
Two summers ago, China’s mighty political machinery ensured that the Olympics in Beijing raised the efficiency bar and set standards for facilities and hospitality that would be difficult to match, leave alone better, as London, the venue of the 2012 OLympic Games, is discovering.
The Commonwealth Games suffer in comparison to the Olympics in terms of its relevance, significance and importance, but yet, big enough to attract leading sportspersons.
The Delhi Games have lost some of the gloss following the pull-out of several high-profile sportspersons and the situation does raise a pertinent question, even if it may be too late to debate it – whether the effort to host such an extravaganza was worth the enormous expense.
At first glance, the facilities for the Delhi Games, though completed way behind schedule, are comparable to some of those in Beijing that unveiled the stunning Bird’s Nest Stadium and the Aqua centre for the swimming competition.
For all that, such quality facilities tend to become a financial burden over a period of time, as in the case of Montreal, Canada, that took decades to clear its debts incurred on staging the 1976 Olympics.
In this context, last month’s Youth Olympic Games in Singapore perhaps provided a sneak peek into the future trends of hosting mega sporting spectacles.
The YOG was compact in terms of number of participants, disciplines (in relation to summer Olympics) and duration, while budgets were kept on a leash through a moratorium on new construction. The existing facilities were either upgraded or renovated.
Further, each participating country was allowed to enter only one team in a sport of its choice while basketball witnessed an innovative three-a-side, single hoop matches held at a venue with a circus top.
Although the YOG evoked only lukewarm interest among the international media and spectators, the event threw up interesting possibilities with regard to future multi-discipline Games.
With the Olympics and other multi-sport regional competitions like Asian and Commonwealth Games becoming prohibitively expensive, perhaps, the YOG template could be the way forward.
Like recycling, optimum use of existing infrastructure rather than constructing costly stadia, and limiting the number of participants would make hosting such mega ventures a pleasure rather than a pain.
