´óÏó´«Ã½

yay first comment
well personally I think they would be barking mad to move it there ;)

what was wrong with Bisley?

The home of shooting is Bisley and by having the games there would gaurantee a lasting legacy for generations of shooters that follow! It's completely lunacy to do what they are proposing. How can temporary stadia be the answer to any sportsman's dreams when the basic infrastructure alreay eXists to deliver a perfectly good event?

Does your definition of "basic infrastructure" include accommodation for athletes, efficient public transport for athletes and spectators, media facilities for thousands of journalists and all the facilities those people need? Everyone already knows the answer to that.

What you mean, I suspect, by "basic infrastructure" is Bisley has a few shooting ranges, which is basic indeed.

It does appear that the contractual obligations of the Olympic Games 2012 were serious sidelined by the euphoria of winning the event.
The current understanding of the complexity of Olympic specification venues comes across as seriously lacking.
Does anyone at LOCOG or the ODA understand the enormity of addressing Olympic spec venues ?
LOCOG and the ODA come across as far too many layers of management and certainly little practicality.
If the Mayor of London can save the taxpayer a tidy amount.

I think this move is a brilliant step in the right direction for shooting at the 2012 Olympics...

Woolwich was an inpractical and a venue which was not thought out properly

Bisley is not a good option either, i know it is the "home of British Shooting" but for those who are shooters like myself, just look at the state of the Lord Roberts Centre which was used for the 2002 Manchester Commonwealth Games... it is in all honesty run down, some equipment isn't working correctly because it has not been properly looked after and its bloody expensive to shoot there...

Great Move LOGOC!!!!

... and at least with a temporary facility the legacy can be shared out across the whole country afterward, its a long way for some people to get to bisley!!!!

There are less than three years to go to the Games. I'm incredulous that Barking Riverside is still being considered. There is surely insufficient time to transform it ... which would require an enormous input of resources. Has Boris even visited the place? The transport links are abysmal. There is no railway or underground station within walking distance. The A13 in this vicinity isolates rather than connects the site. Eastbound it is regularly backed up from the North Circular (A406) roundabout at Beckton. The junction with the A13 is difficult and dangerous for eastbound traffic, turning into Renwick Road, which crosses the London-Southend railway line via a road bridge that is inadequate. This entire area is ugly in the extreme. River Road is home to a dirty, down-at-heel industrial estate (check out the pollution in the little creek that runs through it). Many of the businesses are scrapyards. A huge monolith of an electrical switching station dominates Barking Riverside. Other ex-power generation buildings there are derelict. Giant electrical pylons stride across the landscape. Most of the brownfield land is covered in several metres of fly-ash from the old power station, although lately large areas have been covered by millions of tonnes of clay deposited by the housing development there to provide the bases for construction. And it remains in spirit the land of the Krays.

There's no sporting logic for Barking. I doubt whether its supporters have even considered what would provide the best experience for the competitors and their audience. It's a cynical grab-for-cash by Boris, LB Barking & Dagenham and the highly-political management of Barking Riverside (the Homes & Communities Agency), the last of which should instead be focussing on the more mundane, but far more important, matter of the long-term transformation of this area. They've set this bandwagon rolling because this high-profile development, in an area of low-value property, is struggling in the wake of the collapse of the housing market. I don't blame them for seeking 'new' cash, but they shouldn't treat the Olympians and their spectators so casually.

Hmmm I have to be totally honest and say that this story is about as interesting as watching paint dry, no I tell a lie its slightly less interesting. Although anything that is one in the eye for the government cant be all that bad, so on that bias I am all in favour for anything that the government opposes and vice versa.

In respoense to 'Vlad_The_Inhaler'

1. - a few shooting ranges... agreed but nonetheless in place

2. - efficient travel links... that's the whole point of the games. A few extra minutes travelling isn't going to put out anybody!

3. - thousands of journalists!!! In all my experience of watching an olympic shooting final I have yet to see any kind of resemblence to a multitude of jouranlists moving into the 'thousands' as you say. It is a sport which most countries are happy to cover using the main broadcast provider. A handful of countries might have a vested interest in competitors who may have a chance of medalling and will therefore also attend.

4. - facilities. No matter where the event ends up being held there will need to be massive investment in the facilities that the attending people will need. The question to be considered is that whereas after the games at Barking, Woolwich, wherever it will be held the infrastructure will be pulled down, Bisley will be able to use some of the facilities for future international shooting events. It would put it at the forefront of international shooting.

It is a great shame that we already have some of the finest shooters in the world but because the second rate infrastructure and amenities in place do not provide good enough support we will always struggle to compete in the 'Olympic' events.

I thought that the whole point of having the games in the first place was to encourage the next generation of sportsmen and sportswomen. The shooting community will be only to accomodating to the level of interest from the public and indeed it is a great sport where your average shooter can rub shoulders with olympic medalists. Unfortunately they have to do so in inadequate arenas up and down the country! Therefore the impression that viewers may percieve will be very different from the realities that await them if they do decide that they would like to have a go.

Lasting legacies arise out of inspirational decision making that looks outside the box. Look at the model of cycling and how they now have a modernised home with which to provide training, support and the kind of venue which only can motivate an individual to succeed. They are now the pride of the British Olympic movement but it is not that long ago that to succeed in cycling you had to be self financed and do everything off your own back!

It is always easy to dismiss or marginalise sports which are not P.C. but in the past shooting always brought home medals because of the kind of self motivated determination that could get you far in the days of level playing fields across the world. However whilst other countries continue to invest in their sporting arenas we decide not to. Nowadays being excellent is not always enough. The margins between medalling and not are infinitesimally small. Without the right kind of support, guidance and coaching technical abilities are not enough. You need the entire package which will be torn down after the games for shooting.

why not?! barking's a dump after all and needs regeneration

I don't care where any of the events are held, as long as the are housed in permanent structures.
Where is the legacy in temporary buildings?