Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy

London 2012 chair “impressed” by Glasgow 2014 preparations

August 3 2011

London 2012 chair “impressed” by Glasgow 2014 preparations
London 2012 Chairman Lord Sebastian Coe has praised Glasgow’s 2014 preparations on a visit to the city – his first ever.

The whistlestop tour took in various Games venues including an established international rowing facility at Strathclyde Park and the main Velodrome and Village site in the east end.

Coe said: “With just less than three years to go, it is impressive to see and hear first-hand about the preparations to stage the Commonwealth Games Triathlon event in 2014. It is clear the Glasgow 2014 organisers have put athletes at the heart of their decision making to ensure they have the best possible competition experience.”

Glasgow 2014 Chairman Lord Smith said: “Everyone is getting excited about the Olympics coming to London next year and our own countdown is now under the three year milestone. I’m delighted to welcome Seb Coe to Scotland to see just how big a difference both events are making north of the border.”


#1 Posted by Barry on 3 Aug 2011 at 14:19 PM
Seb Coe is impressed with Glasgow? That's good news -- us lowly Scots can sleep better at night now that Sebby approves of Glasgow's preparations.

Oh, one thing though: Glasgow's Commonwealth games are being entirely funded by the Scottish government and Glasgow city council in an 80/20 split. Unlike London 2012 and Manchester 2002 (English commonwealth games), Glasgow, a Scottish city is not receiving UK taxpayers money.

So, excuse me for not caring if Lord Coe 'approves' or not with our Commonwealth games.

But one thing dearest Lord Coe is not approving of is Scotland's (and Wales/N.Ireland's) legal right to not participate in the Team GB football team in 2012. His words, when asked about this was : "F*ck em". Yep, Lord Coe, whose wages are in part facilitated by the UK taxpayer, and whose Olympic games job as head of London 2012 is facilitated by UK taxpayers funding the building work, showed nothing but crass bigotry towards the non-English ppl, also funding the Olympic games.
#2 Posted by RAB on 3 Aug 2011 at 15:07 PM
I'd have said that too frankly.
They don't wanna play with us? Fine, fuck 'em.
Methinks Seb is not the worst zealot here.
#3 Posted by Barry on 3 Aug 2011 at 15:21 PM

If you did say that, you too would have illustrated your own bigotry.

Scotland (and Wales/N.Ireland) are SOVEREIGN football nations. Do you know what that means? Yep, that means, independent sports bodies.

Back in2006/07 when all this drama was happening, FIFA, the world governing body of football, could not guarantee Scotland that its footballing sovereignty.Thus, Scotland, due to FIFA's non-guarantees, could not sacrifice its own sovereignty for the sake of an Olympic U-23 football competition.

Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland's FAs sent a letter to FIFA to say they support England playing as team GB however. A perfectly respectful reply.

Thus RAB, if you too used such crass remarks a la Seb Coe, you too would have just demonstrated your own ignorance of the situation.

At no point did Scotland,Wales or Northern Ireland act inappropraitely.Indeed, they acted within the boundaries of international law.

I take it you, being a man of morals, were recently outraged when England's FA LIED to the media and said it had reached ana greement with the home-nations football associations over this incident? Of course, England's FA made that up and the Scottish FA exposed them lying. Got nothing to say about that RAB?

Seb Coe is leader of the London 2012 games. His wages are paid in part by Scottish taxpayers. The vnues being built, over which his job is ultimately based, as paid in part by Scottish taxpayers. His word were out of order.

1174 events for the Olympic Cultural Olympiad at a cost of £80million has been decreed. Out of 1174 events, Scotland is only receiving 7 events --that's 0.6% of all events. England is receiving over 98% of all events. The 2012 games are the UK games but in terms of the Cultural Olympiad, England is receiving almost 100% of all the events. RAB, does that upset you?

Oh, and 98% of all building contracts went to English firms.

Glasgow is having to stage a Commonwealth games without any UK taxpayers money. Manchester in 2002 got over £112million of UK taxpayers money to build their main stadium.

So, excuse me for not caring if Lord Tory-boy Seb Coe approves or not of Scotland's effort.

#4 Posted by h.a. on 3 Aug 2011 at 16:21 PM
yes yes, but anyway, he wouldn't be very British if he hadn't expressed how "impressed" he is, regardless of it being true or not, so what is the big deal?
#5 Posted by Barry on 3 Aug 2011 at 16:42 PM

The point is that we're all expected to jump for joy that Lord Coe says he's impressed with Glasgow's progress, whilst ignoring his comments regarding the GB football team. In addition, Glasgow is meant to be grateful that it is getting a wee pat on the back from the 'distinguished' Lord Coe who has the privilege of leading the UK taxpayer funded London 2012 project. Glasgow 2014 does not have that privilege.

Oh, and it's a big deal because Lord Coe has still never apologised for singling out Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland when he told them to basically f*ck off even though their actiosn were backed by FIFA.

Lord Coe didn't chastise England's FA who this year were caught lying about making a "historic agreement" with the other home-nations' football associations.

Let's be frank, what Glasgow is spending for ALL OF ITS games preparation, London has just spent on building the ONE athletics stadium which after the games is being handed over to a private LTD English premiership football team.

Glasgow doesn't need tokenistic little pat's on the back from arrogant Tory-boys. It needs to be treated fairly just like Manchester was in 2002 when it got over £112million of UK taxpayers' money to build its main stadium.Glasgow is getting Zilch. But hey, Seb Coie, who was slagging Scotland off not that long ago is engaging in a bit of PR with Glasgow 2014 so let's all pretend everything if swell. Nah.
The Bairn
#6 Posted by The Bairn on 3 Aug 2011 at 18:01 PM
well I personally dont know anyone who is 'getting excited' about London 2012 do you?
its on TV, Beijing, Sydney or Mars its location doesnt matter a jot when you're unemployed...
#7 Posted by FW on 4 Aug 2011 at 07:13 AM
I think you need to go lie down, Barry.
#8 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 14:13 PM

Go lie down?

Is that because I have stated some objective facts? Must one always take a lie down if one states facts?

I think perhaps you should read up on the costs of the London 2012 Olympics, how it is impacting Scotland negatively, and how Glasgow 2014 is being treated unfairly compared to Manchester, and English Commonwealth games host in 2002.

I'll pass on the lie down sweetie.
#9 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 14:16 PM
i'm missing the bit in the article that mentions fitba...
#10 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 15:22 PM

Try to understand the wider context. The very man now doing PR (Seb Coe) was not long ago attacking Scotland (and Wales/N.Ireland).

So, the fact the article does not mention "fitba" does preclude comments on the wider nature of the Commonwealth games and the environment in which they are being developed.

But if you are happy to have a guy, slagging off (wrongly) your country, getting thousands of pounds of wages via the Scottish taxpayer and then grinning like a Cheshire-cat as we're all expected to have convenient memory loss over his actions--you are free to ignore that. I'm not.

I want Glasgow to get its fair share. Glasgow is spending £524million on its games. That's all entirely Scottish money.

London and Manchester 2002 both got UK taxpayers money.

Clearly, once again, it's a Scottish city getting short changed when we have precedents of English cities getting favourable treatment.
#11 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 15:50 PM
"London 2012 Chairman Lord Sebastian Coe has praised Glasgow’s 2014 preparations on a visit to the city"
so he can't say something positive because previously he said something negative about something completely different?! and it's me that has to look at the wider context?! - it's hardly a cutting remark to say he was impressed - or do you think it's just him coming up to rub glasgows nose in it because they got more government money for london!?
gcc gets a lot more government money than other local councils, but i'm not that bitter about them having the games in glasgow, i'd certainly be offended if someone from glasgow praised a public building in edinburgh that got lots of money poured into it....
#12 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 16:13 PM
@ wang

All the fake, phoney PR nonsense getting spewed in the media regarding Glasgow 2014 is just that -- PR. It's all smiles for the cameras.

Glasgow doesn't need buffoonery like this. It needs to be treated fairly just like Manchester was when it hosted the Commonwealth games in 2002. Glasgow, unlike Manchester, is not getting UK taxpayers funding. Further, Glasgow is following on from London 2012 where millions of Scottish pounds have been poured into Stratford. Glasgow is having to deal with this double whammy offset further by the global economic recession.

Seb Coe clearly demonstrated his disdain for all things non-English. Thus, to say his remarks were not related to anything is a gross misundertanding. His "f*ck em" remark was a disgrace and still has not been retracted. And nwo this Tory-boy is whoring it up in Glasgow, part of the province he told to "f*ck off". Excuse my while I don't burst into song and dance.

P.S London didn't "get more" government money for the Olympics. That implies Glasgow is getting some. Glasgow's games are being entirely funded by an 80/20 split via the Scottish government and Glasgow city council. What London got given to spend on one Olympic athletics stadium via the UK taxpayer, Glasgow's is spending for its entire budget,venues and overlays.
#13 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 16:49 PM
erm... and where do the scottish government get their money from?!
seb coe, has his views which you are clearly offended by, so if you take all his comments so seriously why not take this one as him appreciating something glasgow has done?
#14 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 16:58 PM

Q.Where do the Scottish government get their money from? A.Taxes from Scottish people who get up everyday and work and pay their way. Oh, and not exclusively from England as you are trying to imply.Please give that fallacy a rest.

A more prudent question would be : where did Manchester get the funds for its £112million stadium it used to host the athletics events in 2002? The answer: the UK taxpayer. The same taxpayer funding system not currently being used to fund Glasgow 2014.

I care too much for Glasgow and Scotland to sit by and just accept the clearly unfair treatment it is receiving.Perhaps Wang, you are happy to see Scots be taxed for London 2012, Manchester 2002 and then have no help for when they are playing host to a major games. I'm not.
#15 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 17:22 PM
ahh, i see it does work both ways, all the scottish tax money goes to the scottish government, but it also all goes to the uk government?
#16 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 17:27 PM

No. Scotland should get treated fairly. That means, when it hosts a Commonwealth games, it should get UK funding. The reason is due to the fact that Manchester, an English city, got UK funding when it hosted the games in 2002. Thus, a precedent has been set.

So yes, things should work both ways. If by both ways you mean that when Scotland hosts a major sports event, it too gets UK funding like south of the border.

The only loser in all of this is Scotland -- £150million was taken from Scotland and gifted to London for 2012. In addition, Manchester received over £112million of UK funding for its Commonwealth games.

Glasgow is not being gifted the same privilege.Whatever way you slice or diced that Wang, that's not fair.

#17 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 17:55 PM
by both ways i meant you are suggesting that scottish tax payers money is exclusively scottish and pays for the glasgow games, but then the same scottish tax payers are paying for the london games? it's either one way or the other, either our taxes go to holyrood or to westminster.
it seems that the government south of the border chose to spend money on the games there, and then the scottish government spend their money on the games here, it's up to the scottish government to decide what the money they get from westminster goes on in scotland, i would suggest you should have a wee tidy up of all the toys around your keyboard now :)
#18 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:01 PM

By fair, I mean Scotland gets the same treatment as its counterparts South of the border.Nothing more. Nothing less. Both Manchester and London have received UK wide financial support. Glasgow has not. That's a clear example of unfairness.

Wang, I don't think you are understanding the political set-up of the UK which is rather embarrassing.

Manchester held the commonwealth games in 2002.It got UK wide funding to the tune of £112million. Manchester is an English city.

Glasgow is hosting the 2014 games. It's receiving ZERO UK funding. Zilch.

That has nothing to do with the Scottish government who have been vocal about this unfair treatment.They want Glasgow to get its fair share of funding like it should!

And what do you mean by the government south of the border?

The London 2012 games are the UKs. Not England's you ignoramus. The UK is made up of 4 nations of which England is one. Can you not comprehend that?Did England all of a sudden have a team England in the Olympics? Thought not. It's a team GB (actually meaning all of the UK as N.Ireland are given option to compete for Republic).

And it's not either one way or the other regarding funding. As of right now, Scotland is a part of the UK. Glasgow, as of right now, should be getting UK wide funding because Manchester got it. It's not fair that an English city gets that kind of help but Glasgow, a Scottish city does not.

The givernment South of the border did not choose to spend their money on anything. Can you not comprehend, part of their funding was based on UK wide money (that's Scottish, Welsh etc). Scotland was never given that priviedge. That's the whole point. FFS. Can you not comprehend that?

#19 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:06 PM

Can I suggest you polish up on what the UK actually is.

For future reference Wang, the 2012 Olympics are the whole of the UK's.

And the UK (United Kingdom) is made up of 4 nations : Scotland, N.Ireland, Wales and England.

Hopefully that clears things up for you. Perhaps in future you won't make ignorant statements like you just did which were factually wrong.

P.S. Scottish taxpayers ARE funding two games. The 2014 Commonwealth games and the 2012 Olympics.The Commonwealths are where Scotland must get its fair share as a precedent has been set where English cities get UK wide funding. Hope that clarifies that for you wang.
#20 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:19 PM
You do understand that our tax goes to the uk government to divide up rather than straight to the scotland?? - scottish taxpayers are paying for two games as are the rest of the uk as it all comes from the same pot!
#21 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:21 PM
and i never once mentioned england, please try to understand the difference between westminster government and england
#22 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:26 PM

Manchester hosts commonwealth games in 2002 and gets £112million of UK wide funding. Manchester is an English city.

Glasgow is hosting 2014 Commonwealth games. It's getting NO UK wide funding. Zilch. Glasgow is a Scottish city.

The point of fairness is: Scotland is being shafted when it comes to it hosting the commonwealth games in comparison to when England hosted in 2002. Simple. As. That.

The rest of the UK is not paying for 2 games. Are you really this ignorant?

The Glasgow 2014 games are being funded by the Scottish government (80%) and Glasgow city council (20%).

What part of that says England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Manchester was gifted £112million of UK wide funding (that is, money from Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland) to build it's main stadium. Glasgow is not getting that.

#23 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:30 PM
and was the bid for the games not organised by the scottish government - including a business plan to fund it, that would have been the time for them to look at the funding streams, clearly they thought it was possible with the funding they had access to at that point - and none of this is even relevant to seb coe praising the way it had progressed, or anything to do with the football associations
people are trying to make what they can of the games - a visit from seb coe isn't going to bother them too much, why should it anger you at all?!
#24 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:31 PM

I'm not sure how to make this simple for you as you are clearly not grasping this:

Glasgow is not getting UK wide lottery funding like Manchester did. Thus, Manchester was aided by UK wide funding to boost its games that Glasgow is not receiving.

That's got nothing to do with "distributing the pot". You are wrong.

If one city gets lottery funding directly for the purpose of its games (Manchester) and Glasgow isn't, that's a clear discrepency there whatever way you frame it.

The Scottish government is paying for the Glasgow 2014 games largely. Not Wales. Not England. Not N.Ireland.

So please get your facts straight.
#25 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:33 PM

No. The government and city council are funding the games. It's an 80/20% split.

Manchester was awarded £112million pounds of UK lottery money for its games (in addition to the local government/council input).Glasgow, unlike the English city of Manchester has not received this funding which IS unfair.
Carlo M
#26 Posted by Carlo M on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:34 PM
#27 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:37 PM

Can I suggest you actually read up on this. You are clearly in the dark regarding what Seb Coe has said in the past and why it DOES relate to what is going on.

One minute you are trying to conflate the UK to mean England and then wrongly trying to say Wales, Northern Ireland and England are paying for the 2014 games which is simply not true. Oh, and then you conveniently ignore the objective fact that Manchester got massive UK funding for its games which Glasgow IS NOT receiving.

But when your lack of intelligence was exposed, your retort was something along the lines of toys and keyboards.

Please get clued up mate.
#28 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:38 PM
@Carlo M

zzzzzzzzzzzz...... to you aswell. How dare people use such as myself use the comments section to engage in commenting on the given subject. Your 'zzzzzzzzz' adds what exactly to the discusssion?
Carlo M
#29 Posted by Carlo M on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:41 PM
You're a bore Barry, that's all, nothing personal. I'm sure you mean well, but for fecks sake get a life
#30 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:44 PM

In simple terms just for you:

-Glasgow is spending £524 million on the 2014 commonwealth games. This includes all the costs : Ceremonies; venues, overlays, etc.

-Glasgow, although it is funding the games in an 80/20split with the Scottish government, is not getting the same help with regards to funding that Manchester got. Manchester is the last British city to host the Commonwealth games so is a good comparison. Thus, if Manchester, a city in England is viable for UK WIDE funding (it received £112million for its stadium alone), then Glasgow should get funding of that nature too.The Scottish government has repeatedly campaigned for this.

-Saying "well, when they bid, they bid with a budget so tough, they'll just have to do without UK funding" is silliness.Manchester too was given funding AFTER they were awarded the games. Not before. And it was based upon the details of their projects.
#31 Posted by wang on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:46 PM
seb coe is one man, you clearly don't like - fact
we, as scots pay tax into the uk economy (enlish, welsh and irish pay in too) - scottish parliament gets money from (uk government) westminster (as do other devolved states) but i guess you think scotland only gets back the money it puts in so that to you means only scotland is paying for the scottish government spending?
at no point have i mentioned england - you seem to raise that constantly, when you are the only one to have mentioned it.
If the scottish government didn't think it was possible to have the games without extra funding, they wouldn't have put forward a business plan that said they didn't need it...
I am away to "get clued up" maybe you should do the same, and put away the seb coe voodoo doll ;)
Carlo M
#32 Posted by Carlo M on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:47 PM
and take the poker out from up your backside
#33 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:48 PM
@Carlo M

Oh well Carlos, nice to see you have much to contribute to the topic. Oh wait, you don't.

There's nothing more tedious in life that non-entittes such as yourself who comment on other people's comments without actually commenting on the topic at hand.

The topic is about the Glasgow 2014 games and I'm raising issues relating to them.

Your 'zzzzzzz...' comment added what exactly?

Anyway, facts exists independent of you. And whether you find them "boring" or not is irrelevant.

#34 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:49 PM
@Carlo M

Why are you talking about bumholes on a Glasgow 2014 topic? Can you not actually talk about the subject at hand.

Does people engaging in discussion offend you so much that you bypass the topic to attack their comments. That's a bit weird.
#35 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:49 PM
@Carlo M

Why are you talking about bumholes on a Glasgow 2014 topic? Can you not actually talk about the subject at hand.

Does people engaging in discussion offend you so much that you bypass the topic to attack their comments. That's a bit weird.
#36 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:53 PM

It's not a case of the games not being possible without the UK funding.

It's a case that Glasgo should not be deprived of it since Manchester got it when they hosted in 2002. Simples.

Not sure why you can't comprehend that or if you've just taken a contrary position for the sake of it but hey ho.

As for Seb Coe. Yep, I dislike the smary man. Not a fan of people, who attack others based on bigotry a la his football comments. Also think its highly crass when he was wrong in what he said and how he didn't attack the English FA for getting caught lying this year. But hey, no-one ever said Tories have morals.
#37 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 19:59 PM

Manchester also spent 'money' from the council budget on its games excluding its UK wide lottery funding. By definition, some of that money will also have come from the UK taxpayers too in some way, shape or form. But it's still Manchester's money for all intents and purposes.Just like the budget's Scotland deals with in a devolved state is also 'their' money.

What has to be commented on is when a deliberate UK wide lottery fund was allocated to Manchester to fund its games.That is, a fund for the purpose of building venues which is being taken straight from the UK wide funding system (that is, not council, government etc).

Glasgow has not received that. Thus, Glasgow is not getting the same Fair treatment that Manchester did.That's clearly not equal.
#38 Posted by "El" on 4 Aug 2011 at 22:04 PM
I think there have been a few too many crossed wires here.

I don't know too much on this but having just read 30 odd posts (most of which were basically the same) I can however comment on what has been posted.

@ Barry; Seb Coe does seem like a Smarmy twat and I'm sure 98% of Scotland doesn't give a toss what he says but it could just well be that the journalist caught him off guard and he actually meant what he said. Which to be honest wasn't much and slightly condescending. Can we not just ignore him?

I agree that "Lottery" funding should be available to everyone fairly but how much Lottery funding has really been given to Glasgow?
Surely the fact that the vast majority of Glasgow’s infrastructure is already in place has meant that the funding required aid the games is significantly lower?

Also, I think there may have been confusion between you and wang as to what you meant in your first few posts by "UK wide Funding". I thought you meant Government funding too to begin with.

On the issue of taxes, they go into a massive pool of money at the British Government in Westminster (which I'm sure Scrooge McDuck would love to have a right good swim through). It is then given to each of the devolved governments & assemblies to play with. A great deal has been done to try and raise our pocket money but that’s basically what it is, our allowance. I can't say for sure if my taxes have come back here or if they have been given to some other "worthy cause" somewhere else in the UK like Kyle Lafferty's sister or Craig Bellamy's Aunt but the same could be said of the reverse. I have to agree with Wang on this one. Some poor sod in Birmingham is more likely to have helped pay for these games than you or I have

I’m proud to be having the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow and don’t really give a damn if we don’t get the support that someone else got in the past. What’s done is done. Lets just make sure we can do it better than everyone else.

Anyway, 38 posts surely that has to be a record.
#39 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 22:42 PM

Nice comment.

The issue regarding lottery funding is one which fully illustrates to what extent Scotland is not getting a fair deal.It might not register with many people but does show some disparity with regards how funding is allocated to events in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK.

Glasgow is not being deprived lottery funding due to having a lot of infrastructure in place -- otherwise the snp and other party members cross-parties would not be campaigning for those funds which Manchester got for its games.

Bear in mind that Manchester also got UK lottery grants for its velodrome which was built on the back of 2 failed Olympic bids.

The only way Scotland will be able to pull off a good games is if it has the funds to do so. And Scotland is being deprived funds it deserves. I don't think we should have to be proud of our games when they are being staged at a disadvantage to prior games hosted in the UK.
#40 Posted by Barry on 4 Aug 2011 at 22:56 PM

The SNP’s Lottery spokesman at Westminster Pete Wishart MP : "With Lottery money supporting the Manchester Commonwealth Games and the London Olympics a contribution to Scotland’s Commonwealth legacy is a fair deal."

The issue is one of 'getting a fair deal'. The lottery funding --Scotland had to give up £150million for London 2012-- and which Manchester 2002 got (£112million for its main stadium) means that for Glasgow to not get it, building a tangible legacy becomes difficult.

Snp: "With over £150 million of lottery money that should have come to Scotland going into building the London Olympics it is only right that £150 million of lotter funding goes toward building a legacy for the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow and around Scotland".

I wish Glasgow all the success in the world. I just hope it doesn't have to struggle needlessly to achieve it. Hence why I take smarmy PR stunts by Mr Seb "f&ck em" Coe for the worthless nonsense they are.

Glasgow's £524million budget is not big at all -- they are having to building a velodrome,2 sports arenas, bowling greens,cross-country mountain bike course, Tollcross pool expansion, general sports facility updates, athletes village, ceremonies, medals etc etc.
#41 Posted by craig on 17 Jun 2014 at 13:35 PM
I think you should continue this debate.
i also think you should contact John Paul Breslin of the Sunday Post to express your views and to "go public with your thoughts of the scottish people being shafted again.

Post your comments


All comments are pre-moderated and
must obey our house rules.


Back to August 2011

Search News
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.