It might be strange, but it's also uninteresting. Why does anyone care whether the B-side swimmer to Michael Phelps was robbed in Rio?Originally Posted by Solon
It might be strange, but it's also uninteresting. Why does anyone care whether the B-side swimmer to Michael Phelps was robbed in Rio?
Lochness monster is a known moron.
I was there when the two swimmers were released from questioning. The station where they were held is down the street from our offices.
It's very compelling in light of the threats of street crime that hung over the build-up to the Games. At this point, Rio is looking for "Legacy" to define its Olympic success (since it's obviously not a financially success to host the Games).
Legacy matters to politicians, to the IOC, to future bidding cities, to academics, and ultimately to the citizens of Rio. If Lochte made it up (and the most recent story suggests that he was shaken down by a security guard after peeing on / behind a gas station - sort of a robbery, but not quite the same thing he reported), it's pretty embarrassing for the USOC (and there might be anti-US repercussions from the IOC on, say LA's bid for 2024). If Lochte really was robbed, then it's a further stain on a slipshod and ramshackle Olympic festival.
just because you think it's uninteresting doesn't make it necessarily so.
σοφῷ ἀνδρὶ Ἑλλὰς πάντα.
-- Flavius Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.35.2.
That's true. One of my few strengths is that I'm not usually very intrigued by scandal. Obviously, NBC thinks Lochte talk will interest viewers more than track and field events.
In my mind, Rio's legacy is sure just because of what Phelps and Bolt have done.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote