In December 2013, even the BBC was straying off message in terms of the ‘benefits’ of hosting – and piling loads of money into – an Olympic Games and associate elite sports people. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/25356001 )
Reviewing the aftermath of the London Olympics it reported:
‘.. what cannot be avoided by policy makers is this simple statistic: Almost 18 months on from the London Olympics and the number of people playing sport once a week has increased by only 200,000.
‘This is a disappointingly small return for the billions of pounds of investment pumped into the staging of the Games and the funding of grassroots legacy schemes thereafter.
‘That failure to really move the needle in the months since the Olympics will worry ministers and sports administrators, who know the glow of that unforgettable summer is already fading.
‘What will really trouble them is the continuing slump in the number of young people – aged 16-25 – playing sport. The latest figures show another decline – of 51,000, down to 3.74m ..’
The BBC article adds evidence that: ‘there is no direct link between the profile and popularity of a sport at the elite level and participation at the grassroots.’
All a bit ‘edgy’ for a BBC article?
Fit for nothing: where it all went wrong for Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games legacy