Chicago loss due to disagreement between the USOC and the IOC?

US President Obama and IOC president Rogge after the Chicago 2016 presentation (c)IOC/R. Juilliart


By Ida Relsted Kærup
Rumors are spreading that Chicago loosing in the first round was due to controversy between The United States Olympic Committee (USOC) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

Rumors are spreading, both in the corridors of the Bella Center in Copenhagen, host of the ongoing IOC Session and in the international blogosphere, that Chicago loosing in the first round was due to controversy between The United States Olympic Committee (USOC) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

Chicago Tribune commentator Philip Hersh first raised the suspicion Friday, after Chicago left the race unexpectedly early despite of the support of both the First Lady Michelle Obama and President Barack Obama, who were both present at the IOC Congress in Copenhagen.

According to Hersh, some believe IOC members' vote reflects longtime rift with U.S. leaders of the USOC.

"Chicago never had a chance, it turns out," Hersh quoted NBC Sports chairman Dick Ebersol for saying the day after the vote: "This was the IOC membership saying to the USOC there will be no more domestic Olympics until you join the Olympic movement."

Today, Danish newspaper Politiken reports that talk in corridors of the IOC Session in Copenhagen is of a financial disagreement between the USOC and the IOC. This disagreement is reported to be the reason why Obama was humiliated by what the newspaper call “an IOC plot” in Copenhagen.

“The International Olympic Committee had already decided not to choose Chicago even before President Obama came to Copenhagen,” writes Rasmus Bech of Politiken.

Politiken reports that the coordinated action in rejecting Chicago came as a result of dissatisfaction with the failed negotiations over revenue-sharing between the IOC and the USOC.

The disagreement is connected to a loan by the USOC to the IOC in the 1980s, when the IOC was in serious financial trouble. Since then, the IOC has become financially strong and enjoys an increase in income, out of which the USOC receive a percentage.

Since the USOC recently declined to give up part of their profit in favor of the poorest IOC countries, a group of the major international sporting federations decided to take action, winning support from IOC members to punish Chicago, reports the Danish newspaper.

  • Georg Facius, Denmark, 06.10.2009 13:07:
    If this is true it is a scandal beyond scandals, and the election of the 2016 organizer turns out to be a charade, mocking everyone who
    who has been involved with, or just following the proceedings around this election, which is probably the greater part of the world`s population.

    Much more serious, however, is the fact that the IOC has executed brute force, in order to punish the USOC, with complete disregard for the actual facts of the biddings, which naturally should be the ONLY basis on which to select the organizing city.

    It may perhaps be that bribery no longer affects the selection, instead the IOC is introducing some form of blackmail against - not the candidate city - but the USOC, and on what basis??

    It appears that the IOC some years ago willingly, and probably also eagerly, made a long term financial contract with the USOC, a contract which the IOC nevertheless has,for quite some time, wanted to dishonour against all sense and decency, while all that the USOC has done, simply has been to honour the contract, and to stick to the business agreement the two parties have made.

    Apparently, however, the IOC made a huge blunder, when signing the contract, and caught up in their own failure and shortcomings, as it apears, all they can do is to abuse a voting (I will not even whisper the word: democratic), by coming down full force, not primarily on the USOC, but on Chicago and on USA.

    On top of that the IOC tries to imply that the USOC (not USA, allthough this will probably be a common misconception) has denied to spend some af their income from the contract on poor NOC´s - something which in all probability is not part of the contract.

    What a devious way for the IOC to make the USOC/USA look vile and greedy.

    How poorly and condemnably the IOC once again displays that it violates its own rules, when found fitting by the IOC.

    It may be that the IOC formally answers to nobody, but it should always answer to society.

    I am ashamed that this took place in Denmark.

* required field

What is three plus seven?

Guidelines for posting
Play the Game promotes an open debate on sport and sports politics and we strongly encourage everyone to participate in the discussions on But please follow these simple guidelines when you write a post:

  1. Please be respectful - even if you disagree strongly with certain viewpoints. Slanderous or profane remarks will not be posted.
  2. Please keep to the subject. Spam or solicitations of any kind will not be posted.

Accept cookies

By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our cookie policy unless you have disabled them.