buteman

The results are down to the "12th man", the audience.

We would not have stadia fill with "Team GB" fans if it was anywhere else, we would not have the blanket coverage, we would not have the atmosphere.

So yes, it wouldn't cost us a bean, but it would cost us a fair proportion of our medals

There is no contradiction in lauding our Athletes and saying that the whole thing is a most stupendous waste of funds that could have been more effectively spent elsewhere.

Basically, that's it, but then it's also wrong to assume we can't afford it. Despite our whining, we have loads of money.

This debate, as with many, does get very polarized, when in fact it's perfectly possible to hold mixed opinions. You don't have to be one of these poeple posting all over facebook about how meaninglessly proud to be British you are, or an out and out cynic. But you do have to be realistic, as this excellent piece points out:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/02/rio-2016-santa-claus-olympic-profit

Simon Jenkins has been consistently opposed to the Olympics for a number of years. It is, therefore, not surprising that he sees no legacy.

He is still correct, I'm afraid.

It won't be a figure you can point to on a spreadsheet. If it happens, and it will need a sustained effort long after the games are over, it will come from intangible things.

Well, we are promised a tangible uplift. Jenkns correctly points out it will not happen. Actually, he doesn't make enough of the businesses that are losing out. Johnson et al would have use believe they will "win" in th elong run. They won't.

We might see reduced obesity in young people if sport in schools is boosted.

We probably won't. Obesity is all about food. We will see most kids seeing Coke advertsing and drinking it, or their sports drink products.

We might see a change in attitudes to disability if the enthusiasm last through to the Paralympics.

"We might see society as a whole become more open and friendly as a result of the whole volunteering aspect."

Highly unlikely, and that's not what Jenkins and Boris are talking about.

Jenkins is talking about financial return, and something is wrong if you think Boris et al are not talking about that too, so you and Jenkins are at cross purposes.