The sporting success of the Beijing Olympics, and not least Great Britainâ€™s rich haul of medals, has raised interest and expectations in the UK about London 2012. There have been sceptics about Londonâ€™s Olympics adventure for years, but now theseÂ Â doubters are pretty marginalised â€“ there isnâ€™t a lot to complain about and much to look forward to. True the costs are considerable but I suspect that if an economist attempted a Cost Benefit Analysis on the Games the outcome would be positive. Not to mention the less quantifiable boost to National morale if, as I am sure that we will, London puts on a good show.
But whilst there is indeed much to look forward to over the next four years there is one very visible sore on London 2012 â€“ the absolutely hideous Games logo. The logo in its latest garb, which includes the colours of the Union Flag in a facile way, illustrates how ill-advised the Organisng Committee were to adopt this meaningless graphic. In Beijing one of the things that the organisers got right was the classy graphics at all of the events. The main logo had a delightful simplicity to it that completely avoided the need for further explanation.
Everybody knew what they were looking at. The London daub, on the other hand, defied explanation â€“ although plenty have tried â€“ not always politely!
The head of the London2012 bid and also its director to conclusion the famous athlete Sebastian Coe hasnâ€™t put many feet wrong so far. But the logo is a terrible error and unless it is quietly dropped it will hang around unpleasantly and irrelevantly as an albatross around the London 2012 neck. My own research shows that the logo was never properly researched and that the brief to the designers (and their response) was trivial and inadequate.
I call upon Seb Coe to eats a tiny bit of humble pie. You got it wrong Seb, junk it!