[mArVHDO6]

But enough of the positivity! Here are some things I truly loathed about these Olympics. Once again, I am limiting these to things directly under the control of the Olympic organizers:

Truly beyond the pale decisions by people officiating over a competition/sport:

I'm not talking about one or two erroneous ref calls here, but stuff that indicates outright corruption, cheating or institutional malfeasance.

The judging in boxing: In 2011, the BBC uncovered evidence that gigantic bribes were paid to the International Boxing Association (AIBA) by Azerbaijan. The AIBA conducted its own investigation later that year, where it claimed the allegations are baseless. Came time for the actual Olympics, Azerbaijani boxers benefited from some truly, outrageously nonsensical judge calls in boxing. They weren't the only ones, either. Lots of the calls in boxing were questioned by observers, followers of the sport, national federations and boxers themselves. It's so bad that pretty much any boxing medal from these Olympics cannot be taken seriously.

Gender-policing in track and field: Really, this all started with the hell South African runner Caster Semeneya was put through. When she won the 800 meter a few years ago, questions were raised about her gender. The IAAF thoroughly, medically, invasively investigated her body and history. The investigation went on for years not because they suspected cheating or lying, but because, as the IAAF says itself, they wanted to make sure Semeneya didn't have some natural condition that gave her an "unfair" advantage in racing. Now the IAAF never officially released the results of its investigation, but parts of it have been leaked (which I won't rehash). But starting with the Olympics, the IAAF instituted a new rule: female track athletes who have a testosterone level equal or above that of an average male must have their hormones medically suppressed in order to compete. It's really, really difficult not to think this has something to do with Semeneya's case. And as scientists and researchers kept pointing out, the very basis of this rule is unscientific! There is no evidence that heightened testosterone level makes for a better female athlete. In fact, among elite level female athletes, a higher than normal proportion of them have androgen insensitivity syndrome, which makes their cells unresponsive to testosterone. And a quarter of elite level male athletes may have testosterone levels below that of average males. The fact is, testosterone's holistic effect on the human body and how each body processes it has not been thoroughly studied. To set an official rule based on testosterone level borders on superstition. To require some female athletes to undergo potentially harmful and unnecessary medical treatment in order to continue competing is cruel and wrong. And as scientists point out, there are other naturally occurring rare mutations and syndromes that are proven to benefit athletes (unlike heightened testosterone levels, whose benefits are far from proven) that aren't regulated. Why make an exception for this? Just because it's deemed to be gender-related?

LOCOG goes loco:

Overall, the London Olympics was pulled off beautifully by LOCOG (the London organizers of the Olympics). But they did make some bad decisions, ranging from silly to truly awful.

Brand policing:

This is by no means a problem unique to LOCOG, as it has been the trend with Olympic organizers for years now. But from what I've read and seen, LOCOG took the trend to its next level.

Screwing over small, local businesses: Local businesses were strictly forbidden from mentioning the games in any way at all, not unless they're official sponsors, which of course, they can't afford to be. So despite the games going right next door, pubs and cafes were not allowed to scrawl any supportive messages on their blackboards, or invite people to any watching parties, etc. This is completely antithetical to the Olympic spirit. The Olympics should be by and for the people, not just the highest bidder. The very large corporations that are in no way competing with these local businesses should let them be. Let the people of the host city of the Olympics be a true part of it, too. That should be a fundamental part of any city even agreeing to bid on the games. It is absolutely ridiculous that the locals are expected to play good hosts and provide the best hospitality and show the best face of their culture, but forbidden to engage in even a small part of the games unless they pay directly. And even more galling is the fact that the local businesses are paying for the games: in all the taxes they pay and will continue to pay as a result of the astronomical expenses the games rack up for the host city.

Screwing over journalists and spectators: While the ban on local businesses mentioning the games is not unique to London, the brand policing at the London Olympics took some real initiative with how they've been going after even spectators and journalists watching the games. An elderly BBC commentator had his umbrella seized by officials because it had a brand logo on it of a non-sponsor. This happened in the rain. A BBC cameraman was forced to put tape over all the logos of his camera and equipment, because they weren't sponsors. Things like this also happened to spectators who paid and bought tickets for the games.

Screwing over athletes: Athletes were strictly forbidden from showing or even tweeting anything that mentioned non-sponsoring brands, risking fines and even expulsion from the games. Some athletes got in trouble for being photographed using non-sponsor headphones in their downtime. A batch of free condoms in the athletes' village was removed after an athlete tweeted a picture of it, because Durex is the only allowed condom there. I mean, really, let's remove a safe sex implement in a place where, by all accounts, rampant sexing goes on, just on the off chance that someone might tweet another picture of it.

Large corporations should be honored to be a part of the games. The keyword being part. They cannot and should not be the whole of it to the exclusion of other people and companies. This should be thought of as something akin to charity (only, of course, the official sponsors get much higher billing than corporate patrons of charities typically do). Imagine if corporate partners of the Red Cross insisted that they can't use bandages from a non-sponsor! LOCOG should've put its foot down and spread the true spirit of the games instead of holding it hostage to a strict trademark.

Lesser evils of LOCOG:

Design nightmare: The London Olympics logo is a gigantic, awful eyesore. As was the typeface for the games. Using them in the numbering of tracks really ruined the look of the tracks. The uniforms of the Olympic stewards were stiff, ugly and horribly unflattering for the women. But perhaps worst of all is the choice of color scheme for these games: purple, orange and magenta. All these loud, similar and thus clashy colors all over everything at the games! It made everything look like the aftermath of a brawl at a beauty pageant.

Letting Russell Brand sing: What and why? He's a brilliant comedian and even more brilliant writer. But singing? Not his thing. Whose idea was it to let him warble tunelessly on not one but two songs at the closing ceremonies? Baffling decision.