FIRST, the good news: next year will be the fiftieth anniversary of arguably the greatest Scottish football victory over England, the 3-2 defeat of the reigning World champions at Wembley. You know what the bad news is: this year is the fiftieth anniversary of you-know-what. Also at Wembley.
We will hear of the latter, ad nauseam. Fortunately, however, the Rio de Janeiro Olympics open just six days after that anniversary, so perhaps the Games will spare us over-exposure.
I expect 2016 to be not just a vintage Olympics, but a particularly intriguing one given the distinct likelihood of Russia's exclusion following state-sponsored doping.
An independent inspection commission will visit Russia this month, checking whether the accused can so speedily tick a lengthy list of boxes. I don't believe that is possible, and given the depth of allegations, the sport can hardly afford anything other than forensic examination.
Svein Arne Hansen, president of the European Athletics Association, stated in an interview with Athletics Weekly that he does not believe it is possible for Russia to be in Rio. "They must have a cultural change," said the Norwegian. "They must get rid of all those people from before."
He is right. This has, without doubt, been going on for decades. The scale of long-suspected East German doping was years in being exposed, also revealing our credulous naivete. The scope of Russian (and before that Soviet) doping systems may never be fully appreciated.
From 1952 in Helsinki, where the former Soviet Union made its first Olympic appearance, to London 2012 (having morphed through the Commonwealth of Independent states to Russia) their athletics medal table profile has been stunningly and consistently high: absent from the top two only three times, winning 97 gold medals. During that time, including the 1984 Los Angeles Games which the USSR boycotted, Britain won 27.
Olympic athletics table
tab under year gold silver bronze ranking
2012 8-4-5 second
2008 6-5-7 second
2004 6-7-6 second
2000 3-4-6 fourth
1996 3-6-1- second
1992 7-11-3 second
1988 10-6-10 second
1984 Soviet boycott
1980 15-14-12 first
1976 4-4-10 third
1972 9-7-1 first
1968 3-2-8 second
1964 5-3-11 second
1960 11-5-5 second
1956 5-7-10 second
1952 2-8-7 fourth
The impact of Russian absence from Rio would be nothing short of seismic.
Consider the Summer Olympic domination of the Soviet Union and East Germany. In 1976, 1980, and 1988, they were the top two on the overall medal table (both boycotted in '84). The USSR were still top in 1992 (Barcelona) when, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the now-united Germany closely challenged the USA for second. Four years later, in Atlanta (following the meltdown of the USSR) Russia, were second behind the US, and they repeated that again in Sydney 2000. They were third in 2004 and '08.
When Russia finished fourth in London 2012, it was the only time barring the 1984 boycott, that they (or the Soviet Union) had placed outside the top three in their 15 Olympics since 1952.
From Helsinki in 1952 the USSR (or Russia) have finished top of the overall table seven times, second five times, and third twice.
If their athletes are sanctioned (with inevitable greater scrutiny of their competitors in other disciplines) that domination will end. And rightly so.
My good friend, BBC statistician Mark Butler, has compiled his usual list of Olympic gold medal predictions. He suggests Mo Farah will repeat his 2012 feat with a successful defence of both the 5000 and 10,000 metres titles, and that Usain Bolt will do likewise in the 100 and 200m. He also reckons Britain will win the heptathlon, but not Jessica Ennis Hill. He believes Katerina Johnson-Thomson will have the defending champion's measure come Brazil.
I certainly believe that we will see a significant changing of the guard, especially in middle distance events. David Rudisha was THE athletics sensation of 2012. The Kenyan led all the way and broke the world 800m record to claim Olympic gold. Silver and bronze went to teenagers Nijel Amos and Timothy Kitum.
Rudisha subsequently endured two years plagued by injury, but was back to his imperious best in winning 2015 World gold in Beijing – again from the front. Amos, however, eliminated in a tactical semi-final, was the most consistent over two laps in 2015, beating Rudisha in their only two pre-Beijing meetings. Third behind Rudisha in the World final was another unheralded talent, Amel Tuka of Bosnia. He had a best of 1:46 before 2015, yet in just 17 days in July he clocked 1:44.19, 1:43.84 and 1:42.51. This topped the 2015 world rankings in which Rudisha was only eighth.
I believe these young men now have Rudisha's measure. But statman Butler reckons Poland's European champion, Adam Kszczot, is the man to dethrone Rudisha in Rio.
Asbel Kiprop ran the fastest 1500m for 14 years. His pace was evident when he came from tenth with just 300 metres to go to win World gold in Beijing. Provided he does not leave himself too much to do, he is a banker for Rio.
The women's 800 and 1500m will be more open in Russia's absence, with rich potential for Scotland's Lynsey Sharp and Laura Muir.
Edinburgh's Sharp has had the measure of World 800m No.1 Eunice Sum, and just 0.72 of a second covers the world's six fastest. It's almost impossible to see past Genzebe Dibaba at 1500m, but Muir, fifth in the world, is a developing talent and both she and Sharp can make the podium.
And that would take the edge off 1966 hype.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here