Now for the Most Glittering Prize of All

It would be a mighty irony, given the snotty attitude that the capital took towards Manchester's two abortive bids for the Olympic Games of 1996 and 2000, if a successful staging of the 17th Commonwealth Games led directly or indirectly to London hosting the Olympics a decade from now.

"I have no doubts that if Britain wanted to stage the Olympics they could do, and make a fabulous job of it, just as Manchester has achieved for the Commonwealth Games," said Trevor Brooking, chairman of Sport England, on the eve of today's opening ceremony in Manchester. "The question is whether there is the will."

And this is the rub. Brooking, who will step down this year, pointed out that Sport England's budget has dwindled by a third over the past seven years. He is immensely frustrated that government departments still do not recognise the good that sport can do for the country as a whole. "Look at what has happened here in Manchester," he said. "The whole city is up for the games, and massive areas have been redeveloped for sport."

The modern Olympics were launched 106 years ago in Athens. A touch more prosaically, the Commonwealth Games - or more strictly the British Empire Games - were inaugurated in Hamilton in 1930. Not quite the same romantic lilt, yet had the Canadian blue-collar town failed to get them off to a good start then the British Empire-Commonwealth Games might have ended there and then.

No such likelihood this time, with Melbourne set to welcome the games in 2006. But were Manchester to screw up its turn - which, it should be pointed out, at this early stage looks highly improbable - then Britain's lingering hopes of making a successful bid for the 2012 Olympics would be virtually dead and buried.

Jacques Rogge, the president of the International Olympic Committee, was being understandably diplomatic when he said: "If Manchester goes well, and if the question mark over a modern Olympic stadium is lifted, then [Britain] has all the chances [of hosting the Olympics], because you have a great reputation in sport and any bid coming from the UK would be a very strong bid. I think what happens in Manchester is definitely going to have an influence on London's potential bid."

A lot can happen in 10 days, although the success of Manchester will not so much be judged on the level of the sporting competition, rather the general atmosphere and ambience. Though acknowledging it has nothing like the same resources, Manchester has leaned heavily towards the volunteer-led success of the Sydney Olympics, at the same time learning from the mistakes made at the last Commonwealth Games in Kuala Lumpur, where a five-star hotel room was deemed to be any with a window.

There has also been a hard-nosed pragmatism. When Australian swimmers complained there was not enough room at the aquatic centre, the organisers responded bluntly that there was, and that this facility, like the others, was built for the benefit of the Manchester public once the games have gone.

The attitude has been "Yes, this is a great party, but what benefits will we get once it is over?" In this respect, it might be argued that the government was bounced into handing over more than £100m last year, as well as apparently underwriting the opening and closing ceremonies. What chance that Tony Blair turns up in his running shorts?

IOC members, however, remain extremely disgruntled with Blair after the Pickett's Lock debacle and the resultant failure to stage the world athletics championships. If London is to bid for the 2012 Olympics it will have to be underwritten by the government, and there are many within the IOC who feel Labour cannot be trusted.

As yet, as Brooking intimated, there is no clear evidence that the government is interested in backing a London bid. Blair may prefer to share in Manchester's success and not run the risk of a failed Olympic attempt near the time of an election.

Ironically, as matters stand, the competition for 2012 does not appear particularly strong. New York and Washington have been mentioned, although it is generally felt the IOC does not want to go back to the United States so soon after the chronic transport problems of Atlanta in 1996. Any bid from Rio de Janeiro looks stymied by Brazil's economic troubles.

Of the numerous European cities mentioned, Paris and London appear the best placed, particularly if Italy gets the 2006 Winter Games. Hence the perceived need for success in Manchester.

Ultimately, though, any decision by the IOC members will have less to do with sport and politics, and everything to do with personal preferences. Sir Bob Scott, who headed the two Manchester Olympic bids, would never concede that virtually no IOC member, to say nothing of their partners, was the least bit interested in staying for four or five weeks in the city. The IOC had always wanted London, but this does not mean it will be preferred to Paris or Rome. Far from it.

And so Manchester has the Commonwealth Games, only the second English city to stage the event since London in 1934. "We declare that we are all loyal subjects of his Majesty the King Emperor, and will take part... for the honour of our empire and the glory of sport" was the oath then given by England's team captain, RL "Bonzo" Howland, on a union flag-draped podium.

No empire any more, but a perfect opportunity this time, perhaps, to prove that not all of Britain's sporting administrators are bonzos.

You've read the piece, now have your say. Email your comments, as sharp or as stupid as you like, to the sport.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk