Much was promised.

Back in 2005, the government saw the Olympics as a good news story for Blair’s Britain, a demonstration of the country’s shift to a modern, outward-looking nation.

Much emphasis was placed too upon leaving a sporting 'legacy' centred around two main commitments: first, that a generation would be inspired into taking up sport, leading to 'increased grassroots participation', and secondly that there would be a mass redevelopment of the area around Stratford, East London.

But today, in 2016, that legacy seems to have faltered – instead the Games are viewed by some as a pro-European, anti-Brexit symbol, representing a time when Britain, historically often seen as insular and isolated from the rest of the world, opened its doors to people from all nations in the name of sport.

Scepticism about the value of the Olympic Games, leading some to question whether it was all a waste of money, has increased, with many critics placing the blame at the feet of the Games' organisers.

Yet this is unfair, overlooking the fact that wider forces were at work. Rather than a lack of foresight and planning before the Games started, the failure of London 2012 to deliver an effective legacy lies with those in power after the Olympics, who failed to make the most of the opportunities that the Olympiad presented.

So while it must be accepted that the first promise, to increase the country’s sporting participation, has not been met – shockingly, according to figures released by Sport England in June 2016, the number of people participating in sport at least once a week has decreased from 15.89 million in 2012 to 15.8 million in 2016 – this must be attributed to a catalogue of missed chances and government inefficiencies.

Those who lay the blame for this at the feet of the Olympic organisers do so prematurely. As Richard Caborn, former minister for sport, noted, there was a failure to “make sure that we [got] more money into grassroots sport”.

Indeed, it was indiscriminate budget cuts which damned the Olympic generation. The discontinuation of the School Sport Partnership (SSP) – a programme which allowed for £162 million of funding for improvements in school PE – by the Conservative government in 2011 was, in the words of Tessa Jowell MP (minister for the Olympics 2005-10), a “missed opportunity”. By putting an end to the SSP, the cuts removed a vital instrument that was to carry out much of the Olympics' sporting legacy.

In fact, to search for London 2012’s legacy requires more than examining such sporting statistics. Though not a ‘sportier’ nation in terms of participation, there is certainly scope to argue that our knowledge and awareness of more sports has increased.

In the last 20 years, there has been a proliferation of everything from parkrun.com to triathlons in Hyde Park and cycling superhighways, the latter undoubtedly in response to the 14 per cent increase in bike sales since the end of Britain’s Olympic Games.

Furthermore, it is important not to overlook the impact of inspiration. Elite sport took a place in the national consciousness after the Games in London. Its impact was felt right across the nation, with gymnast Louis Smith winning Strictly Come Dancing and cycling star Bradley Wiggins appearing in The Archers.

London 2012 made stars out of Wiggins, Chris Hoy, Jessica Ennis-Hill, all of whom could use their newfound fame to inspire children to attempt to follow in their footsteps. Though it was perhaps too naive to suppose that the London Games alone would convince our couched country to get inspired, it has provided invaluable role models for our future Olympians.

The same crime of wrongfully blaming London 2012’s organisers has also occurred in relation to the second legacy pledge – that of regenerating London’s frayed outskirts. Of course, it is easy to criticise the lifeless Olympic Park: Stratford has not quite lived up to its potential, let alone the hype. But it is poor management that has meant it has yet to fully grow into itself.

In Brazil, the slatted wooden cladding, the concrete circulation cores and the steel frame from the Future Arena in Rio will be used to build facilities for four new state schools in the city.

A similar plan in London never quite happened: the inflatable pillows from the Coca-Cola Beatbox music pavilion were intended to be recycled into a canopy for a local school, but the cost of dismantling the structure intact proved prohibitive, causing the whole thing to be scrapped. One example of many, the post-London fallout saw numerous innovative attempts to adapt venues post-Games, but many found themselves before their time.

As far as London 2012 is concerned, legacy is nothing but a buzzword

However, it must not be overlooked that Stratford is growing and looks set to be an important area for London in the next 20 years. The late architect Zaha Hadid’s Aquatics Centre is a masterpiece and the Lee Valley velodrome retains its charm, though less can be said for Anish Kapoor’s ArcelorMittal Orbit.

And while the area has average employment and sports stats, Stratford will still be a good foundation for long-term investment and development, as well as offering the only affordable graduate accommodation in London. London 2012 is therefore far from a Sochi 2014 or a Montreal 1976, where the infrastructure built became infamous white elephants.

Beyond the bricks and mortar, the Opening Ceremony provided a chance for a thoughtful but daring study of our culture, presenting us as good-humored, eccentric at times, and, in the words of Fernando Meirelles, the director of the Rio 2016 Opening Ceremony, "smart".

In fact, the Olympics in London were in effect a marketing coup for a declining Britain, providing vital opportunities to attract top doctors to the NHS, affecting how we are treated when we go on holiday, and helping universities like Cambridge to compete with US Ivy League and Asian rivals.

So while London 2012 was a very expensive summer party, it provided this country with quantifiable benefits, such as the redevelopment of Stratford and major sports infrastructure. Perhaps more importantly, too, it instilled a sense of national unity in support of the inclusive and idealistic concepts that the Olympic Games carry with them.

In short, the London 2012 Olympics were a huge opportunity for our country that was initially seized with both hands. But, as time passed, the internationalist and sporting ideals of the Games were forgotten, overlooked or sacrificed.

The legacy we planned for may have failed, but the legacy we have is important, nevertheless