People who would not normally know the difference between basketball and volleyball suddenly became devotees of both. Those whose only previous concept of sailing was a ferry trip to France quickly picked up the nuances of finn, yngling and laser.

Non-cycling innocents who thought pedalling was something to do with drugs soon knew their keirin from their pursuit. And sculling has nothing to do with banging heads together.

People like Rebecca Adlington, James DeGale, Ed Clancy, Andy Hodge, Zac Purchase, Mark Hunter, Tim Brabants and Paul Goodison were being toasted by wide-eyed men and women who, just a few days ago, had no idea of their existence.

For two magical weeks, we became a nation of sports lovers, not just followers of cricket, football or either code of rugby.

Mainstream sports will continue to dominate our screens, newspapers and conversations but other activities, not used to exposure on the national scene, now have a wonderful chance to make sure that success in Beijing is turned into long-term progress, aimed not just at London but at subsequent Games.

To achieve that they have to keep on winning at European, Commonwealth and World Championship levels in their own sphere; to demand attention.

For their new supporters, who have realised that there is much more to an Olympic gathering than athletics and swimming, there is the challenge of maintaining that interest. There really is a whole new world of sport out there.

Everyone who has sat through these Games will have their own personal memories and highlights. Here, the first moment when the heart beat a little faster came when Nicole Cooke appeared to have lost contact with the other four leaders as the women's road-race reached its climax. She quickly recovered her momentum and a brilliant sprint took her to the gold. Unforgettable.

But even Cooke's performance was outshone by the men's coxless four, whose acceleration at the end of a lung-bursting final took them from nowhere, with even bronze looking in doubt, to a glorious victory. For Hodge and his colleagues it was precious indeed, the moment Britain's Beijing dream came to life.

There was the astounding sprint double for Usain Bolt, the sublime pole-vaulting of Yelena Isinbayeva and the anguish of Beth Tweddle, so near to winning a medal but denied by a Chinese girl who, if we are to believe what we hear and read, should not have been allowed to compete.

There was the feeling of ambivalence when Christine Ohuruogu's self-belief and uncompromising attitude took her to gold in the 400m. Should she have been there after being banned for missing three drug tests? The flag-wavers insisted she should; for some of us the doubts remain.

And there was the nagging thought – it would not go away, even at the peaks of elation – that maybe we should not have been in China at all, given that country's appalling human rights record, its subjugation of Tibet and its disdain for those who seek to reduce the threat to the well-being of the planet.

We have seen countless shots of the flame, the Great Wall, the Bird's Nest, the Workers' Gymnasium and all those smiling girls but no matter how much those who run the Peoples' Republic might wish otherwise, these Games have done nothing to improve the image of China.

For Britain, the Olympic effect has been startling. More medals have been won, especially golds, than even the most optimistic member of the British Olympic Association could have dreamed possible and many athletes across the spectrum will have taken encouragement from these Games and determined to progress so they can compete for medals in 2012.

The clamour of approval from the public will ring for weeks and surely prove to those who still harbour doubts just how much sport means in this country. We sometimes grasp at modest achievement and turn it into the spectacular; Beijing has been better than spectacular and now the hard bargaining must begin, involving the Government, UK Sport and the BOA, with the aim of making sure the budgets are in place to ensure that London 2012 is even more successful than China.

But the funding for that must not come from money which has been ear-marked for grass-roots sport; by all means support the elite, categorically not at the expense of the next generations.

And while we are on the subject of budgets, the BBC could be well satisfied with their coverage of the Games. It did not used to be part of the role of the national broadcaster to behave as cheerleader but that no longer applies; it will be much worse – or better, depending on your point of view – in London. Stand by for a licence increase to pay for it.

Maybe they ought to give their people slightly tighter guidelines. We don't need telling how wonderful Britain's athletes are, even those who failed miserably; we don't need yet more "experts" telling us little we could not glean from the pictures for ourselves; and we certainly don't need more delirious outpourings from those who obviously went to the "we must avoid clichés like the plague" school of journalism.

Among the guilty in China was dear old Hugh Porter, in deepest Wolverhampton tones, at the cycling, while the daftest call of the entire Games came as the men's coxless fours final reached its climax and we were implored by an over-excited commentator-cum-fan to "scream at your screens". Even David Coleman never demanded that of his audience.

Money well spent? On the whole yes, but by the end, it had all become a little overwhelming; more does not always mean better. Maybe that was the BBC's aim from the outset; after Beijing, they will argue, no-one can doubt their commitment to sport. Let us see if Gordon Brown is similarly committed.