Sign up with Google
antowan
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 13,054
Will there be a World Cup in South Africa?
Jun 17, 2006 | 9:54AM | report this
A week ago, we asked you to think about what was missing at this year’s World Cup. And now we’re going to tell you: South Africa.
Yes, we know South Africa didn’t qualify; that’s not we’re talking about. We’re talking about the 2010 South African World Cup effort, which has curiously, and studiously avoided being mentioned by FIFA at all.
There’s a reason for this, we think: We don’t think it’s going to happen.
Now, before you deluge us with outraged emails, hear us out. We don’t think the South African World Cup effort is going to collapse because of any lack of will or effort on the part of the organizers — we can personally attest that Danny Jordaan is a magnetic, charismatic individual who can get rooms of people to believe they can move a mountain with a coffee stirrer. No, we think the SA Cup will collapse because of external forces that are beyond anyone’s control.
The major thing South Africa lacks is basic infrastructure. Currently, it has neither the money nor the motivation to perform basic upgrades to the stadia. In addition, aside from South Africa’s major cities — Johannesburg and Capetown — South Africa lacks the means to house an influx of 3-5 million fans as well as a way to get them anywhere. Road and trains need basic work, and there is a sense in that country that money that was to be spent on the Cup could be better spent servicing its citizenry.
While some will point to the relative success of the Cricket World Cup as a measure of how the country can handle a big event, keep in mind the entirely different structure of that event: Fewer people, fewer stadiums, and a smaller event altogether. The World Cup is a massive commitment, with one, little known catch: Almost all the money generated by it gets sucked back up into FIFA. The increases in tourist money to a country are often offset by lost productivity gains and the costs of stadium improvement. While some project that Germany stands to gain €5bn from the Cup (a number that we think is very high) this ignores the amount of capital outlay preparing for the Cup as well as losses from other sectors. In fact, other, more sober projections say that Germany will actually suffer a small loss on the Cup.
History bears this out as well: In Korea, stadium after stadium now sits empty meaning that the money the country spent for improvements were, in effect, only used at the arenas four or five times. Japan has fared better, but it too has struggled to absorb the costs of the 2002 World Cup.
As a result, we’re seeing more and more stories out of South Africa questioning the wisdom of this event in a time of a falling economy, rising crime, and massive community need. One proposed stadium reconstruction bid has already been halted by the community it resides in, and our sources note that little work has gone on in South Africa outside the formation of the 2010 committee.
Add in the persistent whisper at this World Cup that South Africa is a goner, and, well, we’re putting two and two together.
Now, the obvious question is: Where would the Cup go? That’s easy. In a fair world, it would go to Morocco, but we’re not sure it can up to speed in time. The only other two places ready to host an event of this size are England and the USA… and London is hosting the upcoming Olympics.
No formal announcement has been made by FIFA, and none may be forthcoming. In fact, the speculation may be just that. But we’ve been around the block long enough to know when something’s up. And something is definitely up with SA2010.
http://community.foxsports.com/blog.../17/Will_there_be_a_World_Cup_in_South_Africa
Jun 17, 2006 | 9:54AM | report this
A week ago, we asked you to think about what was missing at this year’s World Cup. And now we’re going to tell you: South Africa.
Yes, we know South Africa didn’t qualify; that’s not we’re talking about. We’re talking about the 2010 South African World Cup effort, which has curiously, and studiously avoided being mentioned by FIFA at all.
There’s a reason for this, we think: We don’t think it’s going to happen.
Now, before you deluge us with outraged emails, hear us out. We don’t think the South African World Cup effort is going to collapse because of any lack of will or effort on the part of the organizers — we can personally attest that Danny Jordaan is a magnetic, charismatic individual who can get rooms of people to believe they can move a mountain with a coffee stirrer. No, we think the SA Cup will collapse because of external forces that are beyond anyone’s control.
The major thing South Africa lacks is basic infrastructure. Currently, it has neither the money nor the motivation to perform basic upgrades to the stadia. In addition, aside from South Africa’s major cities — Johannesburg and Capetown — South Africa lacks the means to house an influx of 3-5 million fans as well as a way to get them anywhere. Road and trains need basic work, and there is a sense in that country that money that was to be spent on the Cup could be better spent servicing its citizenry.
While some will point to the relative success of the Cricket World Cup as a measure of how the country can handle a big event, keep in mind the entirely different structure of that event: Fewer people, fewer stadiums, and a smaller event altogether. The World Cup is a massive commitment, with one, little known catch: Almost all the money generated by it gets sucked back up into FIFA. The increases in tourist money to a country are often offset by lost productivity gains and the costs of stadium improvement. While some project that Germany stands to gain €5bn from the Cup (a number that we think is very high) this ignores the amount of capital outlay preparing for the Cup as well as losses from other sectors. In fact, other, more sober projections say that Germany will actually suffer a small loss on the Cup.
History bears this out as well: In Korea, stadium after stadium now sits empty meaning that the money the country spent for improvements were, in effect, only used at the arenas four or five times. Japan has fared better, but it too has struggled to absorb the costs of the 2002 World Cup.
As a result, we’re seeing more and more stories out of South Africa questioning the wisdom of this event in a time of a falling economy, rising crime, and massive community need. One proposed stadium reconstruction bid has already been halted by the community it resides in, and our sources note that little work has gone on in South Africa outside the formation of the 2010 committee.
Add in the persistent whisper at this World Cup that South Africa is a goner, and, well, we’re putting two and two together.
Now, the obvious question is: Where would the Cup go? That’s easy. In a fair world, it would go to Morocco, but we’re not sure it can up to speed in time. The only other two places ready to host an event of this size are England and the USA… and London is hosting the upcoming Olympics.
No formal announcement has been made by FIFA, and none may be forthcoming. In fact, the speculation may be just that. But we’ve been around the block long enough to know when something’s up. And something is definitely up with SA2010.
http://community.foxsports.com/blog.../17/Will_there_be_a_World_Cup_in_South_Africa
