Safe 2010 World Cup, The Debate Goes On

South Africa and Safe 2010 World Cup: The debate goes on
By Tokunbo Ojo

A cross-section of soccer analysts and editorialists, especially those in the British media, are now calling on FIFA to strip South Africa of the World Cup hosting rights, following last’s March disaster at Abidjan’s Felix Houphouet-Boigny stadium.

The disaster, which happened during the South Africa 2010 World Cup qualifying match between Ivory Coast and Malawi, left 19 people dead and more than 100 injured. With the headlines in many Western media screaming – African stadium stampede kills 19, Another African stadium tragedy, this unfortunate accident has rejuvenated the Afro-pessimism and cloud of incompetence that have been over South Africa and its organizational capacity to host event of World Cup’s magnitude since 2004.

“It is not the people [of Europe], but part of the media, who, from the very beginning were not at ease in trusting South Africa, or Africa at all, to organize the World Cup,” explained Joseph Blatter, FIFA President, in the press conference held in Johannesburg, South Africa, 48 hours before the kick-off of last June FIFA Confederation Cup that is World Cup dress rehearsal.

“I do not understand this reluctance to go to Africa and we are here, not only to honour Africa but to give justice to Africa and African football for all they have done for football.”

“But ever since I opened the envelope with the name South Africa they said it would not work. Why? Every year 10 or 11 million tourists come to South Africa. They have organized international competitions and conferences. Why the hell is there always this question mark over football?”

With the Abidjan tragedy, the skeptics are hoping to hit a home run on getting the location of 2010 World cup changed. What is nauseating about this thought is the way that a continent of 54 countries is simply reduced to one big homogeneous space, despite diverse political and socio-cultural structure of these countries. Consequently, they all get vilified by incident that happened in any part of the continent because the continent is cognitively constructed as one gigantic ‘heart of darkness’ in the minds of many in Western world and their media.

If not, how on earth would any sane mind with a slight knowledge of global diversity conclude that the Abidjan’s tragedy is another proof of South Africa’s incompetence to host a safe World Cup? It just does not make sense. It is akin to saying that Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics should not be held again in Canada because of an ice rink tragedy in the US or collapse of a sporting dome in Mexico. Can you imagine how ludicrous such demand will be?

The Confederation Cup, World Cup test-run, was held in South Africa in June. Everything went hitch-free. The local organizing committee got pass marks from the FIFA and the countries that participated in the tournament. With the success of the Confederation Cup, one would have thought that this would have assuaged doubting Thomases of their fears. That is not the case. Afro-pessimism rages on.

UK Guardian writer, Louise Taylor, who is among many that have vowed that they would not attend 2010 World Cup due to security risk, discredited the success of Confederation Cup. Though she was not in South Africa for the event, she was still bold to declare the success as a mere propaganda.

“There is a huge political investment in Africa’s inaugural World Cup proving a resounding success,” she writes, “and you suspect those FIFA delegates who recently gave the country eight out of ten in terms of preparations could be in peril of believing their own spin.”

Her colleagues in other media such as UK Sunday Times are having a field day portraying South Africa as a xenophobic nation of starved people, refugees and cannibals. Issues such as South Africa’s high rate of crime, violence, poverty and HIV/AIDS are also making big headlines, at the expense of country’s rich soccer tradition and triumphant successes in hosting several international sporting events.

These headlines, which create a perception of insecurity, are ritually framed within the familiar Western dominant cognitive model of “usual African violence“, and “barbarism.” As Mark Gleeson, former BBC reporter and South African noted, it is “a perception of incompetence carried by a continent whose coup d’etats, famines and conflicts are often the only news to which the rest of the world is exposed.”

If South Africa was located in Europe or North America, there is possibility that issue of security and social vices on streets might not be hot news items. If at all, it was; it would be a buried news item or simply be given a passing reference. That’s the case with Germany 2006 World Cup.

Mere looking at the other side for less than two minutes to check train schedule, my laptop accessories disappeared at the Hamburg train station during the last World Cup in Germany. This happened right under a surveillance camera.

At the media centres in Berlin, Hamburg, Hanover and Munich during World Cup matches, several laptops, mobile phones and electronic devices developed wings and flew away at the blight of an eye. Complaints and reports were filled with the ever-effective German police. Almost four years after, I am still waiting for my laptop accessories to be found.

These incidents did not overshadow the ‘real news’ of the World Cup and good events staged by Germans.

If it was in a developing country that scores of reporters mysteriously lost their laptops, cameras and cell phones in the media centres or in train station as it was in my case, the incident would have made the biggest headline of wrong kind across the world.

One thing that is clear from this foregoing is that “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others,” as George Orwell aptly wrote.

Quo Vidas

Bob Koep
Senior Staff Writer
InsideSoccer Magazine

With the new season of Champions League soccer in Europe pulling in unprecedented amounts of money, people in the know and professional forecasters are projecting where this sport is going and where it could be in 10 or 20 years.

And for a soccer aficionado the projections are sort of frightening.

Big time professional soccer, they say, will soon only be played to make money, big time money. It will plainly be a vehicle for advertisers and sponsors, and these people will control much of what is going on on the field. It seems things will go the direction of the big pro leagues in the USA (Football, Baseball etc) lots of commercials interrupted by some action on the field.

Less than a generation from now with Russian oligarchs, Arabian Sheiks and major United States (and perhaps Chinese) corporations calling the shots, top players in the world will generate ever higher incomes in order to produce more and more revenue. Even though top clubs are already up to their ears in money, those people say this is only the beginning.

This trend is inevitable, the predictions go. It has already begun with several top English clubs having been bought by enormously rich individuals, all foreigners, and more want in before it is too late.

And when you look at Real Madrid having spent $250 million for just two players (Ronaldo and Kaka) they are looking to get their money back rather sooner than later.

It will come to a point, the projectors say, that the top clubs in Europe will simply split away from UEFA and FIFA, form their own league and run their own show as do all the big pro leagues in the USA.

And they’ll do that mainly for business reasons, and most of all, get their hands on all the money available, not only 70 or 80 percent.

At this time, UEFA or FIFA, depending on the type of competition, is pocketing 20 percent and more of the available funds to finance their own organization and support such worthy cases as developing the sport in underdeveloped countries, amateur level etc.

You can see how much escapes the big clubs when UEFA budget for the current season set aside some $400 million to run its own organization out of a pot of some $1.7 billion available from television, sponsors and other marketing projects.

This amount is particularly remarkable in this season of a major recession where nobody is said to have any liquid funds to spare.

This year’s budget is an increase of 33 percent over last year and the figures are projected to rise in leaps and bounds.

This season, the 32 elite clubs in the Champions League group stage are guaranteed $ 11 million each before play even starts. On top of that each victory pays $1.2 million and a tie $600,000. This payout increases until the winner of the final gets an extra $14 million for the title game while the runner up has to make do with $8 million.

Winners of the competition are looking at $50 million overall and that does not count home TV rights, home field ticket sales and sale of merchandise.

Top clubs already can pocket more than $100 million a year from all operations. Some even make more than $150 million. But that doesn’t seem to be enough as more resources seem to be untapped.

Last year’s winner FC Barcelona earned a total of $50 million from its Champions League play alone while runner up Manchester United got even more, namely $ 60 million. That is because the home television market in England is much richer than the one in Spain.

Now if the top clubs in Europe could break lose from UEFA and do their own marketing, they could easily pocket another $10 $20 or $30 million per club (always in 2009 perspective, but a lot more in future years) and believe me, if the super rich smell the money on the table they don’t want to share it with some organization that is only a nuisance to them.

Naturally UEFA and FIFA will fight like hell to prevent this sort of scenario because, if and when it happens, they will be reduced to rather meaningless organizations looking after amateur and minor league affairs which do not generate any funds and still cost money to operate..

And if the breakaway clubs have their own way they might even refuse to provide players for the World Cup and that could put FIFA in a major bind.

But let’s assume the clubs are cooperating and provide their stars for the World Cup. They’ll probably charge FIFA through the nose for their services.

Of course one major question would be: what about promotion and relegation?

Well, that will likely be abandoned because once a club is in the fold its entire budget depends on its membership in the big league and its owners will not enjoy being shut out from the trough if their club finishes poorly.

One could see some clubs folding and others coming in via the purchase of a new franchise, but relegation?

Unlikely.

At this time everything is still in limbo and will be for some time to come. But an attempt to break loose was made some nine years ago by the continents top 14 clubs, at the time called the G14.

FIFA was barely able to block that move by vastly improving the payout for the Champions League and offering other perks. But the problem will not go away. Question is how long FIFA can control the situation.