Jump to content

South Africa 2009


Rafa

Recommended Posts

Which Spanish has said he don't want African people? :huh: Maybe a person who has a personal opinion? It's not an extended thought here... in fact our national team said South Africa was one of the best countries where they have been concentrated... <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Which Spanish has said he don't want African people? :huh: Maybe a person who has a personal opinion? It's not an extended thought here... in fact our national team said South Africa was one of the best countries where they have been concentrated... <_<

Um, can you recognize satire? That's from a satirical South African website. Here are some more of its headlines:

Egyptian team robbed by British archaeologists, not prostitutes

Primary school pupils "only need to know A, N, C and X"

Eskom softens on 34% increase but wants first-born children

Link to post
Share on other sites
Which Spanish has said he don't want African people? :huh: Maybe a person who has a personal opinion? It's not an extended thought here... in fact our national team said South Africa was one of the best countries where they have been concentrated... <_<

oh thats too cute

Link to post
Share on other sites
Um, can you recognize satire? That's from a satirical South African website. Here are some more of its headlines:

Egyptian team robbed by British archaeologists, not prostitutes

Primary school pupils "only need to know A, N, C and X"

Eskom softens on 34% increase but wants first-born children

Unfortuantely, satire does not translate well with our non-English/Spanish/Portuguese-speaking posters.

As they say, "Lost in Translation." (And someties, they have no sense of self-irony.) :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortuantely, satire does not translate well with our non-English/Spanish/Portuguese-speaking posters.

As they say, "Lost in Translation." (And someties, they have no sense of self-irony.) :(

I figured that might be the case. I just didn't want to insult the man if he were fluent in English and just didn't recognize the satire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not deserved on possession or play, but certainly deserved on tactics and team play. USA have stuck to their guns, defended like giants and as a team, and their counter-attacking style has worked well. Brazil have played the better football (apart from in defence) but USA are playing a better game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

/\ Yes, but the USA guys put up an unbelievable tournament. Almost out after 2 games, overwhelms Egypt 3-0; then kicks Spain in the teeth 2-0; and ALMOST takes on Brazil 3-2. Brazil had more to lose in that match than the U.S.

And it's only the Confederations Cup, merely a warm up for the WC organization -- not because it's a great tournament.

I think we'll see a much better, stronger USA team next summer...as of course, will eerybody else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another successful event for South Africa. I suspect though that FIFA will increase the exclusion period. No rugby in any venue a month before the event. Still not sure why the contingency pitch was not installed for the final.

Link to post
Share on other sites

South Africa has very much to improve for next year if they want to be at least, half of what Germany 2006 was...

South Africa has huge lagoons in transport, infrastructure, logistics or security. When Spain was eliminated by the USA, everything was prepared for Spain in Johannesburg, but as the USA won it was chaotic and the organization didn't know what to do... Spain had to be one more day in Bloemfontein and take a plane at 3 o' clock in the morning... Some American journalist had to wait during a long hour for 2 hamburgers in a luxury resort... Do u imagine next year with thousand of hooligans with a little bit of alcohol? 15,000 journalists, 32 countries playing, 500,000 tourists looking for a room, next WC can be a disaster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
South Africa has very much to improve for next year if they want to be at least, half of what Germany 2006 was...

South Africa has huge lagoons in transport, infrastructure, logistics or security. When Spain was eliminated by the USA, everything was prepared for Spain in Johannesburg, but as the USA won it was chaotic and the organization didn't know what to do... Spain had to be one more day in Bloemfontein and take a plane at 3 o' clock in the morning... Some American journalist had to wait during a long hour for 2 hamburgers in a luxury resort... Do u imagine next year with thousand of hooligans with a little bit of alcohol? 15,000 journalists, 32 countries playing, 500,000 tourists looking for a room, next WC can be a disaster.

Don't you think that this is very nit-picking, especially the thing with the journalist? I mean, what does it have to do with the organisation of the tournament if one has to wait one hour for two hamburgers in a hotel???? That's rather a problem of organisation at that specific hotel, and not one of Danny Jordaan. Additionally, there are really worse things that could happen than one hungry journalist.

And by the way, also Germany showed flaws (especially the streaker problem and the leaking roof in Frankfurt) at its Confed Cup in 2005. That's what such test events are for -- to recognise weak spots and eliminate them. And so, thanks to the Confed Cup, Germany was able to deliver the World Cup it delivered.

So it's plainly unfair to prejudge South Africa's World Cup, especially based on the "problems" you mentioned before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wouldn't take what Mikel says seriously. He forget we were hosting the British Lions tour with at least 40,000 Brits and Irish moving between 6 cities and roaming the streets of our city centres.

There were many improvements on Germany 2005 and in some areas where Germany 2005 was much better e.g. transport.

South Africa though will be developing its transport beyond 2010. 2010 is not our pinnacle but our starting point and therefore park and ride issues, are operational issues and not always linked to the general infrastructure in place.

That said, park and rides worked well with most people at the venue 45 minutes after parking their cars AND waiting for the shuttles.

Many felt that the media facilities and warm welcome were great improvements from Germany 2005. Many also felt that the organization and service levels were significantly better than the CL final in Rome.

South Africa's LOC and FIFA needs to get serious about the accommodation shortage and I look forward to FIFA bringing in some more cruise ships soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
/\ Yes, but the USA guys put up an unbelievable tournament. Almost out after 2 games, overwhelms Egypt 3-0; then kicks Spain in the teeth 2-0; and ALMOST takes on Brazil 3-2. Brazil had more to lose in that match than the U.S.

And it's only the Confederations Cup, merely a warm up for the WC organization -- not because it's a great tournament.

I think we'll see a much better, stronger USA team next summer...as of course, will eerybody else.

I really thought the USA was gonna pull it off. After Brazil's third goal my TV remote nearly went through the screen :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really thought the USA was gonna pull it off. After Brazil's third goal my TV remote nearly went through the screen :lol:

In Germany we have two very famous quotes:

"Der Ball ist rund" (A Ball is round)

"Ein Spiel geht 90 Minuten" (A match lasts 90 minutes)

These phrases are metaphors for: anything goes - everything can change until the final whistle

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, the biggest mistake you can make, is to compare SA 2009/2010 with GER 2005/2006. SA has a totally different culture, the South Africans have a different mentality and their nation has a different history in the sport. The World Cup will be held in the winter, and i dont expect as many fans travel to SA next year as they have done in 2006. I dont know the exchange rate of the Rand to the €, $, £ and other currencies but i assume it will be more expensive for the majority to travel to the World Cup next year like it was in 2006.

Personally, i find the sound of the vuvuzelas horrible. There was no football atmosphere; only this annoying sound of the trumpets. I guess, i have to watch the WC without sound next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find I can block it out after a while, but I agree it's a horrible noise which does nothing for the atmosphere.

I suppose if you're going to new frontiers you have to take the bad with the good to some extent though; it'd be far worse and less interesting if every world cup were the same with the same sorts of stadiums and the same sorts of crowds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, i find the sound of the vuvuzelas horrible. There was no football atmosphere; only this annoying sound of the trumpets. I guess, i have to watch the WC without sound next year.

Exactly. What was going thru my mind is...is this what the world waits for every 4 years? Is that what the nation of RSA will be spending however many billions for -- just so the sound of those vuvuzuelas will be the LASTING IMPRESSION of the Games? :blink:

I bet Blatter didn't foresee this in 2003.

And, Mo, sorry to say -- those vuvu-barudus might NOT be a good thing for Capetown's 2020 bid. At least the Brazilians do stop some of the samba-drumming -- and it's human sounds coming from the Brazilian fans...NOT the racket of a New year's Eve party going for like 3 uninterrupted months!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
And it's only the Confederations Cup, merely a warm up for the WC organization -- not because it's a great tournament.

True that. But the US winning a Confed Cup over a traditional football team would REALLY be something, don't you think? I mean, it may not be the most important tourneament in the world but it's the only one, apart from the WC, that the US guys can show their football against the more traditional nations, considering that most CONCACAF teams are not all that powerhouses.

Their growth during the competion and that game yesterday were impressive. But even if the Confederations Cup is merely a warm up for the WC, how come the US guys put themselves under the spotlight if they're still unsuccessful in this minor international competition?

Yes, the boys played nice. But they still have to get a little better next year when we'll have more teams from South America and Europe. And maybe a few surprises...

Link to post
Share on other sites
True that. But the US winning a Confed Cup over a traditional football team would REALLY be something, don't you think? I mean, it may not be the most important tourneament in the world but it's the only one, apart from the WC, that the US guys can show their football against the more traditional nations, considering that most CONCACAF teams are not all that powerhouses.

Their growth during the competion and that game yesterday were impressive. But even if the Confederations Cup is merely a warm up for the WC, how come the US guys put themselves under the spotlight if they're still unsuccessful in this minor international competition?

Yes, the boys played nice. But they still have to get a little better next year when we'll have more teams from South America and Europe. And maybe a few surprises...

I understand that, Victor, and maybe I shouldn't have diminshed the tournament.

But Brazil was favored to win ... and even just the fact that the US got to the FINALS -- and led 2-0 up to halftime -- is certainly a magnificent achievement in itself.

Also, the US great showing in this Cup PLUS the fact that a year away, the greatest number of FOREIGN ticket orders for 2010 are from the US (despite the economic downturn), can only bolster the USA 2018-2022 bid (even tho 2018 favors England).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, the boys played nice. But they still have to get a little better next year when we'll have more teams from South America and Europe. And maybe a few surprises...

I have the impression that the "ability density" of the teams in football is getting more and more close to each others, therewith it is getting more and more likely that so called "non-football-nations" trip so called "football nations" during WC...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't you think that this is very nit-picking, especially the thing with the journalist? I mean, what does it have to do with the organisation of the tournament if one has to wait one hour for two hamburgers in a hotel???? That's rather a problem of organisation at that specific hotel, and not one of Danny Jordaan. Additionally, there are really worse things that could happen than one hungry journalist.

And by the way, also Germany showed flaws (especially the streaker problem and the leaking roof in Frankfurt) at its Confed Cup in 2005. That's what such test events are for -- to recognise weak spots and eliminate them. And so, thanks to the Confed Cup, Germany was able to deliver the World Cup it delivered.

So it's plainly unfair to prejudge South Africa's World Cup, especially based on the "problems" you mentioned before.

You can't dismiss the problems South Africa is facing, logistically this tournament is in worse shape than Korea/Japan and that was hosted in two countries that don't like each other. South Africa has financial issues, transportation issues, crime issues and accommodation issues. I was just in South Africa and was not impressed by much of the infrastructure, the stadium in Pretoria was really good and the best one I have been in (though that isn't saying much) but the transportation is a huge weakness, especially given the distances that some fans will have to travel. I feel sorry for any fan that will have to travel from Cape Town to Johannesburg.

I hope South Africa pulls this off and does an amazing job but other than delivering the stadiums on time and comparable to other great sets that Italy, Spain, Germany, France and England have there is a lot of work to do in under a year.

Btw, since Brazil has won the Confed cup, based on all trends and patterns, Argentina or Uruguay is the next world champion.

And South Africa better hope for as kind of a draw as they got this time around next year for them to stand any chance, with the possiblity of the Dutch, Americans, Mexicans and Portugese being unseeded teams and also Japan, Korea, Australia, Chile, Paraguay, Denmark, Croatia. They are likely to face two of those unless they can manage to 'draw' Costa Rica, North Korea and Chile.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, the reason is there is an increasing mix of nationalities in the top 5 European leagues. It means that the talent is now spread globally when it comes to international tournaments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...