Jump to content

South Africa 2010 headed for commercial flop


Recommended Posts

Empty World Cup stadiums loom as 500,000 tickets unsold

I cannot copy the article for legal reasons, but World Cup organizers fear a "tragedy" for the host nation, South Africa, and Danny Jordaan has urged fans to buy tickets.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/soccer/04/09/unsoldWC.tickets.ap/index.html?eref=sihp#ixzz0kdq3OiLR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

:mellow: Still two months to go...But point taken. Most facilities built from the ground up are long overdue and have been needed for decades, so this is more of a development issue.

South Africans will pretty much show up at the gate on the day of a match however you do have to wonder about those overseas travel packages that are exhorbitantly overpriced.

You'd think most airlines would jump at the chance to fill idle 'planes in these so called 'tough economic times'.

Commercially prehaps they're right, but as nation building - sometimes the cost isn't an issue, the long term future is. Not just for South' but all Africa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be blunt. I honestly feel South Africa should never have been selected to host this competition. They do not need these super stadiums, as most of them will be left as white elephants after the championships have gone. The money could have been diverted to help it's own people out of starvation.

This country has mortgaged itself to the max, with little clear benefits to the South African people. There have been investigations into the building trade, because of corruption claims. And, they're facing a shortfall in terms of venue costs.

It isn't just me who is against and has been against this competition going to SA. Many prominent South African columnists question why stadiums are being built to accommodate European fans, while next door sits local people with no water or electricity.

Shame on FIFA & it's corrupt President. This country needs many things, a World Cup it does not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be blunt. I honestly feel South Africa should never have been selected to host this competition. They do not need these super stadiums...with little clear benefits to the South African people. There have been investigations into the building trade, because of corruption claims. And, they're facing a shortfall in terms of venue costs.

...It isn't just me who is against and has been against this competition going to SA

Well, I guess now we know you are posting an objective article.

....why stadiums are being built to accommodate European fans, while next door sits local people with no water or electricity.

So, as long as an African is living below the poverty level, the entire country should not have any access to first tier sports? But, it's okay for France, where 10% of the folks are unemployed to host the world cup? Why didn't France pass on it and rather spend the money on their unemployed?

A few facts:

1) Most of the folks in the stadiums "built to accommodate European fans" will actually be Africans. I'm sorry, but it will be hard for Europeans like you to tolerate seeing so many Africans, but it's going to happen - deal with it.

2) To make money, you have to spend money. If South Africa took only internal tax revenues and spent them on services, they'd be bankrupt. That's wealth redistribution not wealth creation. To grow the economy, the country needs external funds flows. By upgrading the infrastructure (roads, stadiums, airports, transit), they attract investment, not to mention the 100s of thousands of jobs created and skills developed by this.

3) If you think these stadiums are white elephants, you are in a fantasy world. Most of them are already in profitable use for multiple sports.

Finally, as Sepp Blatter said about folks like you earlier this year:

"Every year 11 million tourists go to South Africa and nobody says they should not go there. It's a kind of anti-Africa prejudice. I think there is still in the so-called Old World a feeling that 'why the hell should Africa organise a World Cup'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but it will be hard for Europeans like you to tolerate seeing so many Africans, but it's going to happen - deal with it.

Completely unecessary Jim Jones Canis.

Your other points are sound and worth debating but please don't degrade the forum by dragging it down to that level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely unecessary Jim Jones Canis.

Your other points are sound and worth debating but please don't degrade the forum by dragging it down to that level.

Rob,

Frankly while you may not see the inherent cultural bias in the OP's post, as someone that has previously lived many years in multiple countries in Africa, I find it offensive. You may not be aware of it, but under apartheid the Nationalist regime used the word "European" to describe whites. So, when the OP writes about stadiums built for "Europeans" it smacks of the old racist regime.

South Africa is not building these stadiums for entitled white foreigners. The stadiums are built to bring the world to South Africa and in turn to provide thousands of people from all over Africa probably the only chance to ever see soccer of this calibre in person. With her entitled "European" blinkers on, the OP fails to understand this and just assumes that it is a show being put on for her and her buddies from the continent.

Further, blindly throwing around allegations of "corruption", and that South Africa should first provide services for the poor, smacks of colonial judgemental-ism.

You may not like it, and view my response as dragging the forum down. I find the original post racist and ignorant and feel the forum is already dragged down by the OP.

So, please, downrank me all you like, but it doesn't change how South Africans perceive the blinkered perspective of folks like the OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be blunt. I honestly feel South Africa should never have been selected to host this competition. They do not need these super stadiums, as most of them will be left as white elephants after the championships have gone. The money could have been diverted to help it's own people out of starvation.

This country has mortgaged itself to the max, with little clear benefits to the South African people. There have been investigations into the building trade, because of corruption claims. And, they're facing a shortfall in terms of venue costs.

It isn't just me who is against and has been against this competition going to SA. Many prominent South African columnists question why stadiums are being built to accommodate European fans, while next door sits local people with no water or electricity.

Shame on FIFA & it's corrupt President. This country needs many things, a World Cup it does not.

Wow. What absolute rubbish. You must be proud.

Mortgage?

South Africa has an R850 billion infrastructure program. R4 billion a year for 3 years on 10 world cup venues is hardly excessive.

How exactly is there a shortfall?

I don't see how ticket sales mean a commercial flop.

1. The LOC has budgeted in their operations budget for a 60% sale of tickets. Its highly likely that this will be exceeded.

2. FIFA's World Cup revenues are more than 30% up on on Germany 2006, already in commercial terms the most successful world cup for FIFA.

3. e.g. In Cape Town, while the stadium cost R4 billion, the city has benefited from more than triple that amount in transport infrastructure alone, excluding the private investment likely to reach R20 billion.

We still build houses, we still deliver services, we are still building schools, new roads, new hospitals.

So if you are TRULY and honestly interested, I can direct you to these projects which have NOT been stopped because South Africa is spending a tiny fraction of the R800 billion + on stadia.

In Johannesburg alone, the high speed train, while not a World cup project costs almost ten times what the city spent on its TWO venues.

SportCal, a London-based tracker of sponsorship and marketing deals, says Fifa is on target to see total revenue of around $3.4 billion over the current four-year World Cup cycle. That's up from the $2.3 billion in revenue raked in during the 2006 World Cup cycle that culminated in the championship played in Germany.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

South Africa's Budget 2010/2011

Education: R165 billion

Housing: R93 billion

Health: R104 billion

Stadia (2009/2010): R4 billion

Total Budget: R900 billion

No I don't see how our stadia will break the bank.

Already the most commercially successful World Cup cycle for FIFA:

SportCal, a London-based tracker of sponsorship and marketing deals, says Fifa is on target to see total revenue of around $3.4 billion over the current four-year World Cup cycle. That's up from the $2.3 billion in revenue raked in during the 2006 World Cup cycle that culminated in the championship played in Germany.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for making me come out of semi-retirement, Minor. :)

First of all, you have interpreted my original post in completely the wrong way. But that was what you were

trying to do. We all see what we want to see, where you see racism I see compassion. Funny that.

Let me address your points.

1) Most of the folks in the stadiums "built to accommodate European fans" will

actually be Africans. I'm sorry, but it will be hard for Europeans like you to tolerate

seeing so many Africans, but it's going to happen - deal with it.

There will naturally be a lot of African supporters going to this event, but the point I was making was

that they are building stadiums which will inevitably be left as white elephants after the World Cup

has left town. So, these stadiums, costing huge amounts of money to construct, won't be accommodating anyone,

let alone the local African population.

2) To make money, you have to spend money. If South Africa took only internal tax revenues

and spent them on services, they'd be bankrupt. That's wealth redistribution not wealth creation.

To grow the economy, the country needs external funds flows. By upgrading the infrastructure

(roads, stadiums, airports, transit), they attract investment, not to mention the 100s of thousands

of jobs created and skills developed by this.

In some instances, this is true. But South Africa isn't France or the United States. It's people aren't dying

of starvation in the same way South Africans are. My point is, one can't build for tomorrow before taking care

of today, first. Using Govt. money to fund roads, which will enhance the economy is a great idea. Using Govt.

money to fund a lavish World Cup, which may enhance the economy is unnecessary. Building World Cup stadia, isn't

going to empower the local people. They'll see a stadium, and ask themselves "is this marvel going to feed me"?

Sorry to be blunt, but hosting a World Cup, and the build-up to it, hasn't helped local South Africans out of poverty. Neither

has it put food in their stomachs. This is what bothers me. Human suffering. While it exists in France, it is not

on the same huge scale as in South Africa. This bothers me.

3) If you think these stadiums are white elephants, you are in a fantasy world.

Most of them are already in profitable use for multiple sports.

6 of the stadia have been built from scratch, in areas where they won't be fully attended after the world cup. How is

this not a waste of resources? How will they be profitable? Tell me how spending $500 million dollars on the new Cape Town

stadium isn't a waste? South Africa isn't China, they don't have funds by the bucket-load. South Africa is indeed mortgaging

itself into oblivion. And YES, shortfalls to exist -- Mo Rush -- There is a 2.3bn rand shortfall in venue construction.

Further, blindly throwing around allegations of "corruption", and that South Africa should first provide

services for the poor, smacks of colonial judgemental-ism.

It was South Africa's competition-commission which launched this enquiry, so I don't blindly throw around anything. These allegations exist, which

is why they are being investigated.

Already the most commercially successful World Cup cycle for FIFA

And what about the local South African people? Who were told they'd benefit from this World Event going to their doorsteps? Tell me, what

about them? Will it be commercially successful for the people of the Soweto, will it?

I want and hope for the advancement of every country, but hosting lavish world cups when you're people need so much more, just to keep them alive, I feel it is a crime. Which is why I feel FIFA are the devil in disguise. They care for no one but themselves. They won't care for South Africa once this all ends.

If you see racist undertones in this posting, that can be your assessment. I actually care a lot more for the South Africa people than either your Govt. or Fifa.

I can't sum it up any better than this.. and I quote

"The government has enslaved itself to an event that will turn South Africa into a playground for European tourists.

When the event is over, we will still be poor."

--Sowetan journalist & columnist Andile Mngxitama*

(last time I checked, Andile was a black South African... I'm guessing you think he is racist, too, Canis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. What absolute rubbish. You must be proud.

Not proud, but very very sad. Sad for your people, the way they are treated. The waste of money, resources.

I don't know your personal circumstances fully, Mr Rush. But I know you have the ability to use the internet and attend University. It's okay for you to tell me how great this tournament is going to be for your country, you'll no doubt attend. Have parties!

I wonder how very different it will be for the vast majority of other South Africans. Who can't use the internet or attend University. Ordinary, working class South Africans, predominately black.

So no Mo Rush, I'm not proud at all. I'm shamed by Politicians and corrupt Fifa bosses who think they can offer hope but when all they have done is make South Africa even more desperate. And the worst of it is, I have no idea how to help. The only ones who can help Africa, as a whole, are Africans. But when led by corrupt leaders, who think spending/wasting money on a football tournament can save their impoverished nation, then you know we got massive problems to overcome.

Yes, I feel strongly about this, sorry if you don't like what I've said, you can mark me down, all of you can. But this tournament going to SA was a crime against humanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More rubbish. Congrats.

Firstly, I have no problem with you being against a world cup in Africa BUT

(1) Your reasons are rubbish

(2) Your reasons are rubbish

(3) Your reasons are rubbish.

etc.

So please forgive us for seeing through the obviously transparent views you have of Africa.

"mortgaged itself to the max" ....."shortfall on venue costs"

Absolute idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Give it a rest. You're digging your own grave here...and its quite boring.

Please....what next? you're going to start posting pics of starving kids?

You seem to be on a mission and you're failing awfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She has more of a point than you Mo. The GDP per capita of South Afria is just over 10,000 USD, 107th in the world. As of 2009 there was 24% unemployment and 50% of the country lives below the intenrational poverty line. Amongst the worst in the world, public debt is at almost 40% of GDP and growing, live expectancy is not even 50 years and almost 20% of your population suffers from AIDS. And the most appalling for your future, education expectacy is at 13 years.

You may be one of the privliged Mo, but the majority of your countrymen and wome are suffering along with the rest of Africa and no football tournament is going to change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who said the World Cup was meant to correct all the wrongs?

Have you actually read what the idiot is saying?

The infrastructure spending, as per deadlines far outweigh any expenditure on stadia, this benefits ALL South Africans.

The education budget remains as high as it always has, and so does the spend on housing, health etc.

You forget that the majority of the poor actually voted in the ANC, so while budgets are allocated correctly, spending the budget efficiently has little to do with the 2010 WC, another major sporting event hosted by South Africa, along with many before it, and other major international non-sporting events we continue to host.

Social grants, child grants, disability grants increase year on year on year.

South Africa has issues, because of the severe implications of apartheid, and a less than stellar ANC government.

Please lets not try and "group" me into a "rich elite" bundle simply because I have an education and broadband internet, and because it "suits" your pathetic argument to do so. Both my parents' homes were demolished under apartheid rule. You move on.

I've never suggested South Africa was anything near perfect, BUT your arguments or attempts at one are a total failure. Starving kids or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you would like to debate any issue in South Africa, feel free to do so, I consider myself open and willing to debate them BUT do not use the World Cup as some sort of scape goat for the any Anti-African bias you have.

From housing, to education, to community facilities, lets talk. Poverty reduction is not as simple as handing out social and child grants as we already do,but it requires a multi-faceted approach. The same applies to housing, handing out free houses can only go so far, even though we have already built a record amount of houses since 1994, only exceeded by countries like India and Chinda.

But if you're going to spew rubbish such as "mortgaged itself to the max", "shortfall on venue costs", " commercially a flop", don't expect me to take you seriously

Go ahead, open a thread on South Africa's issues, of which there are countless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have an Anti-Africa bias Mo, you forget I have been to your country, done business in your country. I question the wisdom of hosting the world cup, its budget is nothing to be scuffed at or played down and the implications of hosting it are staggering. There is not a single example in history where a sporting event has spurred on or aided development in a developing nation, in fact many are in a worse position today than they were when they hosted these mega-events. The benefits may or may not outway the costs, but any sane person would question the expenditure of this amount of money to accomodate a sporting event, when the money is desperately needed elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of what amount of money?

The reality is that the priorities have NOT changed due to the World Cup. We can debate wisdom of actually hosting for decades, but the benefits on the ground in terms of infrastructure already significantly outweigh the cost of "luxury spending" on stadia. This excludes the marketing benefit, tourism benefit, and other event and post event related benefits.

R12 billion over 3 years on stadia that is approximately R4 billion per year of about R900 billion spent annually? OR R12-15 billion of R2400 billion over 3 years.

R12 billion on stadia over three years vs. R465 billion on education over 3 years...remains the highest proportion of the budget.

R12 billion on stadia over three years vs. R300 billion + on health over 3 years.

etc

etc

Of the total amount spent on stadia, part of that has funded upgraded to existing well used venues.

This is the only "luxury spending" related to the event

The rest R40 billion+ is transport infrastructure we actually need in some cases in planning for more than a decade.

I'll repeat what I've said in the Rio thread. 2010 has created a deadline to upgrade transport, infrastructure, tourism infrastructure etc. in a way never seen before, with many projects if not most already on paper before the world cup bid was even won.

Durban's new airport, planned since the 1970's. Airport upgrades in Jhb and CT are simply the next phase of the airport expansion.

New BRT projects in Jhb and Cape Town are not World Cup developments but long term projects that will continue until 2020 and perhaps beyond.

Housing and service delivery in Cape Town are at an all time high, along with the delivery of basic services. This has not stopped.

The Cape is building 12 new schools along with 200 new classrooms, 3 hospitals under construction and the list goes on and on.

If anything, the World Cup has accelerated and spurred on poverty reduction, which will remain a long journey into the future.

2010 provides a spotlight on all our issues, issues that ARE being addressed day by day.

Believe it or not but South Africa IS moving forward, even if in a small way, the World Cup is simply one means of accelerating the delivery of infrastructure and marketing the country with all its strengths and weaknesses to the world.

Its not FIFA's fault for the ANC's poor performance, but you can thank FIFA for setting the deadline for many projects that were and are needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a recent Guardian (UK Newspaper) article, which I'd like to draw everyone's attention to.

Life in 'Tin Can Town' for the South Africans evicted ahead of World Cup

--Campaigners say conditions in Blikkiesdorp or 'Tin Can Town' are worse than in the townships created during apartheid

Children squint as wind whips the grey sand into their faces. A teenager braves the flies and stench of a leaking outdoor toilet to draw water from a standpipe. He stares vacantly along regimented rows of corrugated iron shacks encircled by a tall, concrete fence. No grass or trees grow here.

This is Tin Can Town, or Blikkiesdorp, described by the mayor of Cape Town as a "temporary relocation area" (TRA), but by its residents as a concentration camp. Many say they were forcibly evicted from their former homes and moved here against their will. And for this they blame one thing: the football World Cup.

"It's a dumping place," said Jane Roberts, who lives in the sparsely furnished structure known as M49. "They took people from the streets because they don't want them in the city for the World Cup. Now we are living in a concentration camp."

Roberts, 54, added: "It's like the devil runs this place. We have no freedom. The police come at night and beat adults and children. South Africa isn't showing the world what it's doing to its people. It only shows the World Cup."

.....In some cases families of six or seven people are crammed into living spaces of three by six metres. They complain that the corrugated walls swelter in summer temperatures of 40C and offer little protection from the cold in winter. Tuberculosis and HIV are rife. Babies have been born at Blikkiesdorp and, still unknown to the state, officially do not exist.

Brutality

Rossouw, 42, is among several residents who accuse the police of brutality. "It's like a jail, like a concentration camp," she continued. "If you're not inside at night, the police beat you. A few weeks ago they pointed an R5 rifle as if they were going to shoot people. They swore at us: 'This isn't f***ing Athlone. You should go back to your place.'"

She argues that the fanfare around a month-long football tournament is hypocritical when people are going hungry. "I think they must cancel the World Cup because people are starving. They are renovating buildings in Cape Town for half a billion rand; why can't they spend that money here? It breaks my heart.

"When rich people come to the World Cup they must come to Blikkiesdorp first to see for themselves how people are living. It's worse than apartheid."

Court Action

Badronessa Morris, 47, complained: "The police treat us like animals. They swear at us, pepper spray us, search us in public, even children. At 10 o'clock you must be inside: the police come and tell you to go into your place and turn down the music. In my old home we used to sit outside all night with the fire."

Morris was among families evicted from an informal settlement on the Symphony Way road. "We were one happy family on Symphony Way. Now we've moved to Blikkiesdorp it's like we're in chains, fighting each other, putting each other in jail.

"I know we were moved because of the World Cup. They don't want people to see shacks on the road in South Africa. They want everything perfect for the World Cup."

Unemployment

The Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign said: "The lives of small businesses and informal traders in South Africa have been destroyed by this World Cup. If we are not allowed to trade near stadiums, fan parks and other tourist areas, how can we benefit from tourism?"

The new stadiums heralded a construction boom, but many of the workers who built them have already been laid off and are without work.

Caroline Elliot, international programmes officer for the anti-poverty group War on Want, said: "Behind the spectacle, the World Cup is exacerbating the struggle of poor South Africans who are facing evictions, lack of public services and unemployment. The South African government needs to tackle these problems as an urgent priority."

Andile Mngxitama, a political commentator and columnist, is about to publish a pamphlet entitled "F*** the World Cup".

He said: "We never needed the World Cup. It is a jamboree by the politicians to focus attention away from the 16 years of democracy that have not delivered for the majority of black people in this country. We'll be trapped with white elephant stadiums."

....He added: "The World Cup is not about football or so-called tourism. It's about politicians hoping it keeps us busy for a month and making enormous amounts of money for themselves and their friends."

full article Guardian UK

---

If this isn't a crime against humanity, I don't know what is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I feel strongly about this, sorry if you don't like what I've said, you can mark me down, all of you can. But this tournament going to SA was a crime against humanity.

Where were you Michelle, when most of us were being called racist because we dared suggest developing countries and cities should have to be scrutinised by the same criteria as developd nations when bidding for these big events, rather than have them handed to them on a platter and without the ned to justify themselves simply because of the predominant colour of inhabitants' skins?

That said, I think crime against humanity is overblowing it a bit.

Honestly, if South Africa was NOT hosting the WC this year, I doubt we would be seeing any difference in the country's economic and social problems. It would be the same nation, with the same problems, and investment to deal with these problems would be about the same. Social infrastructure is social infrastructure, and is needed whether a country is hosting a festival or not. I agree with Mo, the only difference such events make is that investment in vital infrastructure gets a focus and a deadline where it has to be made, rather than having desirable transport, communications and municipal projects languish for longer with no great sense of urgency - ad perhaps political in-fighting holding them up for longer than they should be.

Besides, the fervent hope would be that by hosting the WC, South Africa will achieve a profile and reputation that will draw in more visitors and investors and ultimately return the investments made in bucket loads and so ultimately prove positive. Then there is the whole status of football in Africa in general and South Africa in particular. It's the passion and escape of the poorer majority, offering an avenue to kids with fewer chances in life to pursue other avenues rather than fall into a cycle of poverty and despair. It's an investment in hope and pride, and probably far fairer and meaningful for South Africa to host a fstival of its people's game, rather than a Rugby World Cup, which IS the sport of the privileged white minority (or perhaps even an Olympics).

Where I do have a problem is with those who think that developed nations are obliged to be given events like the WC, Olympics or CWGs as some sort of "get square" with the developed world, and somehow to make a point about past oppression. I've said it time after time, hosting such events are not a right, but a privilege and not some statement about inflicting somn sort of schadenfreude on more developed and richer nations. If, on a balance sheet, a developing country can show (as South Africa and Rio have done) that they can host such an even responsibly and perhaps bring in real benefits, well, that's great. But it IS irresponsible to think events should be awarded to less developd locations willy nilly because of some sense of exotic appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where were you Michelle, when most of us were being called racist because we dared suggest developing countries and cities should have to be scrutinised by the same criteria as developd nations when bidding for these big events, rather than have them handed to them on a platter and without the ned to justify themselves simply because of the predominant colour of inhabitants' skins?

That said, I think crime against humanity is overblowing it a bit.

Honestly, if South Africa was NOT hosting the WC this year, I doubt we would be seeing any difference in the country's economic and social problems. It would be the same nation, with the same problems, and investment to deal with these problems would be about the same. Social infrastructure is social infrastructure, and is needed whether a country is hosting a festival or not. I agree with Mo, the only difference such events make is that investment in vital infrastructure gets a focus and a deadline where it has to be made, rather than having desirable transport, communications and municipal projects languish for longer with no great sense of urgency - ad perhaps political in-fighting holding them up for longer than they should be.

Besides, the fervent hope would be that by hosting the WC, South Africa will achieve a profile and reputation that will draw in more visitors and investors and ultimately return the investments made in bucket loads and so ultimately prove positive. Then there is the whole status of football in Africa in general and South Africa in particular. It's the passion and escape of the poorer majority, offering an avenue to kids with fewer chances in life to pursue other avenues rather than fall into a cycle of poverty and despair. It's an investment in hope and pride, and probably far fairer and meaningful for South Africa to host a fstival of its people's game, rather than a Rugby World Cup, which IS the sport of the privileged white minority (or perhaps even an Olympics).

Where I do have a problem is with those who think that developed nations are obliged to be given events like the WC, Olympics or CWGs as some sort of "get square" with the developed world, and somehow to make a point about past oppression. I've said it time after time, hosting such events are not a right, but a privilege and not some statement about inflicting somn sort of schadenfreude on more developed and richer nations. If, on a balance sheet, a developing country can show (as South Africa and Rio have done) that they can host such an even responsibly and perhaps bring in real benefits, well, that's great. But it IS irresponsible to think events should be awarded to less developd locations willy nilly because of some sense of exotic appeal.

On the contrary, as the Guardian article illustrates. The Govt of South Africa has chosen to host this tournament over the well-being of it's population, to me that is a crime against humanity. I'll call it what it is. In some cases, the level of violence in evicting people for this lavish World Cup is far worse in South Africa than it was in China for their Olympics. The only difference is, South Africa is supposed to be a democracy. SUPPOSED being the key word, hardly given the concentration camp style evictions highlighted in above article.

I'm appalled that you think the lure of football, can empower ordinary South Africans to break the cycle of poverty and despair. How exactly? Give them a ball and say "hey, go play football, break your cycle... don't quite know how we're going to feed you, but it's okay, you have a football now"!!! Yeah, because that helps. It's false hope, and anyone thinking otherwise is living in fantasy land.

You're right, hosting should be a privilege, and many South Africans were delighted when they were given this event. But the reality is, the country was never in a position to host this event. It was all political, it has not and will not benefit the people of South Africa once the World Cup ends. I think the world cup should be advanced to countries which have not hosted, but not when it risks plunging that country into debt, forcing it's citizens out of their homes or puts football ahead of starvation and HIV relief.

The facts are, South Africa needs a lot of help, but a World Cup which will show South Africa at its best & indeed worst, won't progress it's people any more than giving kids in the Soweto a football. People need food, people need medical supplies. When you give a nation a global event, you make sure they can adequately care for their population first. No sports event should endanger lives. This World Cup does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:mellow: Chill Pills everyone!

Isn't it amazing how the future of South Africa's direction winds up everyone. As first responder to this thread, I agree that the event could have negative commercial realities. But as mentioned, this 'Cup is a boost for infrastructure development and future recognition. Yes South Africa has a poverty percentage we would consider unacceptiable in the OECD - so does China...And look how far they have come in the last forty years. This WC isn't a miracle fix it all in four weeks thing - it's part of a strategy that will help boost the nation for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you can't adequetly argue that. Mexico City is a perfect example of developing country getting a mega event with promises of development when in the 42 years since Mexico has regressed.

The World Cup is putting lipstick on a pig. All show, no substance.

If the ANC was serious about development they wouldn't be making the same mistakes Zimbabwe has, driving out the educated, landowners that have the means to create jobs to create short-term gains to appease the black masses that want change immediately. South Africa has issues and no world cup is going to start to fix them, no gesture is going to change things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you can't adequetly argue that. Mexico City is a perfect example of developing country getting a mega event with promises of development when in the 42 years since Mexico has regressed.

The World Cup is putting lipstick on a pig. All show, no substance.

If the ANC was serious about development they wouldn't be making the same mistakes Zimbabwe has, driving out the educated, landowners that have the means to create jobs to create short-term gains to appease the black masses that want change immediately. South Africa has issues and no world cup is going to start to fix them, no gesture is going to change things.

But would it be any different if they weren't hosting? Could even be worse with just that bit less attention being put on them - and also without the infrastructure that will be left behind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But would it be any different if they weren't hosting? Could even be worse with just that bit less attention being put on them - and also without the infrastructure that will be left behind.

Back to the point of diverting funds to infrastructure when people are dying of starvation and AIDS... though I do understand some countries have different priorities. But I definitely think this World Cup is a mistake for the reasons I outlined above.

I don't have the answers unfortunately, on how South Africa is able to advance forward, so that their people are better off.

Building infrastructure may aid some, in the long term. But I definitely think priorities, for South Africa, lay else where.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...