Getting a little ahead of ourselves here ... like 12 years ahead of ourselves ...
But Fifa boss Sepp Blatter made clear the other day that he would like to see the 2022 World Cup in ... wait for it ... big soccer country ... a real hotbed ... wait ...
Qatar!
Which would seem like an amusing concept if you or I threw it out there. Sure. Qatar. Right there on the Arabian Peninsula, sticking into the Gulf like a sore thumb. A country that has never qualified for the World Cup, where summer weather is stunningly hot, a country with a tiny population ...
But here is the thing about Sepp and World Cup bidders:
Those he is thought to favor -- and sometimes he just comes out and tell us -- tend to be where the World Cup ends up. Such as South Africa 2010.
So those other nations bidding for 2010? You might be wasting your time, lads. That means you, the United States, Australia, South Korea and all those European contenders whose bids go on the junk pile if England gets the 2018 World Cup, as expected. Russia, Spain/Portugal, Belgium/Netherlands, Russia ...
If you didn't follow the link above, here is Sepp talking about Qatar:
"The Arab world deserves to host the World Cup. We are now nearing the end of the bidding process for the World Cups in 2018 and 2022 and Qatar is the only country bidding from the Middle East. I was an advocate of the Fifa's rotation policy. It was important to bring the World Cup to North America and Africa. Now I strongly feel that the World Cup should come to Qatar."
Again, wow. Can you imagine the head of, say, the IOC coming out so openly in favor of a single bidder before the process is complete? Neither can I.
Granted, Blatter was in Qatar when he pumped up the country for the 2022 World Cup. But of late he doesn't seem to pander to folks. He is more into delivering.
Remember, this is not some distant project. The host countries for both the 2018 and 2022 World Cups will be announced on Dec. 2. This year.
Yes, Qatar. Oil rich Qatar. Don't be surprised if you hear that name coming out of Sepp's mouth on Dec. 2.
Read more!
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Corruption in Fifa, South Africa Alleged
I'm not even going to try to do much in the way of synthesizing here.
It's complicated ... it's technical ... I'm not sure how dependable the sources are ... but some or much of what they allege might be true.
Here is the story from the Johannesburg Times on a report/book issued by an entity called the Institute for Security Studies. No, I don't know quite what it is, either. And here is a pdf file from the press conference the group held this week to announce their book/study.
In it ... at least according to the interpretation by the newspaper ... are some fairly hazy charges of corruption involving Fifa and South African officials.
Among them:
--Awarding a company the right to handle accommodations for fans, and seeing that company charge up to "1,000 percent" above normal rates.
--Suggestions that a deal signed with a firm to manage the main stadium for South Africa 2010, Soccer City, will not yield any profit for the city.
--Allegations that the bid to build the stadium in Cape Town was decided by Fifa president Sepp Blatter the day before a meeting was to be held to review the six bids ... and that the winning bid Blatter hand-picked was the most expensive.
The one quotation tied to the story comes from Andrew Jennings, a contributing editor to the book and a professional Blatter-basher, is this one, on Fifa:
"The unaccountable structure they’ve installed is honed to deliver the game to the needs of global capitalism – with no checks or restraints. Just cheques."
Not sure quite what to make of this. Not much here seems nailed down, to my journalist's way of thinking. But we have enough suspicious stuff going on to make us all wonder how much of this whole World Cup process came together on the up and up.
Go have a look at it yourself. See what you think. Read more!
It's complicated ... it's technical ... I'm not sure how dependable the sources are ... but some or much of what they allege might be true.
Here is the story from the Johannesburg Times on a report/book issued by an entity called the Institute for Security Studies. No, I don't know quite what it is, either. And here is a pdf file from the press conference the group held this week to announce their book/study.
In it ... at least according to the interpretation by the newspaper ... are some fairly hazy charges of corruption involving Fifa and South African officials.
Among them:
--Awarding a company the right to handle accommodations for fans, and seeing that company charge up to "1,000 percent" above normal rates.
--Suggestions that a deal signed with a firm to manage the main stadium for South Africa 2010, Soccer City, will not yield any profit for the city.
--Allegations that the bid to build the stadium in Cape Town was decided by Fifa president Sepp Blatter the day before a meeting was to be held to review the six bids ... and that the winning bid Blatter hand-picked was the most expensive.
The one quotation tied to the story comes from Andrew Jennings, a contributing editor to the book and a professional Blatter-basher, is this one, on Fifa:
"The unaccountable structure they’ve installed is honed to deliver the game to the needs of global capitalism – with no checks or restraints. Just cheques."
Not sure quite what to make of this. Not much here seems nailed down, to my journalist's way of thinking. But we have enough suspicious stuff going on to make us all wonder how much of this whole World Cup process came together on the up and up.
Go have a look at it yourself. See what you think. Read more!
Friday, April 30, 2010
Kiwis Amateurish? Well, Actually ...
This story is heart-warming. Or a stunning indictment.
Take your choice. Want to feel good about New Zealand's World Cup team? Or would you prefer to feel sorry for it?
The Kiwis may very well show up at South Africa 2010 with an amateur player in their ranks.
Which is a nice sidebar, but probably doesn't bode well for their chances of escaping Group F ... with a point ... or even a goal.
Not that anyone thought much of their chances beforehand.
The amateur in question is Barron, a banker by day, an unpaid midfielder for the Wellington club team by night.
It's not as if he has never put in time for the New Zealand national side. He came on as a substitute in the Kiwis' biggest victory in 28 years, the 1-0 decision over Bahrain in a playoff for a World Cup berth.
But, generally, World Cup players are paid millions of dollars by club teams to ply their trade. Or at least hundreds of thousands. Even non-traditional soccer nations such as South Korea, Japan, the United States ... all their guys are pro.
(North Korean players do not play for pay, but they might well be able to, if their bizarre government allowed them.)
Barron is being given time off by his employer to practice with the All Whites, and appears to stand a very good chance of making the roster ... of the least-fancied (as the Brits would say) side in the tournament. Behind even the hosts and the North Koreans.
But how many bankers can say they went to the World Cup as players?
Barron realizes not many (if any) other amateurs will appear at the tournament. "I can't imagine there will be many others there," he said.
New Zealand, with an amateur.
Isn't that cute?
Isn't that pitiful? Read more!
Take your choice. Want to feel good about New Zealand's World Cup team? Or would you prefer to feel sorry for it?
The Kiwis may very well show up at South Africa 2010 with an amateur player in their ranks.
Which is a nice sidebar, but probably doesn't bode well for their chances of escaping Group F ... with a point ... or even a goal.
Not that anyone thought much of their chances beforehand.
The amateur in question is Barron, a banker by day, an unpaid midfielder for the Wellington club team by night.
It's not as if he has never put in time for the New Zealand national side. He came on as a substitute in the Kiwis' biggest victory in 28 years, the 1-0 decision over Bahrain in a playoff for a World Cup berth.
But, generally, World Cup players are paid millions of dollars by club teams to ply their trade. Or at least hundreds of thousands. Even non-traditional soccer nations such as South Korea, Japan, the United States ... all their guys are pro.
(North Korean players do not play for pay, but they might well be able to, if their bizarre government allowed them.)
Barron is being given time off by his employer to practice with the All Whites, and appears to stand a very good chance of making the roster ... of the least-fancied (as the Brits would say) side in the tournament. Behind even the hosts and the North Koreans.
But how many bankers can say they went to the World Cup as players?
Barron realizes not many (if any) other amateurs will appear at the tournament. "I can't imagine there will be many others there," he said.
New Zealand, with an amateur.
Isn't that cute?
Isn't that pitiful? Read more!
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Fan Fests! for Ticketless ... Fans
Seems a bit late to be getting around to this, six weeks ahead of the World Cup. But better than late than never ... we think. I mean, assuming security is OK, and people are able to get in and out ...
South Africa 2010 will have what they are calling Fan Fests, just as Germany did in 2006.
The idea is basic and almost a "have to do it" sort of thing.
Organizers arrange places where fans can gather and watch matches -- in large groups -- and enjoy the feeling of being at a match ... when they are not.
South Africa concedes right off that it won't have Fan Fests on the scale Germany did, where an estaimted 18 million people gathered at non-game-venues to watch matches.
South Africa's total Fan Fest capacity is 275,000, all of it at stadiums not being used for the World Cup. That isn't a big number, but that is a start, especially in a country where many soccer fans cannot afford match tickets. If they can get in free to see, say, their own team play, or Brazil or one of Africa's other team ... well, that's a great gesture.
It's a little unsettling that this is just now coming together. Anything organized at the last minute tends to turn out ... looking like something last-minute.
Presumably, people in South Africa have been talking to the Germans about this. Tips about organization and logistics and transport and all that.
I know people who have been at these sorts of events. Such as outside the Hotel de Ville in Paris in 1998 for the opener between Brazil and Scotland, and it was described as great fun, with thousands of people there who couldn't get tickets or just wanted to party in a soccer atmosphere, perhaps without really caring all that much about the soccer but caring a lot about the event.
Anyway, yes, this SA2010 Fan Fest thing has the capacity to bring the World Cup much closer to lots of people who otherwise would feel no connection to it at all. That's good. Read more!
South Africa 2010 will have what they are calling Fan Fests, just as Germany did in 2006.
The idea is basic and almost a "have to do it" sort of thing.
Organizers arrange places where fans can gather and watch matches -- in large groups -- and enjoy the feeling of being at a match ... when they are not.
South Africa concedes right off that it won't have Fan Fests on the scale Germany did, where an estaimted 18 million people gathered at non-game-venues to watch matches.
South Africa's total Fan Fest capacity is 275,000, all of it at stadiums not being used for the World Cup. That isn't a big number, but that is a start, especially in a country where many soccer fans cannot afford match tickets. If they can get in free to see, say, their own team play, or Brazil or one of Africa's other team ... well, that's a great gesture.
It's a little unsettling that this is just now coming together. Anything organized at the last minute tends to turn out ... looking like something last-minute.
Presumably, people in South Africa have been talking to the Germans about this. Tips about organization and logistics and transport and all that.
I know people who have been at these sorts of events. Such as outside the Hotel de Ville in Paris in 1998 for the opener between Brazil and Scotland, and it was described as great fun, with thousands of people there who couldn't get tickets or just wanted to party in a soccer atmosphere, perhaps without really caring all that much about the soccer but caring a lot about the event.
Anyway, yes, this SA2010 Fan Fest thing has the capacity to bring the World Cup much closer to lots of people who otherwise would feel no connection to it at all. That's good. Read more!
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
South Africa Falls to 90 in Fifa Rankings
Hard not to feel pessimistic about the Bafana Bafana Bafana. (If the same name twice is good, can't three be better?) South Africa's soccer team hasn't had an impressive performance since the Confederations Cup, which was in June, and by "impressive" we mean spirited defeats to Brazil and Spain.
The new Fifa world rankings are out, and South Africa's fall to No. 90 has alarmed and depressed the Johannesburg Times. Well, anyone in South Africa who is paying attention. Rankings are for show, but when they have Brazil and Spain at the top we must concede that perhaps the list has some basis in reality. Or predictable performance, anyway.
Concepts to consider:
--South Africa will be the lowest-ranked team to host a World Cup. (Previous low: South Korea at No. 40 in 2002.) And absolutely is at risk of becoming the first host not to survive group play. We can assume the Bafana Bafana Bafana will play better than they are, in front of home crowds, but will it be enough to earn them results against Mexico, France and Uruguay? Seems as if the first match, vs. Mexico, is critical. A point out of that changes everything for the BBB. A defeat might just do the impossible: Silence the vuvuzelas.
--Brazil is back up to No. 1, slipping past Spain. Seems about right. Lots to like about Spain, but hard to rank them over Brazil, especially with the coldly efficient Carlos Caetano Bledorn Verri (Dunga) coaching the team. All that Brazilian talent inside an actual system? Look out.
--Portugal is third, its highest ranking since Fifa began doing this in 1993. Which is interesting, because the global opinion of Portugal seems to be that it was a bit lucky to make the tournament at all. And certainly this crop of players is not remotely as well-received as the Luis Figo generation, considered a darkhorse choice to win it all in 2002. Remember, Portugal is stuck in the 2010 Group of Death (along with Brazil and Ivory Coast and the Walking Dead, North Korea). If Cristiano Ronaldo and the lads survive Ivory Coast and escape the group, the rankings would seem to indicate Portugal has a fairly good chance of seeing Brazil again -- in the final.
--The highest rankings that don't quite feel right begin with Argentina at No. 7 (Maradona is still coach, right?), continue with England at No. 8 (a bit low for a team that has won everything for a while now), Croatia at No. 9 (third in their qualifying group and not in the World Cup), France at 10 (hello! Raymond Domenech still coach!), and then Greece, Egypt, the United States and Chile at Nos. 12-15. Are they really surpassed by only 11 teams?
--More meaningful rankings are on the way. Fifa's story on the April rankings notes that almost no international matches were played in the past month, so teams are moving around incrementally bases on minimal results. As the story notes, we can anticipate some serious movement when the last batch of rankings come out, one month hence, after a whole bunch of pre-Cup friendlies are played. Read more!
The new Fifa world rankings are out, and South Africa's fall to No. 90 has alarmed and depressed the Johannesburg Times. Well, anyone in South Africa who is paying attention. Rankings are for show, but when they have Brazil and Spain at the top we must concede that perhaps the list has some basis in reality. Or predictable performance, anyway.
Concepts to consider:
--South Africa will be the lowest-ranked team to host a World Cup. (Previous low: South Korea at No. 40 in 2002.) And absolutely is at risk of becoming the first host not to survive group play. We can assume the Bafana Bafana Bafana will play better than they are, in front of home crowds, but will it be enough to earn them results against Mexico, France and Uruguay? Seems as if the first match, vs. Mexico, is critical. A point out of that changes everything for the BBB. A defeat might just do the impossible: Silence the vuvuzelas.
--Brazil is back up to No. 1, slipping past Spain. Seems about right. Lots to like about Spain, but hard to rank them over Brazil, especially with the coldly efficient Carlos Caetano Bledorn Verri (Dunga) coaching the team. All that Brazilian talent inside an actual system? Look out.
--Portugal is third, its highest ranking since Fifa began doing this in 1993. Which is interesting, because the global opinion of Portugal seems to be that it was a bit lucky to make the tournament at all. And certainly this crop of players is not remotely as well-received as the Luis Figo generation, considered a darkhorse choice to win it all in 2002. Remember, Portugal is stuck in the 2010 Group of Death (along with Brazil and Ivory Coast and the Walking Dead, North Korea). If Cristiano Ronaldo and the lads survive Ivory Coast and escape the group, the rankings would seem to indicate Portugal has a fairly good chance of seeing Brazil again -- in the final.
--The highest rankings that don't quite feel right begin with Argentina at No. 7 (Maradona is still coach, right?), continue with England at No. 8 (a bit low for a team that has won everything for a while now), Croatia at No. 9 (third in their qualifying group and not in the World Cup), France at 10 (hello! Raymond Domenech still coach!), and then Greece, Egypt, the United States and Chile at Nos. 12-15. Are they really surpassed by only 11 teams?
--More meaningful rankings are on the way. Fifa's story on the April rankings notes that almost no international matches were played in the past month, so teams are moving around incrementally bases on minimal results. As the story notes, we can anticipate some serious movement when the last batch of rankings come out, one month hence, after a whole bunch of pre-Cup friendlies are played. Read more!
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Capello's Folly: WAGs Welcome in England Camp
Lamest idea of the week. No question. Maybe a World Cup-turning decision.
Mario Capello, England's heretofore no-nonsense coach who last year had made clear that his players would have very limited time with WAGs -- the infamous "Wives And Girlfriends" -- has changed his mind.
Capello now says the WAGs are all right.
What a horrible decision.
England already is the most distracted team in the world. No. Really. Because on top of the usual pressure to win the World Cup, it adds the scary brew of ...
--The world's most voracious tabloid media. These guys love love love the WAGs. And the WAGs love them, too. But it has nothing to do with soccer. Which automatically makes it bad for a soccer team.
--This is now a real distraction. As it was in 2006, when (far as I can tell) the term WAGs became popular. Players need to focus on matches. Not on their girlfriends' demands or complaints or relatives.
--Capello just blinked. He was the Vince Lombardi of soccer ... but suddenly he went all Sven-Goran Ericksson on us -- Sven-Goran being the coach who allowed the WAGs to turn the England camp in Baden-Baden to turn into "a circus" in 2006.
I don't get this. Why the reversal? The players seemed to have come to grips with his original decision. They might even have been happy about it (but would never tell their own WOG -- wife or girlfriend).
Now, the 2010 World Cup could again become about the hangers on.
Capello apparently chatted with coaches, including Marcello Lippi (coach of the 2006 champs from Italy), guys who don't have the same approach to the game as he does, and they apparently convinced him the players' happiness was critical. And they are happy when the WAGs are around, he seems to think.
I beg to differ.
Capello's original plan of access to players only on the days after matches ... was perfect. A break from the grind of the World Cup. But not a lasting distraction. Just right.
He apparently has not made clear how much more access the WAGs will have ... but it's more than they were going to have.
Oh, and if you followed that link, click on the link to "In Pictures" ... and you will get an idea of what the 2006 World Cup was like. With the often silly wives and girlfriends of often silly footballers becoming as big a story as the team.
Madness.
It's not too late for Capello to change his mind again. Maybe he will sense all of England cringing at the decision and go back to the one-day-per-match decision.
The man who was the Iron Hand of English soccer ... just went limp. He went squishy. Which is not what he does ... but he just did it.
Mark it down as the first time the Three Lions "blinked" at the 2010 World Cup. We're guessing it won't be the last, what with the WAGs now in tow.
Read more!
Mario Capello, England's heretofore no-nonsense coach who last year had made clear that his players would have very limited time with WAGs -- the infamous "Wives And Girlfriends" -- has changed his mind.
Capello now says the WAGs are all right.
What a horrible decision.
England already is the most distracted team in the world. No. Really. Because on top of the usual pressure to win the World Cup, it adds the scary brew of ...
--The world's most voracious tabloid media. These guys love love love the WAGs. And the WAGs love them, too. But it has nothing to do with soccer. Which automatically makes it bad for a soccer team.
--This is now a real distraction. As it was in 2006, when (far as I can tell) the term WAGs became popular. Players need to focus on matches. Not on their girlfriends' demands or complaints or relatives.
--Capello just blinked. He was the Vince Lombardi of soccer ... but suddenly he went all Sven-Goran Ericksson on us -- Sven-Goran being the coach who allowed the WAGs to turn the England camp in Baden-Baden to turn into "a circus" in 2006.
I don't get this. Why the reversal? The players seemed to have come to grips with his original decision. They might even have been happy about it (but would never tell their own WOG -- wife or girlfriend).
Now, the 2010 World Cup could again become about the hangers on.
Capello apparently chatted with coaches, including Marcello Lippi (coach of the 2006 champs from Italy), guys who don't have the same approach to the game as he does, and they apparently convinced him the players' happiness was critical. And they are happy when the WAGs are around, he seems to think.
I beg to differ.
Capello's original plan of access to players only on the days after matches ... was perfect. A break from the grind of the World Cup. But not a lasting distraction. Just right.
He apparently has not made clear how much more access the WAGs will have ... but it's more than they were going to have.
Oh, and if you followed that link, click on the link to "In Pictures" ... and you will get an idea of what the 2006 World Cup was like. With the often silly wives and girlfriends of often silly footballers becoming as big a story as the team.
Madness.
It's not too late for Capello to change his mind again. Maybe he will sense all of England cringing at the decision and go back to the one-day-per-match decision.
The man who was the Iron Hand of English soccer ... just went limp. He went squishy. Which is not what he does ... but he just did it.
Mark it down as the first time the Three Lions "blinked" at the 2010 World Cup. We're guessing it won't be the last, what with the WAGs now in tow.
Read more!
Monday, April 26, 2010
The Matches No One Wants to See
Happens at every World Cup. Tickets for certain matches are available ... for a long time.
Maybe forever.
All 64 matches may be declared sellouts, but if you go see X number of the less glamorous matches in person, you see the empty seats. An accounting trick: "Tickets sold," but not to people who plan to use them. Have the groundskeepers get the tarps ready for the end zones.
So, which nations can expect some wide open spaces in the stands when they play at South Africa 2010?
Here are the five group-play matches for which tickets remain at every price level. (Information courtesy of the Johannesburg Times.) And, no, North Korea is not on the list!
--Algeria vs. Slovenia in Polokwane. Comment: What? A poor North African country vs. a tiny Balkan country most of the world doesn't know from Slovakia? You can't sell that out?
--Honduras vs. Chile in Nelspruit. Comment: Wait, a poor Central American country against a South American country so skinny you can spit from the Argentina border into the Pacific Ocean? You can't sell that out? Probably, like, 100 people from Nicaragua will be in South Africa. You still can be the team mascot if you can afford the serape.
--Chile vs Switzerland in Port Elizabeth. Comment: What is with all the hating on Chile? They just had a 9.9-magnitude earthquake, people. Can't some church groups show up and cheer for the plucky survivors? And I know the problem with Switzerland: Everybody feels neutral about them.
--Australia vs. Serbia in Nelspruit. Comment: Wow. I thought that Southern Hemisphere cricket/rugby solidarity thing mattered. But no. South Africans won't see the Aussies play? Could be Serbia be part of the problem. What about the enormous Serbian community in Nelspruit? You know, that family that is always at the mosque? Oh, those are Bosnians?
--Paraguay vs. New Zealand in Polokwane. Comment: Hello? Southern Hemisphere solidarity? A cruel joke. And Paraguay is part of the problem. Quick, name one city or one player from Paraguay! Time's up! Answer: Asuncion ... and The Guy Who Got Shot in the Bar in Mexico. OK, then, how about a shout out for Polokwane? Wouldn't you pay to see anybody play there? Polokwane, anyone?
Anyway ... tickets remain available for these five matches. Lots of them. Pretty much anywhere you want to sit. Better hurry. Or not. Read more!
Maybe forever.
All 64 matches may be declared sellouts, but if you go see X number of the less glamorous matches in person, you see the empty seats. An accounting trick: "Tickets sold," but not to people who plan to use them. Have the groundskeepers get the tarps ready for the end zones.
So, which nations can expect some wide open spaces in the stands when they play at South Africa 2010?
Here are the five group-play matches for which tickets remain at every price level. (Information courtesy of the Johannesburg Times.) And, no, North Korea is not on the list!
--Algeria vs. Slovenia in Polokwane. Comment: What? A poor North African country vs. a tiny Balkan country most of the world doesn't know from Slovakia? You can't sell that out?
--Honduras vs. Chile in Nelspruit. Comment: Wait, a poor Central American country against a South American country so skinny you can spit from the Argentina border into the Pacific Ocean? You can't sell that out? Probably, like, 100 people from Nicaragua will be in South Africa. You still can be the team mascot if you can afford the serape.
--Chile vs Switzerland in Port Elizabeth. Comment: What is with all the hating on Chile? They just had a 9.9-magnitude earthquake, people. Can't some church groups show up and cheer for the plucky survivors? And I know the problem with Switzerland: Everybody feels neutral about them.
--Australia vs. Serbia in Nelspruit. Comment: Wow. I thought that Southern Hemisphere cricket/rugby solidarity thing mattered. But no. South Africans won't see the Aussies play? Could be Serbia be part of the problem. What about the enormous Serbian community in Nelspruit? You know, that family that is always at the mosque? Oh, those are Bosnians?
--Paraguay vs. New Zealand in Polokwane. Comment: Hello? Southern Hemisphere solidarity? A cruel joke. And Paraguay is part of the problem. Quick, name one city or one player from Paraguay! Time's up! Answer: Asuncion ... and The Guy Who Got Shot in the Bar in Mexico. OK, then, how about a shout out for Polokwane? Wouldn't you pay to see anybody play there? Polokwane, anyone?
Anyway ... tickets remain available for these five matches. Lots of them. Pretty much anywhere you want to sit. Better hurry. Or not. Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
