South Africa World Cup Problems, Part 10

In the latest chapter of the growing debacle that is the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, two bits of new came out this week, pouring more fuel on the fire.

This past Monday, it was reported World Soccer that the organizing committee admitted that the target date for Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium in Port Elizabeth might not be met. Granted, this deadline does not affect the actual World Cup, as the deadline is set for 2009 in order to host at least one FIFA Confederations Cup match in a dry run for the World Cup the following year. The organizers are also concerned that the Green Point stadium in Cape Town might not make the deadline either. They did point out that Soccer City, in Soweto is on course to be completed five months ahead of schedule.

So two of the brand new stadiums that are being built for the 2010 World Cup might be ready for the 2009 Confederations Cup. Ok, that doesn't really sound that bad. I would assume that the organizers can adjust the Confederations Cup schedule around to get two other stadiums in line for hosting of matches in 2009. The idea that the Soccer City Stadium upgrades will be finished five months ahead of schedule sounds promising as well. So generally, this story on it's own doesn't really create any cause for concern.

Then, the AP ran this story, which if you look at it along with the construction delays, then we have another potentially huge problem on our hands.

So let me get this right, two of the four new stadiums might not be built in time for its deadline. That was the word before a possible nationwide Union strike halts all construction on all stadiums. Somebody tell me that this is not a bad thing? We go from two new stadiums potentially being finished behind schedule to the possibility that none of the five new stadiums nor the four stadiums that are being upgraded will be finished on schedule due to a labor union strike?

The current tally is that two of the new stadiums are struggling to meet their deadlines, one stadium upgrade is ahead of schedule; but none of this will matter if the Union has a nationwide sympathy strike starting next week. Even if the strike is only for a week or two, how much of a halt will that really do for the new stadium construction? If a two week strike does happen, I would be shocked if the organizers would be able to showcase any of the new stadiums for the 2009 Confederations Cup, which would be a blow for them.

I hope that this is something that can be resolved quickly and that there is no break in the construction schedule. Considering all of the negative press that South Africa has received surrounding the 2010 FIFA World Cup, having yet another blemish on the build up to the tournament would be horrible.

Blatter... WTF!??

Ok, I do get it. I understand that FIFA really isn't interested in organizing soccer/football matches and that they aren't really interested in helping developing nations enhance their way of life through sport. I get it, I really do.

FIFA is only in it for the money. They want as much money as can possibly be steered their way and they will do anything that will help them get it.

Just look at CONCACAF's President, Jack Warner. The guy sells his free tickets to the 2006 World Cup, when they should have been given away. FIFA gave him a slap on the slap on the wrist, almost saying, "Damn, Jack, we aren't mad you did it... we are mad that you came up with that idea first!"

Warner then tries to get the Scottish FA to pay him personally the money that was for the match fee of a match between Trinidad and Tobago & Scotland. Talk about one shady guy.

Wait! That's not the only thing, there's more!

FIFA instituted a continental rotation policy for the World Cup. They did this so that all of the confederations would have the chance to host at least one World Cup. So far we have had the 2002 World Cup in Asia (Korea & Japan), the 2006 World Cup in Europe (Germany), the 2010 World Cup will be held in Africa (South Africa) & the 2014 looks all but set for South America (Brazil). The only two confederations that haven't hosted a World Cup, in this rotation cycle are OCEANIA & CONCACAF.

So we have two more confederations that should be up for host rights, yet now FIFA Generalissimo Sepp Blatter wants to end the rotation system in favor of letting anyone (minus members of the continent that previously hosted one) to bid for the next World Cup, starting with 2018.

Uh, Sepp? Excuse me, but don't you have two more stops on your around the world trip of football/soccer? What is that you say, you can't make any money off of the other two regions so you don't want them to host? Is that right?

It has to be, along with the fact that when CONMEBOL essentially cut FIFA off at the knees when they only presented one member nation as the bidder for the 2014 World Cup. FIFA wasn't able to have multiple nations spend heaps of money on them for inspection visits or even really have any type of bidding war go on. FIFA lost money on the 2014 World Cup even before the 2010 cup kicked off. That scared the living hell out of their bank accounts.

Think of it. If CONCACAF were to get the sole right to bid for the 2018 cup, it would really be down to Mexico, Canada and the USA. FIFA rules for how a World Cup is hosted (stadium sizes, number of stadiums per city) and such would pretty much eliminate Canada (sorry neighbor) because the Canadians don't have the right number of stadiums that are large enough for the World Cup, by the rules. Further more, I suspect that the Canadians are smart enough to realize that even if they spent mass amounts of money on build huge stadiums, they would go to waste, just like the ones in Korea have. So Canada would be out.

So that leaves us with Mexico and the USA. Mexico has the stadiums to host, but are those stadiums truly up to the World Cup spec? Besides, Mexico has already hosted two World Cups, and granting Mexico a third before other countries like England or Spain even host their second cup, seem very doubtful. FIFA would get too much flak from the very countries that they have to keep happy.

That leaves the USA. That also leaves us with the problem that FIFA has seen with Brazil, and a bigger problem on top of that. First off, CONCACAF would probably go through the same elimination process as I have and finally just support the USA's bid, which would give FIFA the same problem as Brazil did, no bidding war.

Second, and this is the biggest problem; with the USA hosting, all the money that would be generated for FIFA "friends" would never be seen. "Friends" I say? Which friends? The friends that all get the lucrative stadium construction contracts. They won't get these because the stadiums are already in place, thanks to the NFL. Each NFL owner is going blind trying to build a bigger and more spectacular stadium, to entice another big money making event: The SuperBowl. Because these stadiums are so big and can already meet the FIFA regulations for World Cup stadiums, FIFA wouldn't be able to truly steer any of their friends to any of the construction contracts, which would mean no kick backs for FIFA.

Facing this problem, Blatter and FIFA have now decided that they stand to make more money without the rotation system and have an open bidding system. You have more people bidding, which means more expense paid visits to China, England, Australia, the USA, Italy and so on. FIFA will make record amounts of money through this new, open bidding system.

What we will finally end up with is that we will see the World Cup primarily played in Europe from now on. We might have one in China, one in the USA, and one in Austrailia, but we will get the 2018 World Cup in either England or in Italy. We will get this because as the 2006 World Cup showed, FIFA gets more money when people show up for the tournament. The USA will get another one, simply because the only one the USA ever hosted broke records for the number of fans in the stadiums and that means huge amounts of money for FIFA. The USA will only get one with an open bidding process, because that also makes money for FIFA.

The entire idea of a fair and impartial process being used for the rights to host a World Cup is a joke.

Does the football/soccer even need to get played anymore?

Another nail in the South African World Cup Coffin

In the ongoing disaster that is the build up of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, another nail has been hammered into the coffin. According to news24.com, there is yet another cost increase in the building of the five new stadiums that are planned for the tournament. The new stadium to be built in Durban was scheduled to have construction begin at the end of this month; however the local government has postponed the announcement of the naming of the contractor due to a sudden rise in costs of building materials. The Durban government is holding out until it finds out whether or not the South African government will cover the new costs.

As the construction on that stadium looks as if it will be delayed, it is growing more and more likely that all 10 stadiums will not be completed in time for the tournament. One of the major problems is that the national government has set aside 1.95 billion Rand to cover the upgrade of five stadiums. One of those stadiums, the Johannesburg Soccer City had been priced at 1.2 billion Rand, leaving the other four stadiums only around 750 thousand Rand to cover their upgrades. These figures were all released before this latest round of cost increases, which figures to increase the cost of the upgrades, but not the budgeted funds to cover them.

The funniest thing about all of this is that I saw this coming, as I have talked about it before -

“I wouldn't start booking anything just yet. I still think that by Jan/Feb 2007, the price tag will balloon to $2.2 Billion and keep rising. FIFA will have its elections in May; then in June or July, FIFA will do an "in-depth investigation of the ability and safety of South Africa hosting the 2010 World Cup." Blatter will voice his opinion against the inquiry, but will say he has no power to stop it.

By October 2007, FIFA will announce that based on their findings, South Africa will not be prepared to host the 2010 World Cup. FIFA will then adjust their rotational schedule to allow South Africa to host the 2014 World Cup. FIFA will then entertain any offers for an emergency host for the 2010 Cup.

Germany, France, England, Australia and the USA will be the five nations considered for the new emergency host. England will be dropped first as they are attempting to bid for the 2018 event (which would be a better planned event with more time). UEFA, wishing to see England host the 2018 event, will work to get Germany and France moved out of the running as well, in order to not jeopardize England’s bid in 2018.

That will leave the USA and Australia. As Australia would not have large enough capacity stadiums for a FIFA World Cup (and FIFA is all about money) they will be offered (silently) the 2022 World Cup. The USA will host the 2010 World Cup, at NFL stadiums and pretty much be out of the running at least until 2038 World Cup.”

I have said this before and I will say it again, I do not want the South African’s to lose the 2010 World Cup. That said, I cannot see how they will be able to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup. Based on everything I have read and everything I have heard about how the government and crime is down there, will ever get the stadiums ready, get the infrastructure ready and get the vast amount of rampant crime under control, they will not be able to complete everything before the World Cup, or much less, the Confederations Cup a year before.