By Patrick Reynell
South Africa will host the 2010 World Cup. Nine cities – including Cape Town, Johannesburg, and Durban – will be the center of the world between June 11 and July 11. FIFA’s decision to hold the world’s biggest tournament on the oft war ridden continent is not sitting well with the rest of the world.
If you haven’t followed the world news at all, Zimbabwe is muddled with violence and alleged political corruption. Now I can’t give you the details of who is who or the acronyms of any political factions; all I know is that the situation has affected South Africa. Leading up to a recent election and its conclusion, which was delayed many times, Zimbabweans sensing political strife and out lash from a suspicious delay fled to their more economically stable neighbor, South Africa. Those who fled early were lucky: they have escaped the daily violence that ensued.
This past week, FIFA has finally admitted that they are concerned with the situation in Zimbabwe and how it may affect the safety of the players and hundreds of thousands of fans that will descend upon South Africa in 2010. They have revealed that there is a backup plan in place, but refuse to disclose any details including the possible country. Rumors have also been swirling that FIFA is considering the suspension of the Zimbabwe National team, who is still in place to advance to the next stage of qualifying.
Lost in all of this is Zimbabwe’s plight to use soccer as a tool for peace. Zimbabwe originally had high hopes of hosting some of the World Cup fixtures in Harare, but ultimately lost that chance due to the inadequacies of its stadiums. They thought hosting some games would promote national pride. One stadium in particular, Rufaro Stadium in Harare, began renovations in hopes of hosting. However, problems with the drainage and turf put the stadium’s progress eight months behind schedule. In fact, up until recently, FIFA was not even going to sanction the use of Rufaro for qualifying matches, which would force the Zimbabwe team to play qualifying matches elsewhere.
FIFA eventually approved Rufaro and the dilapidated stadium hosted a couple of qualifying matches. Zimbabwe performed valiantly, most recently drawing against Kenya and defeating Namibia. There will be at least one more qualifying match played in Harare’s Rufaro Stadium on September 7 against Guinea. Zimbabwe remains in third place in Group 2, two points behind Kenya; they have two more matches to finish in the top two spots in order to advance.
My guess is that FIFA is in fact considering disbanding the Zimbabwe National team, but has chosen to wait out the qualifying round to see if Zimbabwe can just eliminate itself. On one hand, it’s hard to argue with one point of view FIFA could make – they may be protecting them from violence. But on the other hand they may actually prolong it.
A few years ago the Iraqi National team experienced success beyond expectations despite a war in their country. They practiced and played all “home games” in Dubai. Many of them were witnesses to unspeakable horrors experienced by many athletes during Hussein’s reign in Iraq. Yet, they continued to compete. They finished fourth in the 2004 Olympics, and in 2006 and 2007 won gold and silver medals in two different Asian tournaments. These Asian tournaments exposed nationalism in Iraq. During their participation and success in these tournaments, it was widely reported on American news channels that violence was down in Iraq. I can recall CNN running a video of Iraqi celebrations after a big victory and was enthralled at the power of soccer.
(It is unfortunate to reflect back on this now. Iraq was recently eliminated from World Cup qualifying after losing to Qatar. The government decided to dismiss the manager and disband the team until a later time. Victory begets pride, defeat begets shame.)
FIFA understandably refused to allow Zimbabwe to host any World Cup games, but why suspend the team if they continue to be successful? All it needs to do is look at what the Iraqi team did for its country. Soccer can be a powerful force when allowed to run its course. Maybe “The Warriors,” as the Zimbabwe team is so affectionately called, are destined for something bigger. Normally perennial underachievers in Africa, they have shown signs of an undeniable will during qualifying. Why interrupt that? Just look at the games played at Rufaro thus far. There has been no violence whatsoever and national pride was palpable. Rufaro has a capacity of 35,000. The attendance at Rufaro for both qualifying games? 35,000 proud Zimbabweans.
2008 Zimbabwe presidential election
FIFA has no plans to suspend Zimbabwe
Details on Rufaro Stadium
2010 FIFA World Cup
This is great stuff. Too often we get caught up in the headlines surrounding us (scary when some of those headlines are from the NY Post) and forget about the struggles of others.
Thanks for taking the time to research and write this article.
I feel that if FIFA were to neglect Zimbabwe from hosting the World Cup a huge outrage would be the outcome. Zimbabwe is making all the steps necessary in remodeling an old stadium, and preparing for World Cup fever in general. If thus far there has yet to be any violence at Rufaro during the Zimbabwean soccer games, I highly doubt that there is any violence to come. The security needed to host a World Cup is unbelievable. I remember during the last World Cup in Germany, that their were around just as many undercover cops as there were spectators watching the soccer games. I feel that allowing South Africa to host the World Cup would be more then beneficial for their country for years to come.
Claim-2010 South Africa will host the world cup. FIFA is hoping to hold the worlds largest sooccer tournament ever held in the wold.
Evidence- There will be nine cities that are going to be there and that that will also be haveing cape town there and durban. This is going to be the center of the world lasting from June 11 to july 11. But the one problem that has occured is where the tournament is at can effect peoples attitude toward if they really want to go or not because of were it is at.
Interpretation
You really can’t blame FIFA for having concerns about holding it’s landmark event in a war torn, crime ridden, unstable country. The biggest concern has to be for the fans that will pay a good chunk of money to see the pride of their nations play in sweltering heat, in sold out stadiums that will certainly be packed to capacity (which will only make it hotter). But suffering a heat stroke isn’t even the biggest risk for these die hards, it’s making it out of South Africa and back to their homelands alive. The videos talked more about South Africa’s problems (violence, racism, preparations starting late), but on the same token it also talked about the pros of holding arguably the biggest sporting event of 2010 there. Bob Ley was saying that while the country lacks in resources, and prep time, it is definitely ready to host because the excitement of every South African citizen is palpable and they are more than ready.
First off South Africa hosting the world cup is great IMO. I think it will do wonders for the conntinent of Africa. I can’t really make any connections to this article seeing that i haven’t gone through what they have and i don’t play soccer. One of patrick’s claims was that Zimbabwe should be allowed to play if they advance. His Evidence is that Iraq was allowed to play in tournaments, even though they have been fighting a war. His Interpretation is that when Iraq played in the tournaments, the country seemed to be more unified, and the violence numbers decreased. What he is saying is that Zimbabwe should be given that chance too, who knows it might decrease the violence level for them too.
Patrick,
I agree with the thought of “Why band the team if they are successful?”Yes i agree with not letting Zimbabwe host and World Cups because of the complications they had before, however i don’t think it is fair to suspend the team when they are a good and successful team. If FIFA is worried about violence,which is understandable, they should just look at the recent games that were played at Rufaro. The games consisted of no violence, just national pride and taking that away i feel is unfair.
Patrick,
The videos that i watched and your article show a different perspective on sports and society. In south africa, there is violence occuring and racism between each other. Racism is a big problem in the world and causes conflicts with many people especially when the world cup starts on June 11. I also believe that Zimbabwe National team should not be disqualified from the world cup because of there country having problems and violence. The Zimbabwe players are working hard for there country to win the world cup and not letting them qualify even if they are doing good, is wrong. One connection on this topic is that racism is dealt throughout other sports besides soccer. Basketball and football had a color barrier back in the day and could still have some racist people today.
Patrick,
It was very intersting to learn from both the video and the reading about the different reactions of people about the world cup being held in South Africa. In this articled some people do not want the world cup to be held there because of violence and corruption. In the video people are very happy about it being held there because they have a passion for soccer and they belive all the violence has ended and that every one is okay with the World Cup being held there. I think that South Africa should be given a chance and to let the World Cup be held in South Africa. If things don’t work out then they don’t have to have it there ever again. This is what I think should happen with South Africa and the World Cup.
Patrick,
I completely agree with your point of view. It seems unnecessary to disband a team just because of what is going on in their home country. I don’t see that any real threat is posed by the Zimbabweans to the general crowd in South Africa, so I really don’t understand why they’re even considering this. It might actually cause a terrible outburst of protest in Zimbabwe if the team is disbanded once they make the next round. Another thing is that now it almost seems to the team like they’re playing for nothing. Either way, they probably won’t make it to the next round and either way they will probably be disbanded. Finally, I think it is a huge opportunity for the country to unite under the celebration under the teams successes if they do play well enough. I really hope that the team won’t get disbabnded.
Claim- the worlds largest soccer tournament will be hosted in south africa and is going to have nine cities be there and this will be the center of the world.
Interpretation- This is going to be a good soccer game especially if its going to be the worlds largest world cup. Where this tournament is taken place at could affect peoples thought about it whether if they wont to go or not.
interpretation- My guess is ttat this eent will more than likely come out good with a little problems here and there but in the end it will all end up really good.
Matt,
I agree with your opinions on the World Cup and South Africa. However my only thought towards your opinion is that, yes maybe they should get another opportunity with hosting the World Cup but only if they are prepared. They should prove themselves to FIFA and be prepared of they are given the chance.
Patrick,
It is frequently seen, in the world of sports, the relationship between a nation and it’s sports teams. Us Americans don’t view sports as important as other nations do, and that’s easy to see. But for nations like Zimbabwe, it is clearly very important to them that they do well and that they have the 2010 World Cup in South America. Your research is very vivid in this article and I enjoyed how you elaborated the situation very nicely. But my opinion is that, violent outbursts aside, the 2010 World Cup SHOULD be held in South America. Teams like Zimbabwe rely on these type of things to help bring a sense of new peace into their nation. At these games, men on the field become brothers, fighting for a common goal. The fans, completely different people, become friends, hoping and praying that their team can pull out a win. This whole situation is bigger than everyone thinks because if this all turns out well, peace could be restored to places that have never experienced it before.
RJ,
I agree with wat you are saying about were they are holding the fifa tournament i believe that there is nothing wrong with wat they are doing.
As the 2010 World Cup draws nearer, I think that it can only be a positive for the host country of South Africa. South Africa is often riddled with violence, oppression, and sever racial separation, especially until the end of Apartheid in the early 1990’s. However, I think bringing the World Cup to South Africa will bring peoples together through one of the world’s most uniting forces: sports. Many have said that sports helped to integrate races and peoples after Apartheid ended, and because of this I think the World Cup will do the same to bridge the current racial barriers. While many are concerned about possible violence, especially due to the situation in Zimbabwe, I think violence will become an almost non-issue when the World Cup arrives. By hosting the World Cup, South Africa gets to show that they are not just what they are portrayed to be in the news, but that they are a good, hospitable group of people. The joy that hosting the World Cup is bringing to the peoples of South Africa will help to relieve racial tensions. Ultimately, I think that the peoples of Africa will be able to come together peacefully in celebration as the 2010 World Cup draws nearer and nearer and I sincerely hope that hosting the World Cup can help bring this country’s peoples together.
I dont think its right that FIFA wants to take away the world cup from South africa. Since Zimbabwe is having trouble with violence the world cup in Africa will take the vilolence away for alittle while and bring the country together. With the teams joining toegether it will help resolve issues with all the problems in south africa. It can aslo be bad tho because if fifa doesnt let the world cup in south africa then it might trigger more viloence and cause worse things to happen.
Jared, I believe that America is as passionate about sports as other countries, just not soccer. if they had a World Cup for say Football we would be all over that.
Mike Ward,
I agree mike, the world cup being hosted will bring every one together in south america and bring national pride. Its bad for FIFA to take the world cup out becasue it will just make things worse.
I think every team should have the opportunity to compete no matter what problems they’re having. It would just make better competition. Why not? And if they aren’t good, who wouldn’t like to see an upset or two? Authorities should not be afraid of putting two teams on the field because of the violence it may bring. Sports has always been something that has brought everyone together and the same idea applies to the Olympics. It’s a time for everyone to put all their problems aside and come together as a nation to compete against the world.
The FIFA having the World Cup in South Africa is a great idea in my opinion. I think by bringing the different kind of races to the country would be a great opportunity to understand the other cultures. In the four videos that I watched showed a Native of South Africa said that “South Africa would fight about ones race,” but in the United States no one even wanted to talk about “RACE.’ In one of the videos the reporter said that South Africa will be ready for the World Cup, and that they will not have that Angle-Saxon attitude. The sport ‘soccer’ and other major sports bring race together as one and to forget about the different colors and cultures of one another.
Gill,
I’m with you on that. If it becomes a problem then deal with it but other than that, just let em’ play.
Mike,
Can you tell me why people keep saying if they are prepared? Prepared for what?
Wow, well what is there to say about this conraversyle topic? I can start out by saying the feeling on this subject is mutual. Now i do understand the risk of housting the world cup in south Africa. The violence, crim, and corrupt government that South Africa is known for. On the other hand there is the pure inocents caring people that are put under this stereotypical shadow of hate. The south African people want change and some type of national pride that will help them bring there country in as a whole. Soccor excuse me, Futbul is the worlds bigest sport and could indeffenently help achive that goal. There is so much more to South Africa then meets the “tabloids”.
Aaron
That’s a solid connection to the Olympics.
Jared and Mark – an interesting difference in opinion. I understand Jared’s point. From the videos we watched, sports (in particular soccer) is a way of life. Kids playing soccer as a form of communicating and bonding. Where as in the USA we have so much at our disposal, we don’t have to depend on sports in our daily lives. I got the feeling when watching the Outside The Lines clips that if those kids didn’t have soccer, they wouldn’t be able to gather.
On the other hand, as Mark points out, every Sunday in the Fall is a great example of America’s passion with sports.
Matt,
What I mean by if they are prepared is if they can make a stadium that doesn’t occur any problems such as the ones stated in the reading. If they can create a stadium that doesn’t obtain any problems then maybe they can get another shot at the World Cup but they have to prove they are ready to have it hosted there. By all means i do not think the team needs to be suspended but as far as hosting the World Cup they have to prove they can handle it.
Patrick,
I think every team should have the opportunity to compete no matter what problems they’re having. As the 2010 World Cup draws nearer, I think that it can only be a positive for the host country of South Africa because south Africa is often confronted with violence, oppression, and sever racial separation.
It might actually cause a terrible outburst of protest in Zimbabwe if the team is disbanded once they make the next round. Another thing is that now it almost seems to the team like they’re playing for nothing.’
Mike,
Thanks for clearing up prepared for me.
Wow guys – some great comments and points here! Thanks for taking the time. I like what Breanna said – sports can help integrate peace and motivate a means toward desgregating a people so to speak. My stance when writing this was really that it very rarely, if ever, hurts a country in violent turmoil. It only helps. Unfortunately, it also rarely solves permanently, but that is the idealist in me thinking sports is a vehicle that can do such a thing on its own.
It’s also interesting that the Olympics has granted Rio the next 2016 Olympics. Here is a real mess of a place that the commitee has decided to take a chance on. I personally think their thought process is that perhaps the Olympics can help propel them out of a hole. Again – maybe a bit idealistic, but who knows what event, leader, or change is going to be the one that changes a city or nation.
I think South Africa will be fine; however, there are many documentaries out there that point out the “cover up” that is taking place. Many native South Africans feel like things will be worse when the WC is over. For the time being, people have jobs BECAUSE OF this event. What happens to those people and their families when the WC is over with???