In South Africa, the Cup is no game
The country took suggestions that it was behind on World Cup preparations for 2010 as a national insult, saying that such claims undermined its interests.
By Scott Baldauf | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitorfrom the May 15, 2007 edition
Page 1 of 3
JOHANNESBURG, south Africa - A word to the wise: Any public statement about South Africa will be seen through the lens of race, even if it is about something as harmless as sports.
This lesson was learned recently by Joseph "Sepp" Blatter, the president of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), the world's governing body for soccer.
Egged on by a persistent BBC radio reporter at a press conference in London late last month, Mr. Blatter admitted that FIFA had alternate locations for its 2010 World Cup soccer tournament, which is currently schedule to be hosted by South Africa.
Alternate locations?
Blatter's statement made headlines on sports pages worldwide, a perceived warning to South Africa to speed up its seemingly sluggish preparations, or else risk losing the World Cup.
South African officials were apoplectic. FIFA officials were apologetic. A follow-on FIFA statement reaffirmed that except in case of a "natural disaster or catastrophe… there is no such a thing as a contingency plan. The plan B has been and will continue to be South Africa."
A matter of pride
The imbroglio may have been settled for now, but the exchange speaks volumes about South Africa's sense of pride, as a rising African economic and political power, and its somewhat touchy attitude toward criticism, as a post-apartheid nation ruled by its black majority.
That South Africa is behind schedule in construction, compared with past World Cup host nations such as South Korea and Germany, is not the question. Many experts admit it is. But the South African government seems to regard questions about its ability to hold a world-class soccer match as unpatriotic, and even racist.
RSS feed
