These articles were published soon after FIFA announced that the rotation policy that FIFA had introduced to take the World Cup around the world, at the instigation of Sepp Blatter, would be scrapped due to an uncompetitive bid that gave the current World Cup to Brasil. The consequences of that affect Africaʼs chances of hosting the World Cup again. Consequently, we think it appropriate to publish them again.
by Satish Sekar © Satish Sekar (Updated June 28th 2014)
An uncompetitive bid by COMNEBOL (the South American Football Confederation) resulted Brasil winning the right to host the 2014 World Cup without a contest. The fact that such an approach made sense, especially in the current climate and that certain nations – Bolivia for example – had no realistic chance of hosting the tournament, because they were neither good enough, nor possessed sufficient resources, escaped the attention of FIFA.
Realistically, only Argentina, or perhaps Uruguay as well could have hosted the tournament and have a decent chance of success, but Uruguay lacked he resources. No nation should be allowed to buy the right to sell their country through it. South Africa was never going to win the World Cup, but had they stuck to their plan – a good one – they would not have become the first host nation to go out in the first round.
Paraguay would not disgrace the tournament on the field, but who else in South America could host it. Both Paraguay and Uruguay could not afford it in the economic climate then, let alone now, so that left Argentina as the only realistic alternative to Brasil. The economic climate in Argentina was not good and they had hosted the World Cup in 1978, a staggering 28 years after the most successful nation in the football world last hosted. It was obviously Brasilʼs turn and everybody in COMNEBOL knew it.
COMNEBOL members recognised these realities. There was little point – none really – in opposing Brasil and wasting resources in the process. How could they tell the poverty-stricken of their countries or even the better off that wanted to create opportunities that they had wasted millions of pounds on a bidding process that everyone knew they could not win? It would have been fiscal irresponsibility of the worst kind and none of them were prepared to do it.
Instead they could invest in programmes for the disadvantaged to create the players of the future of both sexes. They could upgrade stadiums. They could improve sporting infrastructures and much more besides. Refusing to allow this type of bid makes no sense at all. The COMNEBOL members had acted responsibly. UEFA demands fiscal responsibility from football clubs. Well how about some from FIFA at this level too!
FIFA had introduced the rotation system to ensure that confederations such as the African and Asian confederations and also CONCACAF had a fair chance of hosting the World Cup. And letʼs not forget that the post-rotation bidding process that gave the World Cup to Russia and Qatar has hardly been a rip roaring success.
“We argued for rotation, but the other possibility under the system of rotation is that the continental federations – whether it is CAF (Africaʼs confederation), or COMNEBOL, whoever, can come together in a congress and decide that we donʼt want competitive bidding,” the CEO of Africaʼs World Cup, Dr Danny Jordaan told us exclusively. “We are just going to appoint one country, so then what can you do? Then it comes to what you are saying as long as it a process that is the position that one country is invested in by FIFA and ends up hosting the World Cup.”
So rotation was removed and the corrupt practices quickly returned. The bathwater was retained and the babies washed away.