FIFA denied my request for tickets so I followed the Confederations Cup from home. I drew on my observations from afar as well as media coverage and conversations with friends in South Africa to learn these five things from the tournament:
1. This beautiful yet scarred country will host an eventful World Cup next year. The stadiums are nice and the climate in different cities may surprise visitors. Also, the difficulties with transport, accommodation, communications, and moving people to the stadiums may be mitigated by next year but are not likely to disappear.
2. The Confed Cup is not a terribly interesting competition. It features too many marginal sides (New Zealand, Iraq, South Africa) and tired European giants (Spain and Italy). No wonder we had to depend on the depth and individual brilliance of Brazil and the do-or-die attitude of the improving USA for entertainment.
3. Despite what the organizers tell us, the vuvuzelas are not part of South Africa’s ‘traditional’ fan culture. The horns appeared in the mid-1990s and did not become widespread until a few years ago. And they were ‘invented’ by a white guy.
4. The trend of the past decade that saw raw speed and set pieces decide so many matches will probably continue in 2010. Given the heavy-handed emphasis on defensive tactics, the pace of players like Kaka’ offers precious opportunities to burst through defensive walls and exploit open space on counter-attacks. Corners and free kicks are key, just ask the USA and South Africa.
5. The 2010 World Cup is a huge national project aimed at enhancing ‘Brand South Africa’ — the image of the country as a modern, democratic, business-friendly, tourist destination. Football-crazy South Africans legitimize this political and economic agenda, even though they pay billions to host the event while FIFA keeps most of the financial profits.
