Which African country can host the WC in 2010?

[topcow]

I¡¯m sure FIFA has many criteria for the host country. What are some of the candidates to host the 2010 WC since we now know it will go to an African nation.


Here's a possible list of countries.

Cameroon
Nigeria
Tunisia
South Africa
Egypt
Morocco

These country has the Facilities and the finances to host a big event.

Any other country in Africa that can host the WC?

[Justin O]

Maybe Ghana?

[3rdSt.Jim]

I'll say that African football has come a very long way in the last twelve years, but I believe that FIFA's limitation of 2010 bids to African countries is extraordinarliy short-sighted. Which of these countries is capable of hosting the WC in 2010? Honestly, who knows? The governments all hope to be in some form power in that time, but there are few guarantee's of any democratic processes holding up in any of these countries for 8 solid years. South Africa, of course, has the best chance, but hardly an unqualified candidate considering the extremely high level of crime and social upheval. The Tunisian and Egyptian governments are currently struggling to contain a seething anti-Western attitude amongst their populations - Morocco hasn't been greatly effected by the general Islamic malaise, but they have no more than two suitable stadia. As for Cameroon and Nigeria, best of luck, but the money spent on World Cup level emminities really should be spent in other places....

[wu-tang beez]

Not to fall prey to an obvious attempt at trolling rivals but South Africa is the only country that conceivably host an event and provide security and resources needed 4 it. Considering the troubles on the continent, I would think it irresponsible for FIFA to grant such a responsibility w/o ensuring that the event could be staged trouble free and be the festival soccer fans around the globe have access to readily and securely.

Personally, I think the americas are more justified in receiving it after a 16yr absence.

[sidspaceman]

Well 2014 should be in South America by than it will have been 36 since the cup was last played in South America.

[clubfoot]

Originally posted by 3rdSt.Jim
As for Cameroon and Nigeria, best of luck, but the money spent on World Cup level emminities really should be spent in other places....

Great point. World Cups are rarely money-makers for the hosts. Nigeria is a basketcase and it's not apparent how 12 or so white elephants... oops, I mean soccer stadia... are going to do anything but cause more debt. A country like Nigeria spending all that money on a showcase event like the World Cup would be a disgraceful case of misplaced priorities.

[Canadian_Supporter]

Not saying they could, but I know Libya has shown interest in hosting a World Cup.

[benfica_74]

none.

[FunGuy]

Originally posted by benfica_74
none.

Well at least South Africa is more capable of hosting than portugal

[CrewDust]

Originally posted by FunGuy


Well at least South Africa is more capable of hosting than portugal

Not so sure about that. Portugal is hosting the next EURO championship.

[sidspaceman]

And South Africa is the odds on favorite to host the World Cup in 2010.

[Bahnzo]

South Africa is most capable.

USA bids for 2010, loses to SA, and then FIFA realizes that no African nation is capable of hosting a World Cup and is forced to fall back on the USA to host yet another great WC.

[sidspaceman]

The only problem with your scenario is that the US can not bid on the 2010 World Cup only African countries are allowed to bid.

[desertfox2]

I also am not thrilled with the idea that a World Cup Finals will be held in Africa, but you knew it had to happen eventually. South Africa does seem to be the best candidate as of right now, but this World Cup is 8 years away. How can anybody be sure that the situation in South Africa will be ok in 8 years?

I believe that 2 co-hosting nations should host the Finals just like Japan and South Korea did it for this past one. I think when it is your continents' first World Cup, it should be co-hosted. What 2 countries would be good candidates for co-hosting?

[Maczebus]

Originally posted by FunGuy


Well at least South Africa is more capable of hosting than portugal

Wow - that's a response that should have been thought through.

And to the original question - by 2010, none.

[topcow]

I am reading today's NYTimes. In it, it has an eight pages advertisement for Algeria.

Algeria might not be as good as many other African countries when it comes to soccer, but it's safer then some.

There seems to be some doubts about an African nation hosting the WC, I’m not completely immune to the prejudice. I am worried about the security the host nation can provide as well as attendance of the games because of the prejudice towards Africa. An optimist might think the situation in Africa will improve much within eight years, but sadly, Fifa’s decision will be based on the conditions two years from now.

Since Fifa now has decided on Africa instead of the world, the criteria to choose a host nation must now also change. Safety undoubtedly is the highest concern. South Africa is the front-runner considered by many. Is South Africa the safest nation on the continent right now?

Personally, I don’t think a WC in Africa isn’t a bad idea. It will help the idea of the world’s game. Although conditions in Africa might not be as good as some developed nations in the world, doesn’t mean none of the countries has the capability to host the WC. I believe it's very short-sighted to say no country in Africa can.

[topcow]

Ten bombs exploded in South Africa today. Maybe the work of white extremists.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/africa/10/30/soweto.bombs/

This could happen in any country, but hopefully it will not escalate.

[rksehga]

only south africa and this is really iffy.

I think it will happen though.

[kasai]

There are two choices:

1) South Africa is one of the wealthier nations in Africa and has hosted the Rugby World Cup. They have a decent infrastructure already in place.

2) Morocco is close to Europe and the country does not have the political issues that other African nations have. There would need to be quite a few stadiums built for the WC, but at least the games would be easily accessible to Europeans.

[trobinson]

I don't see why everyone is so negative about an african country having the WC. First and foremost, though most African countries will need to make significant improvements in fields and infrastructure, it'll be an investment. the point of having the WC is that it brings money into the country through TV rights, sales and tourism. The money could be used. Also, everyone assumes that things will be or at least could be worse in 8 years. This is true, but the chances are things will be better than they are now. Africans nations have brought a lot to the WC, it is only fair that the African fans that cannot travel around the world would be able to see it at home at least once. Also, noone should speak of terrorism and crime in African countries because at this day and age terrorism is everywhere. Look at America and its probably with local terrorism. You have the WTC, anthrax, sniper killing 9 people, etc. But I don't see people Aarguing that America would be a bad choice. the same goes for many S. American countries. It is only fair to be optimistic rather than pessimistic about the situation. I think it would turn out being one of the greatest WC's. I do think the idea about having two countries co-host it isn't a bad idea though. I hope it goes to somewhere in W. Africa. They deserve it the most. Why S. Africa? What have they given to the WC?