For the last several months the international press has piled up on Brazil, bashing the country at any opportunity. Catastrophic predictions were thrown around all over the place (I'm guilty of the same), targeting stadium delays, overpriced stadiums, infrastructure works not delivered, and lack of priorities with a country that needs investments in health and education, instead spending billions on a soccer tournament. The negative propaganda was such that the internal environment bought into it as well, and the Brazilian population showed their anger in manifestations, protests, and riots. At times I had a nagging suspicion that the media likes "the sky is falling" sensational headlines more than "it will be all right" headlines, since the former sell more newspapers and collect more web hits than the latter. Also, I thought about a sort of twisted, perverse pleasure that sometimes inhabitants of the so-called First World (me included) have in gloating about how much better we have it, as compared to under-developed Third World countries, and how these major events should stay with our countries and not be given to primitive ones. Well, well, now it's starting to look like the catastrophic predictions were grossly exaggerated (as it is often the case). So, today, the Brazilian president took to the waves, and said the following - I'm augmenting with some comments of my own (for Portuguese speakers, here's the link: http://www.em.com.br/app/noticia/po...arado-para-a-copa-e-critica-pessimistas.shtml: 1. Brazil is ready. The 12 stadiums are gorgeous and extremely modern. They are actually way better than anything that even Germany has ever put together, and far superior to the South Africa stadiums. 2. Protests are dying out. Some political groups are saying they'll stop protesting, since their demands have been met. 3. Brazil spent 8 billion on stadiums, but since stadium construction started in 2010, it also spent 1.7 trillion on health and education, that is, 212 times more than what the stadiums have cost. She says that overpricing will be looked into in excruciating detail, and cheaters will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law if evidence of corruption and price gouging is found. 4. While not all infrastructure projects were completed, it may be more a function of having promised too much and having been too ambitious, but what *was* delivered is actually pretty good: for example, airport capacity has doubled. 5. The delegations that have arrived are being received with open arms, with the local population welcoming them and cheering them, and the infrastructure put at their disposition in most cases is top notch (for example, the US team said that their training facilities are "NFL grade." 6. Delays and last minute preparations are sort of a way of life in Brazil, and part of the culture. That's what the mayor of Rio said in a recent interview. It doesn't mean things won't be just fine by the time of kick-off. 7. Concerns about safety for the tourists and delegations, in face of Brazil's daunting social problems and urban crime, will probably turn out to be overblown as well: with 170,000 law enforcement officers on the streets, this may turn out to be one of the safest World Cups in history. So, it's not excluded that the 2014 World Cup in Brazil will be an astounding organizational success, with state-of-the-art facilities and a friendly people who love soccer, in a beautiful country that is immersed in many problems, but also has many assets. Chances are that the naysayers will be surprised. Opinions?
This always happens with, as you say, anyone other than a "first-world" country. I remember the Athens Olympics in 2004. Apperently there was no way they were going to be ready on time. The games went off without a hitch. Then China in 2008. Yes it's certainly a first world country, but the west still looks down on them because their people are mainly poor and they aren't democratic. I can't remember if SA came under criticism. Now Brazil world cup and there are even rumours that the UK has been secretly asked if London can host the 2016 Olympic games because Brazil aren't looking likely to finish on time and London still has a lot of the infrastructure in place from 2012. This has been officially denied by all parties involved but someone somewhere said it to begin with. So in conclusion, I think you're right. Western media have a superiority complex when it comes to hosting major events.
IMHO, they were right to criticize, the stadiums were overpriced and most of them were delayed. I didn't have a chance to go to any Germany or SA stadiums so really can't compare them. We will see this comparison from fans from those coutries soon enough. I really doubt it will be considered "an astounding organizational success" for our infrastructure is very limited. Regarding safety I can only speak for Rio, which is the city I live, In zona sul there is a massive police presence so I'm hopping for a safe WC.
Yes, the infrastructure may be limited as compared to that of First World countries, but maybe it will be just enough. If I'm not mistaken, reports from the PanAmerican Games in Rio are that the city organized urban corridors with priority access for city buses headed to the venues, there was massive police presence, and the games went on without a glitch. I recently saw an interview by an Infraero official (the Airport Administration organization) saying that the airports will hold. I just booked a round-trip flight for my son (he is attending the games) from Rio to Brasilia and back to Rio to attend a game at the National Stadium in Brasilia, and there were plenty of seats at convenient times, and the price was not bad either ($200 for the round trip). So, if fans can come in and out without much delay, access to the stadiums is decent, enough hotel rooms exist (it seems to be the case), the delegations are given good training facilities (it also seems to be the case), the games go on and broadcasting is efficient (again, FIFA said all auxiliary services and broadcasting technology is in place), and safety on the streets holds, I don't see how we would call the tournament less than successful from the organizational standpoint. Maybe it won't be Swiss-clock level of precision but might very well be good enough. We'll see. So, yes, there were delays, but Brazil seems to have it together now, even if it was done at the very last minute. I mean, what is more important? Being ready when the games start is what counts. If the delays made everybody nervous but did not result in anything falling apart and actually not being ready in time for kick-off, then, fine.
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/esport...dos-de-7-estadios-da-copa-preocupa-fifa.shtml Fifa worried about the quality of 7 (seven) pitches with days from the WC. I really do not have your confidence
Well, but is this an over-reaction? The Brazilians don't seem to agree with FIFA's evaluation, if you read the last four paragraphs of the article you've quoted. In a few weeks we'll see who is right.
Yeah, but these are Confederations Cup images. I don't think the situation remains this dire. We'll see.
This one is from today.... Several news outlets are reporting incidents in Sao Paulo...including CNN which had two reporters injured in the confusion between protesters and riot cops.
A small protest, yes small, was trying to block the main road to the stadium. They have the right to protest but trying to disrupt the event is another thing. I feel that the Brazilian population is shifting their opinion about the Cup again, If Brazil starts strong I think most of the population will support the WC after all. The cost were excessive, late and unfinished work is shameful and the legacy is a joke but to try to sabotage the Cup is plain stupid
Yes, now I've seen these images and worse. Still, it's an isolated incident with 50 protesters, as opposed to the huge crowds during the Confederations Cup. Two CNN reporters got lightly injured. One of them was reported to have a broken arm then this was not confirmed. It looks like superficial small wounds with minor bleeding. Still, a shame for sure and the International press will pile up on Brazil even more.
well, if reporters go to cover violent protests, they should expect there would be danger. They expect to be in the middle of the protesters and not get any tear gas in their faces? mind you... these protesters are COMMIES... all of them connected to extreme left parties (they have their red flags... some even swing Soviet flags!) and if police does nothing, they will march right to the stadium and try to invade it, thus it will be much worse. these scumbags must be dealt with force, because they want to achieve their political objectives with violence, and when cops react, they cry like spoiled babies about police violence. but last year showed perfectly that WHEN POLICE DID NOT REACT, these imbeciles would cause MASSIVE DAMAGE to private and public property on the streets AND try to reach the stadiums.
Hexa: the SAME company is taking care of the pitches since the stadiums were delivered to FIFA. The company is SPANISH (from near Barcelona, and Camp Nou is one of the turfs they take care of): http://www.royalverd.com/es/contacto/ Royal Verd boss admited they were having massive problems in Manaus, because the idiots did not expect that much rain plus heat and humidity... In other words BLAME FIFA for hiring an european company without experience with brazilian climate to take care of those pitches.
There were no visible sign they were from the press and they stood in the middle of the protesters, for what I read they were hit by canister, bad luck. Hope they are OK with only minor injuries
I think hosting the FIFA World Cup is fine, but the Olympic Game is not. The Olympic Game in 2016 will put too much financial burden on Brazil. They should wait at least 4 more years to allow them to have more time to recover from the World Cup.
Airports are holding. The delay index was better than the international average, across all airports. So far, so good, thinks are going well. http://noticias.terra.com.br/brasil...491a5e1464796410VgnCLD200000b2bf46d0RCRD.html
Bad news always sells better than good news. And if there aren't any actual bad news, they'll just make some up. And everywhere you go, you will always find someone who's unhappy about whatever and protesting against it. So far, the stadia look gorgeous, and the favelas have pretty much always been war zones, they didn't just become war zones because of the World Cup. I'm sure there's quite a discrepancy between what a ticket to one of these matches costs and what the average Brazilian makes, but you might almost say the same for 'First World' (first to what?) countries. I'm not sure I could afford a ticket if the WC was here.
As the mayor of Rio said: it is the Culture-theory of the Lazy--> And I like that! Why should they be held to the super-expensive and wasteful consumption standards of the so-called "1st-world"?? Be ya'self, BRASIL!!!
In my opinion that is not correct, you need to see see how much each other stadium outside Brazil cost these days, for example Dallas Cowboys stadium cost over 2 Billion US , Atlanta Falcons are building stadium over 1,5 billion US, all their original cost were way down. We are talking about stadiums that cust 2x more then the World Cup ones. When you announce stadium cost, you general have more cost later due to so many issues. Brazil made some good stadiums for very good price.
You are actually right, I adjusted to capacity Estádio Custo em milhões de R$ Capacidade em milhares Dunas 417 42 Amazonas 669 42,3 Baixada 265 41,482 Pantanal 525 41,3 Corinthians 1000 69,1 Castelão 513 63,9 Pernambuco 532,6 44,2 Mané Garrincha 1560 71,788 Fonte Nova 689,4 48,747 Beira Rio 330 48,849 Maracanã 1200 78,639 Mineirão 695 64,184 média 699,6666667 54,70741667 custo por pessoa 12,79 Using figures available on line I got 12,79 million R$ per thousand seat in average. Using a exchange rate of 2,23 you get 5,73 millions US$ per thousand seats, our most expensive stadium Mané Garrincha costed 9,74 millions US$ per thousand seats Wembley Stadium original cost 757 million sterling and capacity of 90 thousands (got it from wiki) Converting to US$ I got 14,29 millions US$ per thousand seats. I didn't used the NFL stadium because they are covered stadium which costs much more
All the naysayers should be ashamed by now. The Cup is going great. The pitch in Manaus? Not a problem. Airports? Just fine. Hotels? Just fine. Fan Fests? Great. The games are starting on time in gorgeous stadiums with festive atmosphere. Protests/riots? 50 disgruntled people here or there. Great football, huge number of goals, entertaining matches, exotic locales, friendly people. The 2014 World Cup in Brazil: a huge success, so far!
The British press said crocodiles could be found on the streets in Manaus. No crocodiles were seen today. No cannibals. No jaguars. No players got eaten. The pitch was perfect. The one thing that wasn't perfect was the English team. They were thoroughly booed by the locals. A panel held by a local said "Hart, you are not welcome to the jungle."
There's no reason why it shouldn't. The Cup is winning over the folks. Images on the streets of Belo Horizonte today, Savassi neighborhood, showed huge crowds of cheering fans from different countries having fun and partying on the streets and bars. People are having a great time.