If hosting a World Cup is such an advantage, do you think South Africa will edge it in 2010?

Answer 1

heck NO!!!

Answer 2

The world cup should be hosted by nations whose citizens love the game besides having the facilities. The 1996 Africa Cup held in South Africa was very poorly attended. The South Africans only watched matches which featured their team. A big contrast to the huge white audience which cheered Ghana on in the match against Brazil last week and a huge South Korean audience which cheered Zambia when they beat Italy in Seoul in 1988. SAFA should work on this between now and 2010.

Advantage? Yes. You automatically qualify, your chances of winning the cup are better and foreign spectators, TV and sport companies spend millions in your country.

Answer 3

The fact that South Africa didn't qualify for the 2006 World Cup means that it will be quite a big surprise if they are prosperous in 2010.

However, it must be bore in mind that France didn't qualify for the 1994 World Cup, and yet won it on home soil four years later.

Answer 4

Unfortunately African countries can hardly cover all the huge expenses of such an event, but South Africa is a different story..

Answer 5

You must be joking! That country is still run by whites because of their economic power and they have no interest in football ( or soccer as they still call it.) The sports that have money behind them are Rugby and Cricket and although football attracts bigger audiences they are bedeviled by fraud and corruption in their Administration. The FIFA representative from Botswana, Ishmail Bhamjee, who was sent home in disgrace for selling tickets above their face value is a South African and his brother Abdul spent many years in jail for defrauding the South African league.Their international football team is a joke and they would struggle to win a match up Putney Marsh on a Sunday morning.
South African whites are big on promises and low on delivery and as they haven't even started to prepare for 2010 I will be surprised if they stage the event unless some 1st World country bails them out.In case you haven't noticed their representative in Germany is busy issuing all sorts of denials that FIFA have discussed a contingency plan with Australia to have it there. Pele visited them a few weeks ago and was aparently abhorred by what he saw and advised FIFA to have a re-think. That place is not safe and they should rather spend their money on dealing with the massive HIV/AIDS problems they have and all their other social ills.

Answer 6

no chacnce, even though they have competed in the world cup on past occasions they have never faired well. They have no world class players to call on and the players they do select for there teams do not play for top european teams in the top leagus such as liverpool , chelsea,real madrid, barcelona..
But saying that they will have home town support as have germany this year but sth fric just arnt world class either there players or team

Answer 7

The country need to be a top tier team in order to have an edge. look at the 98 france compared to the 2002 japan

Answer 8

No - there is not the feintest possibility that South Africa will win the World Cup this century.

Answer 9

Heck yeah its an advantage. Refs aren't stupid, they have families to think about. Hell hath no fury like an international crowd. Those guys overseas don't mess around when it comes to soccer,

Answer 10

I hope so the world cup needs new blood

Answer 11

well they will get an automatic qualify so yes they will have a chance.
2020 world cup may be in Australia too!!