This coming week provides some relief on the World Cup vs. Real Life balance.
The next few games should be blow-outs like today’s Germany/England (4-1) game, or at least clear victories like Argentina’s 3-1 win over Mexico.
On Monday, you can go back to work and follow the matches out of the corner of your eye online. The Netherlands should dispose of Slovakia (10AM--ESPN gives the Dutch 89.6% chance of winning), and Brazil should defeat Chile (2:30PM).
Tuesday’s matches look good. Paraguay and Japan play first (10AM Eastern Time) followed by Spain and Portugal at 2:30Pm. Wednesday and Thursday are rest days. The Quarter Finals are Friday July 2nd and Saturday July 3rd, followed by two more rest days, allowing for time to ease back into regular schedules.
The rest days will allow for some time to work on certain questions that have been pestering me as I explore the geography of the 2010 World Cup.
1) Gender Apartheid. Where are the women? All I’ve seen are female fans. Occasionally young girls appear as part of the kid’s parade for the teams’ entrances and anthems. Granted, my observations are critically influenced by the fact that ESPN is my main access to the games. But all (but one) of the announcers have been male. So are the commentators, the referees, and the coaching staff. As far as I can tell, the bodies underneath the bulky Fifa Vests of the stretcher crews have been male. What’s up with that? Given that the 2010 is arguably the most extensive global event ever, where are the women? Can the World Cup be 99.9% male and still be considered ‘global’?
2) Public Patriots and Private Players. What is the relationship between the national teams and the private clubs? Do the players get paid to play (and train) for the national teams, and if so how much, and how much in relation to the salaries of the private clubs? My hunch is that both the public and private sector are heavily inter-dependent, meaning the national teams rely on the functioning of the private sector and vice-versa. Rather than existing in separate, contrasting domains, the public and the private are mutually-constituted.
3) FIFA and RSA. I’ve heard reports that the South African government invested more than 3 Billion dollars to host the tournament, but that Fifa stands to reap the billions in profit. WTF?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
All these questions are super. On the surface and yet seemingly no public discourse.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your theory on the causes of gender apartheid?
ReplyDeleteInteresting observations. I hadn't noticed the lack of women in the coverage outside of the French woman from FIFA talking about the FIFA Schools for Hope program. On the ESPN soccer coverage before the WC they used Julie Foudy, former US Women's team member. She hasn't been part of the WC coverage so they must have left her behind covering MSL.
ReplyDeleteOn point #2, I think the players are paid something for playing on the National teams but probably a mere pittance compared to their team salaries. There is a governing body for the sport in each country that also manages the National teams. I suspect that the private clubs pay some form of fees to this governing body to finance their costs. There has been the ongoing conflict of Club vs Country. That is, when a player gets injured playing for their country, the clubs have been trying to get compensation from the nations goeverning body but to no avail. It wasn't as big a deal years ago when most players played for club teams in their own country. However, it has become a bigger issue these days with international players playing in countries other than their home.
Thanks! Very informative. I'm going to look into the Club versus Country issue to see if the $$$ is reported.
ReplyDelete