Such a pity – the Emperor Nero would have benefited immeasurably if this magisterial overview of the bread-and-circuses business (currently dominated by FIFA) had been available to him before the barbarians became impertinent.
Ancient Rome might well have survived to thwart the invading hordes.
Player and Referee is an impressive, densely researched monograph, which meticulously dissects the entire South African 2010 Fifa World Cup process and beyond. The book seeks to transcend the sum of its parts (contributions from nine award-winning journalists) and it does so successfully. It sounds a dreadful warning.
The research, presented in digestible chapters, deserves international attention from those who harbour ambitions to host future beautiful games. South Africa might have been a very different place if we had been privy to this information before we tangled with the power of FIFA and all its works.
The evidence presented here depicts the majority of this country’s leaders – sporting, political and business – as embarrassingly naïve or greedy. Or both. Eye-popping amounts of money have been apportioned to vainglory when some sensible compromises could have been agreed to secure both the footie and major sustainable public benefits. Instead, the country has been plunged into enormous debt for a long time to come.
Eye-popping amounts of money have been apportioned to vainglory…
Player and Referee draws sober conclusions and recommendations, aimed primarily at South African policy-makers. However, writes Collette Schulz Herzenberg, they should also be of interest to future hosting nations to the World Cup, and to event organisers generally. “Where potential risk exists, policy-makers should regard that as sufficient need for integrity systems to be put in place. We hope that [this will] set an agenda for new anti-corruption interventions.”
The calm and sensible recommendations, rendered from the writings of all the co-authors, note that transparency is critical for proper governance. Tendering and procurement processes at all levels of government require far greater levels of openness than at present. One measure is to allow public access to decision-making and procedural bodies. Descriptions abound of opaque procedures and Byzantine legerdemain by officialdom and the construction industry in the orgy of stadium-building.
Much corruption has been revealed to a confused public by investigative journalists – not excluding writers in this very publication. Confusion often arises from the conflict between patriotic emotions – milked by politicians and those who stand to benefit financially – and justifiable suspicions of the financial implications of all that flag-waving. The suspicions, as the writers make clear, are more than justified.
In her conclusions, Herzenberg notes that the Municipal Finance Management Act 56 of 2003 requires revision. It does not at present allow for sufficient multiparty political oversight of municipalities’ financial and tendering decisions. “The City of Cape Town has introduced measures to ensure greater transparency in their tendering processes and this may provide a model for other municipalities and other levels of government to emulate.” Fat chance. But it needs saying.
… there is some evidence of a gradual shift in attitudes towards a more supportive whistle-blowing culture.
She notes that Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan has stated that there will be a revision of the government’s procurement and tendering system to ensure greater transparency, and a more systematic approach to rooting out tender fraud and corruption. “The case studies presented here echo many of these concerns and issues. They also contribute rich material and much-needed insight into key conflict of interest situations relating to government tendering processes, black economic empowerment and unequal elite access to state resources,” Herzenberg notes.
The general lack of protection for whistle-blowers is, naturally, deplored. “However, there is some evidence of a gradual shift in attitudes towards a more supportive whistle-blowing culture.” We hope. It is perhaps naïve to suggest that a corporate-minded organisation such as FIFA should prioritise the host nation’s public interest. “Organisers are likely to regard these events as profit-maximising opportunities first and foremost. Nevertheless, sporting events of this nature are sold as a ‘public good’ and as development vehicles. And since these values underpin the rationale of the event it becomes imperative that its legacy is judged from that perspective.”
Do public interest values guide government’s decisions on the 2010 World Cup? Whose interests are 
really being served? The book claims not to present specific proposals for reform, arising from controversial aspects of the event, but the findings of the writers do amount to a clarion call for national house-cleaning, particularly in context of Citibank researchers’ recent impact assessment of the event on South Africa’s domestic economy. It suggests that FIFA, the monopoly organiser, is the major beneficiary while the host nation carries a disproportionate share of the cost burden. Surprise, surprise.
The authors are: Eddie Botha, Stefaans Brummer, Andrew Jennings, Gcina Nt-saluba, Rob Rose, Karen Schoonbee, Sam Sole and Collette Schulz Herzenberg. Edited by Collette Schulz Hertzenburg.
Written by Len Ashton. This article was taken from the May 2010 edition of Noseweek magazine.
Related Content
