November 20, 2008
Obama, Chicago and World Cup 2018
By Steven StarkLONDON -- Speculation is already rife among commentators that with Barack Obama as president, the United States is a cinch to host the Summer Olympics in Chicago in 2016, followed by the soccer World Cup two years later. The theory, of course, is that with Obama as the new symbol of American goodwill, the world’s sports events will now flock to our shores for their staging.
As to the Olympics, Chicago does seem like a good bet to host the Olympics – though its chances were pretty decent even before Obama was elected. But the 2018 World Cup? A distinct long shot.
Even before Obama, the U.S. has been a venue of choice for the world’s leading sports events, despite doubts about the way we Americans tend to “over commercialize” everything. We have the infrastructure already built; a huge market of fans to tap, and our TV money always speaks volumes. (It goes without saying that if the economic crisis continues and worsens, we may be one of the few countries that can still afford to stage pageants like these.)
It is one of sports history’s lucky accidents that Obama’s hometown is carrying the American banner this time; more than a few preferred San Francisco early on, which eventually lost out to the Windy City as our contender. But what’s past is prologue. What counts is that a re-elected Obama (the International Olympic Committee will certainly support him!) could open the Games in 2016.
Moreover, the other major contenders all have flaws as we approach the official selection in October 2009. Madrid is nice, but Europe will be hosting in 2012 here in London. Tokyo is applying to host too soon after the recent Beijing Games; it’s not time to go back to Asia yet. Rio is one of the key host sites of the 2014 soccer World Cup so it’s already getting a turn at that and if the world’s economy stays south, there are a lot of worries about whether Brazil can even afford the Games. As has been true so often in its history, Chicago just happens to be in the right place at the right time.
The World Cup, however, is another story. The 1994 American hosting effort was deemed a huge success -- despite the kind of hot temperatures that sharply increased the chances of any team that knew how to handle them. (Even Saudi Arabia, usual also-rans, managed to look impressive.) And, soccer’s authorities would love to tap into that American market again.
The problem is that South Africa is hosting in 2010 and Brazil in 2014. Although the policy of rotation which would have granted the 2018 Cup to some country in Europe has been scrapped, there’s still very strong sentiment to let the Europeans host then and England, the Netherlands and Belgium (joint bid), and others are already expected to enter the fray.
It’s not just the principle of moving the Cup around that speaks in Europe’s favor, however. Sure, hosting nations almost always do better in the Olympics or World Cup; anyone can live with that. It’s that in the World Cup, location seems to dictate the winners and losers as in no other competition. Consider this: European teams have won every Cup staged in Europe but one – in 1958 (Brazil won it) Last time in Germany, the four semi-finalists were even all European (France, Germany, Italy, and Portugal).
Away from their home, however, it’s the opposite story. For a variety of reasons, European teams have never won a Cup held outside Europe. All of this means that if the US is awarded the World Cup for 2018, Europe will be facing three consecutive tournaments where they go in with what looks like a marked disadvantage.
It’s true that streaks are made to be broken. And, Europe’s representatives don’t have the votes to steer the tournament to their continent just because they’re likelier to lose elsewhere. But the sport’s powers-that-be all understand that the commercial and professional center of soccer is Europe. To go for 16 years between European-hosted tournaments – from 2006 to 2022 – would mean that a whole generation of European stars would never get to compete for the World Cup title on their home continent.
That’s unlikely to happen. Besides, someone should tell soccer’s powers and a few overeager prognosticators that Obama won’t be president in 2018 anyway. The 2016 Olympics? Yes we can. But the 2018 World Cup? No, we can’t.
