- Marionville mayor ‘kind of agreed’ with Kansas City shooter’s views
- Rev. Al Sharpton’s Easter message: Politically ‘crucified’ Obama has risen again
- Supreme Court to weigh challenge to ban on campaign lies
- UNICEF launches ‘Mr. Poo’ mascot in India to curb public defecation
- Teen taking selfie by train: ‘Wow, that guy just kicked me in the head’
- Goodbye, Afghanistan — hello, Africa: Air Force to shift as U.S. exits Middle East
- Iran mulls ban on vasectomies, decrease on abortions to bolster population
- CNN op-ed claims right-wingers ‘more deadly than jihadists’
- Classes resume at high school rocked by stabbings
- ABC News accuses Center for Public Integrity of stealing Pulitzer-winning work
Hunt for white elephants tests Brazil’s World Cup
The graceful Arena das Dunas in the coastal city of Natal, where the United States and seven other teams will play, is a prime example. This isn’t simply a mere place to watch soccer, it’s a shrine to the sport’s wealth and power, its ability to commandeer resources.
The curves of the stadium’s bone-white roof bring to mind wind-sculptured sand dunes. The light and dark blues of its 42,000 seats are a wink to the hues of the nearby Atlantic. Sea breezes naturally cool the airy bowl. In the pristine white changing rooms, players with an eye for detail might notice the stadium’s name engraved on their lockers’ chrome handles.
Then what? The gauge of Brazil’s success as the 2014 World Cup organizer won’t simply be if it pulls off a samba-filled month of futebol fun. An acid test will also be whether its World Cup stadiums built or renovated for $3.4 billion subsequently justify the investment that critics say could otherwise have been used to improve the lives of Brazil’s millions of poor.
For the majority of Brazil’s 12 World Cup venues, the future looks assured, because they have teams sufficiently big to draw spectators and revenue. For others, not slowly becoming monuments to wastefulness will be more of a challenge. They include new stadiums in Natal, in the Amazon city of Manaus, in Cuiaba in west-central Brazil’s wetlands and in the capital, Brasilia.
When Natal’s mayor, Carlos Eduardo Nunes Alves, was elected last October, the decision to spend $180 million had long ago been taken and construction was well underway. If given the choice, he says he would have preferred a stadium costing half that and the rest invested on schools, hospitals and transport for his city’s 800,000 inhabitants.
“I hope these golden cages can be good for something,” he said in an interview. “We have to think positively and make an effort to make this stadium a living thing and not a white elephant.”
Build and they will come. That is the mantra World Cup organizers repeat over and over to justify these constructions. They say the venues’ comfort and safety will draw families to soccer long after the World Cup turns its attention to Russia, its next destination in 2018. Governing body FIFA is already claiming success, saying that after six of the stadiums opened for business with the Confederations Cup in June, they have nearly all been pulling in crowds larger _ much larger at three stadiums _ than the Brazilian league average of 14,951 fans per game. The Arena Pernambuco in the Atlantic beach city of Recife is the exception, drawing an average of 11,955 spectators per game, FIFA says.
Brazilian officials say hosting pop concerts and other events will help make ends meet for stadiums that cannot live off soccer alone. In Natal, 10,000 seats will be stripped out of the stadium post-World Cup to manage costs.
In short, move along, no white elephants here.
But World Cup organizers have to say that, especially after Brazilians poured into the streets in June to demand better public services and decry World Cup expenses. The cost of building stadiums sufficiently large and modern to satisfy FIFA has become a protest battle-cry. In Salvador, aviation employees campaigning for better salaries have stuck up posters demanding “Less FIFA standards, more respect for workers” at the airport that will serve as the gateway for fans coming for six World Cup games at the city’s new Arena Fonte Nova.
In Natal, the presidents of local teams ABC and America, which play in the Brazilian league’s second tier, both expect far bigger crowds at that city’s new stadium post-World Cup. The teams’ flags already hang from its rafters. The divide between rival fans _ the “ABCdistas” and “Americanos” _ cuts through Natal like a fault line. Natal’s mayor supports ABC; his chief of staff is an Americano.
The ABC motto, written large on the front of its existing, grubby and Spartan 18,000-capacity Frasqueirao Stadium, is “O Mais Querido,” meaning “The dearest.” With next-to-no prompting, ABC fans lustily belt out the team song and its chorus: “Salute the dearest! Salute the dearest!”
The Frasqueirao “is big enough for our needs,” ABC president Rubens Guilherme Dantas said in a telephone interview. “There was really no need” for the new one.
“It’s a lot of money, and society and the citizens are actually paying for that,” Dantas said.
By John R. Bolton
Reality calls for attaching Gaza to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan
- 'Culture of intimidation' seen in Nevada ranch standoff
- HURT: Wilson and Obama ... 100 years apart, but so alike
- Rand and Ron Paul ride to the rescue for Bundy in Nevada standoff with feds
- IRS emails reveal discussion with Justice about suing nonprofits for election activities
- U.S. Navy to turn seawater into jet fuel
- CNN op-ed claims right-wingers 'more deadly than jihadists'
- GOP writes legislation to deny Attorney General Eric Holder his salary
- WEBER: Obamacare cuts home healthcare for millions of seniors
- Nevada Bundy ranch standoff could leave dirt on Harry Reid reputation
- Fuel-filled wings, ability to swarm: Pentagon offers glimpse at future of drone fleet
Celebrity deaths in 2014
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.