- Associated Press - Friday, May 18, 2018

VOLGOGRAD, Russia (AP) - Russia looks set to pack fans into the stadiums for the World Cup. But what happens then?

Several of the 12 stadiums look set to remain largely empty after the teams have left Russia and the tournament is over.

It’s a problem both for Russia - whose $10.8 billion World Cup price tag could be inflated by loss-making arenas - and for FIFA, which has a history of leaving host nations lumbered with under-used stadiums, so-called white elephants.

Club team Rotor Volgograd will occupy a new 45,000-seat World Cup stadium despite averaging home crowds of just 3,800 this season, while Baltika Kaliningrad will inherit a 35,000-seat arena with average crowds of 6,100. Sochi has a 48,000-seat stadium but no professional team.

Older fans in Volgograd remember Rotor knocking Manchester United out of the UEFA Cup in 1995, but the club last played top-flight football in 2004 and has longstanding financial problems. It’s facing relegation to the Second Division South - Russia’s lowest professional level.

Fans say that if Rotor is to rise again it’ll need government money to maintain the stadium and sign star players.

“When we played against Manchester and Nantes, I was at those games and it’s something you can’t express, those golden times,” longtime supporter Nikolai Seleznyov told The Associated Press.

Rotor could pack arenas “if there’s success for the team,” he added. “It all depends on the authorities here in Volgograd, and whether they help. If they don’t, it can’t work.”

Volgograd mayor Andrei Kosolapov is hunting for a sponsor for Rotor. In Russian soccer, that often means the regional government, or else a state-owned company prepared to tolerate heavy losses. Russian billionaires typically prefer investing in glamorous foreign clubs like Chelsea, Arsenal or Monaco. “I hope that we’ll resolve some issues with investors in the near future,” Kosolapov said last week.

Russians are keen to see World Cup games and lead the world on ticket sales. But few go to see local clubs play.

In a country of 144 million people, the average Russian Premier League attendance this season rose to 13,971, the highest in two decades but still far below Europe’s top leagues. The second tier averaged just 2,552.

World Cup organizers hope new stadiums will attract fans turned off by old, crumbling facilities. “Test games” at the new stadiums had large crowds, though spectators were often let in for free.

“A new stadium instantly attracts more people to watch football,” World Cup organizing committee CEO Alexei Sorokin told the AP last month, but admitted the government may have to subsidize under-used arenas.

“It could be at first, and there is nothing wrong with that, that the federal budget will help stabilize the operating situation of the stadium,” he said. “I think when the situation rolls on, they will be well on their feet.”

Various World Cup stadiums will cost between 200 million and 400 million rubles ($3.2 million to $6.4 million) a year each in maintenance, regional officials have estimated.

The new-stadium buzz may not last forever.

Rubin Kazan saw attendances soar when it moved into the 45,000-seat Kazan Arena, a World Cup stadium, in 2014. However, they’ve since dropped back and this season the stadium was on average more than three-quarters empty.

That mirrors the situation in Poland, host of the 2012 European Championship, where middle-class fans initially flocked to new stadiums but were turned off by low-quality club games, argues Simon Chadwick, who is professor of sports enterprise at England’s Salford University.

“In Poland, what seem to have happened is it’s tailed off,” said Chadwick, who has taught in Russia. “There’s this misalignment between the hopes of domestic football authorities and the realities of what it means to be a football fan in somewhere like Poland and Russia. That can include anything from the weather … right through to the quality of the football. In Russia, one or two teams aside, the quality of the football is not great.”

South Africa and Brazil are still struggling to manage World Cup stadiums from 2010 and 2014.

Four cities in Brazil have under-used stadiums like the $550 million Mare Garrincha in Brasilia, which recently hosted a game for 400 spectators. The Rio de Janeiro state government, administrators and local clubs are fighting over who should pay maintenance bills for the Maracana, which hosted the World Cup final in 2014. South Africa spent $1.1 billion on its 2010 World Cup venues, some of which are reportedly losing money.

Faced with more white-elephant venues from Qatar’s 2022 tournament, FIFA has praised the 2026 bid from the United States, Canada and Mexico for using existing, mostly well attended venues.

Some Russian cities are trying to adapt.

Stadiums in Saransk and Yekaterinburg have large temporary stands which will be removed after the tournament, reducing capacity and costs. The regional minister overseeing Saransk’s preparations, Alexei Merkushkin, said Wednesday he hoped a gym and other commercial ventures would set up at the Mordovia Arena so it breaks even in “two, maximum three years”. No tenants have signed up yet.

The stadium’s post-World Cup capacity of 28,000 is large for a city of 300,000. It’s also 11 times the average crowd in the Russian second tier, where Mordovia will play next season.

Almost all locals welcome Saransk’s new roads built for the tournament but some see the stadium as a burden.

Merkushkin is “the minister for wasting Moscow’s money,” said Pavel, a Saransk resident who didn’t give his surname because he didn’t want to be identified criticizing the government.

After the World Cup, “who’s going to watch all these backyard-level games?”


Francesca Ebel in Saransk, Russia, Mauricio Savarese in Sao Paulo and Gerald Imray in Cape Town contributed to this report.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2021 The Washington Times, LLC.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide