FIFA World Cup: Five Reasons The 2010 Edition Has Been So Poor

« Prev
1 of 7
Next »
Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse the slideshow
FIFA World Cup: Five Reasons The 2010 Edition Has Been So Poor

It's supposed to be the biggest show on earth.

It's meant to be bigger, better, and more exciting than the Olympics.

It should make the whole World stop in unison for 90 minutes to stare at a television screen, even if your country is not playing.

Perhaps it still makes the World stop, perhaps it is still the greatest show in sport but this World Cup has certainly not reached the highs of Usain Bolt in the Olympics.

Sepp Blatter has been mouthing to all who will listen—and that is few—that this World Cup has been the best yet, and has been a glaring success. Considering Blatter's ideas of "fair play" it's no surprise that he is wrong.

Yes, South Africa has hosted the tournament well. The infrastructure and stadia were built on time, but, surely, this is to be expected.

Despite the scaremongering, there was no terrorist attacks or killing of tourists on the streets.

But the World Cup is not meant to be a promotional tool for the South African tourist board, it's meant to be about the football and the promotion of football.

Here are five reasons why this World Cup did anything but promote football to the unconverted.

Begin Slideshow »

Follow B/R on Facebook

World Football

Subscribe Now

By signing up for our newsletter, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy.

Thanks for signing up.