Comparing South Africa's hosting of the rugby and cricket world cup: lessons for the 2010 football world cup and beyond

This paper compares South Africa's hosting of the two largest mega-events hosted by it up to date, the 1995 Rugby World Cup and the 2003 Cricket World Cup. By comparing these two mega-events, it is hoped to learn lessons for South Africa's hosting of the 2010 Football World Cup, but also for developing nations hosting of mega-events in general. Although nations habitually put forward the 'hard', tangible benefits that such events are likely to bring as justification for hosting them, not many analyses have sought to explore the processes through which the more elusive benefits are said to accrue, namely, the identity formation and signalling aspects on the one hand, and the democracy and human rights enhancing aspects on the other. Through this analysis it is demonstrated how South Africa has traditionally drawn from the realm of politics as its moral authority for hosting such events, yet the folding of the overtly political into the sporting arena has sometimes led to unintended consequences. South Africa has also become much more business-like in its approach to mega-events. Whereas the Rugby and Cricket World Cups were steeped in the symbolic importance of an `imagined community?, these sentiments are likely to become diluted in the face of a more consumerist global football milieu and the powerful role of FIFA in deciding who gets what, when and where.

Publication Details

Journal
Human Science Research Council SA
Published
2025-07-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14749/29645687
Primary Topic
Sport and Mega-Event Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparing South Africa's hosting of the rugby and cricket world cup: lessons for the 2010 football world cup and beyond

Human Science Research Council SA
Sport and Mega-Event Impacts
article

Comparing South Africa's hosting of the rugby and cricket world cup: lessons for the 2010 football world cup and beyond

article en

Abstract

This paper compares South Africa's hosting of the two largest mega-events hosted by it up to date, the 1995 Rugby World Cup and the 2003 Cricket World Cup. By comparing these two mega-events, it is hoped to learn lessons for South Africa's hosting of the 2010 Football World Cup, but also for developing nations hosting of mega-events in general. Although nations habitually put forward the 'hard', tangible benefits that such events are likely to bring as justification for hosting them, not many analyses have sought to explore the processes through which the more elusive benefits are said to accrue, namely, the identity formation and signalling aspects on the one hand, and the democracy and human rights enhancing aspects on the other. Through this analysis it is demonstrated how South Africa has traditionally drawn from the realm of politics as its moral authority for hosting such events, yet the folding of the overtly political into the sporting arena has sometimes led to unintended consequences. South Africa has also become much more business-like in its approach to mega-events. Whereas the Rugby and Cricket World Cups were steeped in the symbolic importance of an `imagined community?, these sentiments are likely to become diluted in the face of a more consumerist global football milieu and the powerful role of FIFA in deciding who gets what, when and where.

Human Science Research Council SA
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 42%
Sport and Mega-Event Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.