All’s well that ends well

South Africa 2010 has been a success. It’s official. The world’s second best newspaper (after the Mail & Guardian of course), the Financial Times, said so today. In an editorial. So it must be true. The naysayers and racists were wrong; Africa can do it. Yes we can! Emma Hurd of Sky News, and all those other dreadful, dull-minded English journalists who could not think beyond the “white elephant” stadia and the “murder capital of the world” stories, must eat their words.

Only they went home ages ago, along with their pathetic excuse of a football team.

The World Cup was a tremendous of piece of brand re-positioning, therefore. That was the external bit: the world’s view of South Africa is enhanced. What of the internal: has South Africa’s view of itself — so febrile and prone to manic fluctuation — been enhanced too? Maybe it has. Certainly middle class South Africa has been exposed to a different perspective. As I noted in a previous blog, it was gratifying as well as amusing to observe middle class Capetonians walking along the now-famed fan walk to the Greenpoint Stadium.

Former MEC Tasneen Essop and senior provincial government official Laurine Platzky, two of the people who bore the brunt of the at-times vitriolic criticism of the decision to build the new stadium at Green Point rather than, say, Athlone, should be given just recognition for shepherding the process and defending the decision. Great cities bring people to their centres, not their suburbs. Perambulation is the life-blood of such metropolises. And the fan walk gave Capetonians a taste of it and they seemed to enjoy it.

By Tuesday night it had become so popular that it was a tough challenge getting through to the stadium for those with actual tickets to the game. “Soccer”, as it is still being called, has become fashionable. It has come an awful long way in just a month, has it not? Even die-hard rugby fans are converts. Well some of them. You can spot them at the games: they have a slightly bemused look on their faces. They don’t really get the fact that goals are scarce and therefore so highly prized. Rugby is far more promiscuous; tries are two a penny. The Southern Suburbanites are even easier to spot: they are the ones that look like they have just reached base camp ahead of an assault on Mount Everest, such is the quantity — and quality — of their warm, protective clothing.

But, to return to the point, the most significant internal impact of this World Cup has been the emergence of the potential social melting pot of public transport. There is nothing that brings the working and middle classes together than the tubes and buses and trains of Europe. Nor, now, the rapid bus systems of Latin America. Many middle class South Africans used buses and trains for the very first time. And I think that they found it enlightening and even liberating. We need to keep them there; we need to recognise that public transport is the platform for the sort of social integration and re-calibrated social relations that are needed to overcome the racial divisions of the past.

But enough of the politics and the sociology let me rather end where I began with some (amateur) football punditry. The best bit of any World Cup is choosing the team of the tournament. Here, with the help of my research assistant Jack Calland, is mine:

Goalkeeper
It has to be Manuel Neuer of Germany — despite his inexperience (just 10 caps), he has been pretty much the only ‘keeper not to handle the Jabulani with all the trepidation of a white farmer approaching Julius Malema.

Right back
Sergio Ramos of Spain — not every one’s cuppa tea, admittedly, possibly not even some of his teammates who would prefer that he do what they do all the time — namely pass to one another. Ramos prefers to surge and shoot. But his pace and directness is as a potent as his other main rival, Maicon of Brazil, but he is less prone to cheating.

Centre-backs
Lucio was a tower of strength for Brazil, both in defence and taking the ball forward. Mertesacker was equally magnificent for Germany, just nudging out the superb Dutch pair, Heitingar and Mathijsen.

Left-back
Phillip Lahm, Germany — no contest, even though he is disturbingly similar in looks to the other Phillip — one of the Neville brothers — and was required to play right-back in this tournament, which merely served to illustrate his skill and virtuosity since he generally plays on the left.

Centre midfield
This was the easiest bit: Xavi should be the first name down on any “world XI” at the moment and unlike the strutting stars Ronaldo, Rooney, Kaka and Messi, the diminutive Spaniard, who looks like he should be conducting the Berlin Philharmonic, did not fail to deliver. He is the ultimate playmaker — everything goes through him, which is why his stats reveal that he has made the highest number of passes in the tournament. And alongside him, who else but the imperious Bastian Schweinsteiger — Herbert Von Karajan to Xavi’s Lorin Maazel?

Flanks
A vast array to choose from: Robben and Robinho dribbled defenders to distraction, but I exclude both because they fall and/or dive too easily. Messi was brilliant at times, and even though he did not quite live up to the high expectations, is hard to leave out. But leave him out I do, because his time will come again. As will Mesut Oezil of Germany, who was exceptional, and who I cannot leave out because he was a constant threat, stayed on his feet, and showed vision, pace and a two-footed incisiveness. On the other flank, I will put David Villa. Against Portugal I was astonished at how wide he stayed, hugging the left touchline for ages. But it was a ruse. It lulled the defenders into a false sense of security and when, finally, he came inside to pounce he duly scored — with his habitual aplomb.

In the Hole
Diego Forlan or Wesley Sneijder. Tough one. Forlan was undeniably brilliant. Sneijder was undeniably effective. Since there has to be at least one Dutchman, I will go for the latter.

Centre forward
Though his sending off, and the injustice it did to Ghana’s cause, will always rankle with many and blind them to his accomplishments with his feet rather than his hands during this tournament, Luis Suarez was exceptional. Movement, pace, instinctive poacher’s ability in the box, good with both feet and in the air. So I am glad to have Miroslav Klose’s all-round excellence available to me as a more politically acceptable alternative. The German makes the hardest chances look simple; and he is always where a great striker should be — just like his compatriot Gerd Muller in the 1970s, the finest six-yard box centre forward of them all.

So, in 4-2-3-1 formation (the favoured formation of the tournament as deployed by the Dutch, the Germans and the Spanish), the 1^st XI: Neuer; Ramos, Lucio, Mertesackar, Lahm; Schweinsteiger, Xavi; Oezil, Sneijder, Villa; Klose. Six Germans; Three Spaniards; a Brazilian and a Dutchman — which shows how much I appreciated the Germans. 2^nd XI (also 4-2-3-1): Casillas; Maicon, Mathijsen, Heitingar, Boateng; Annan, Alonso; Mueller, Iniesta, Forlan; Suarez. Three Spaniards; Two Dutchman; Two Uruguayans; Two Germans; a Ghanaian and a Brazilian.