Mbebe: CT failed criteria

2012-05-08 07:47

Johannesburg - The 2013 AFCON LOC’s CEO, Mvuzo Mbebe, has explained the reason why Cape Town was not selected to host any fixtures for next year’s continental show piece was due to the fact that the city did not meet the criteria used to select the host cities.

Mbebe said that all the host cities presented their bids on March 26 at SAFA House to an LOC Panel comprising of the LOC evaluation panel and the LOC management team, and that the host cities where presented with the unsigned host city agreement on March 20.

"The final selection of the host cities was conducted by an independent law firm without the influence of the LOC or SAFA. The cities were given points according to the needs in the criteria for final selection which included demonstrating ability to fill stadiums, especially football games.

Structure of events, cost, legacy benefits, accessibility, linking 2013 and 2014, government strategic requirements and current infrastructure.

“You have to know that the optimal number of host cities is five and Cape Town came out number six. Number one was eThekwini followed by Nelson Mandela Bay, then Rustenburg and Mbombela, in that order.

There is no bad blood that saw Cape Town ruled out, as we just followed the criteria for all the cities," Mbebe said.

He added that Johannesburg will not host only two games, despite reports suggesting so, as the tournament structure is yet to be finalised.

"We had to tell CAF where the opening and closing games will be played, as per their requirements, but that does not mean Soccer City will only host two games. We still have too see how many more games can be played here," Mbebe concluded.

Soccer Laduma

  • Sekalf - 2012-05-08 08:09

    what a load of rubbish! I am surprised that Rustenburg, Mbombela and Nelson Mandela Bay have better infrastructures to offer than Cape Town (including accessibility). Mvuzo Mbebe - you smell of fish!

      Gordon - 2012-05-08 09:27

      They didn't do the judging, but surely they put the criteria together. The easiest way to rig a tender is to scope in a way that narrowly meets the needs of the supplier you want to win. It doesn't mean that the actual solution that is needed is scoped. Does SA have some form of tender oversight panel capable of assisting in defining requirements to meet actual needs as opposed to what one friendly supplier is selling?

      handyandy.rome - 2012-05-08 09:45

      Did they forget that Capetown is amongst the top five biggest tourist cities in the world,? Stupid !

      Hanno - 2012-05-08 10:31

      Easy, Cape Town is governed by DA. The rest is governed by guess who?

      Warren - 2012-05-08 10:44

      This isn't about infrastructure, its about bums in seats. On a completely practical note did The Eagles, U2 and other international bands go to these cities? No! What city hosted the start of the World Cup- Rustenburg- No! This is a game for the people, let other places have events too: share, and accept when its someone elses turn to host big events. Why should everything be a conspiracy, and not simple fairness? By the way I live in Cape Town

      Roelf - 2012-05-08 22:50

      No use having the best infrastructure but people do not attend soccer. All about full stadia!

      steyts - 2012-05-09 08:45

      YYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO CARES ABOUT AFCON???? Seriously???? The chances of SA winning is ZERO!!! So who cares!!!???

      Gunner - 2012-05-09 09:07

      Well done Durban....Sad that CT has been overlooked...definitely a political decision.The last time I checked, the stadium in Jhb is FNB stadium and not 'soccer city", Mbebe???

  • dwayne.engelbrecht - 2012-05-08 08:12

    The BEST City in Africa, The BEST airport in Africa , The BEST infrastructure in Africa , The Best tourist destination in Africa!......................... And we not number one on that list .

      goyougoodthing - 2012-05-08 08:18

      You don't want to be on that list. As we all know, the other cities were put under tremendous pressure from the ANC and MECs to sign on the dotted line. We don't even know how much it will cost yet!

      michael.ntshabele - 2012-05-08 08:21

      That was not the criteria, Dwayne and Sekalf (-kaal). If I remember well, CT did not want to cooperate from the beginning, hence they submitted a rushed (poor) bid. Again if my memory serves me well, a load of rubbish was said on this forum, supporting CT's reluctance to bid, citing more pressing needs other than Afcon. wtf do you want?

      frank.cornelissen.1 - 2012-05-08 08:26

      That's why we don't want to host the Worst Tournament on the Planet! The City is probably still waiting to be paid by the ANC government for the SWC 2010! Good move!!

      Freddie - 2012-05-08 10:07

      Relax, this tournament is nothing. The host cities will pay millions to host empty stadiums. Cape Town should be happy not to be associated with this mess.

      Sean - 2012-05-08 10:46

      @michael.ntshabele - I am glad it`s not happening in Cape Town , but not meeting the criteria , lol lol lol lol lol ! Once again , the biggest load of bull sh@t !! I actually wonder how many of those municipalities can afford to host the event ??????

  • Vaughan - 2012-05-08 08:15

    Criteria number 1, run by deployed cadres...

  • Helmut - 2012-05-08 08:18

    I think CT gave your the finger ?

      Papa-storm - 2012-05-08 09:35

      And here is another finger from me

  • Burtfred - 2012-05-08 08:18

    What rubbish.

      achmat.easu - 2012-05-08 09:48

      its total crape they don't want C.T. on this

  • stoute.babuseng - 2012-05-08 08:21

    yes they didn't meet the criteria of being corrupt like all the ANC rules cities we all know that

      Koos - 2012-05-08 10:13

      They were not prepared to grease a palm or ten. I don't think it is a loss for Cape Town. It is a win for the ratepayers of Cape Town. The next step would be to demolish the white elephant.

  • jsmonk - 2012-05-08 08:21

    Just remember that we have to fill our staduim, it is one of the main requirements, and quite frankly a these games will not come close to filling the staduim ....

      Jeffrey - 2012-05-08 09:22

      Quite correct. Many of these matches will be played between two teams that no South African would be willing to pay money to watch. South Africans are supposed to be soccer mad, but they have little interest in the quality of the football played by non-South Africans. It's all about wearing silly headgear and dancing.

  • Jean - 2012-05-08 08:22

    So our most organized city didn't make the cut!? Ja sure whatever!!!

  • Vaaldonkie - 2012-05-08 08:22

    Thank goodness.

  • Spook - 2012-05-08 08:24

    No No my fellow readers. The five cities first on the list represent the cities and structures they(Mbebe and clan) are used to. CT should have been last on the list, as they are not used to the infrastructure and neatness. One can only drive through the 5 cities on the list to see what have become of them.

  • cmutasa1 - 2012-05-08 08:26

    Good for Cape Town, at least they can concentrate and continue delivering quality services to Residents. Afcon is always run at a big lose and its a waste of limited resources. Keep the matches to those failed cities.

  • justinasher - 2012-05-08 08:28

    Most ridiculous story ever. You cannot tell me that Rustenburg and Mbombela are better organised and structured than Cape Town. What a joke.

      Roelf - 2012-05-08 22:41

      Its about filling of stadia nothing else

  • Eric - 2012-05-08 08:39

    Good news for Cape Town! The city should host only world class events and leave the dregs to the rest.

  • fdalana - 2012-05-08 08:40

    Cape politics is the reason why the saracens did not come to SA early this year. And now they want to make noise on something they can't change.four other cities failed the bid,cape town should stop acting like the Brits who wants to host everything because of the success of the EPL.

  • zybt99 - 2012-05-08 08:44

    To all of you saying Cape Town was cheated try to think. When have you ever had a sold out game in the city? Football in CT is not a crowd puller. Ps if Cape Town is so orgernised why does it never win bids for large events?

      Nigel - 2012-05-08 09:47

      yea I suppose Peter Mokaba Stadium in Limpopo is full every weekend, huh!!

  • Pietertjie - 2012-05-08 08:45

    Who cares if we get soccer!?? We must just get whiskey.

      Arthur - 2012-05-08 09:56

      You sir, have style.

  • Terence - 2012-05-08 08:53

    Might it be that CT is a DA strong hold??!!!!????

      zybt99 - 2012-05-08 09:21


      Sean - 2012-05-08 10:48

      Obviously and Cape Town is run by mostly competent people !!

  • Rob - 2012-05-08 08:55

    This certainly says a lot about different people's worldview. Maybe Cape Town has become too clean and too well organised to provide a comfortable environment for such events. And maybe the opportunities in Cape Town require more effort on the part of the organisers in order for them to be rewarded. Just thinking aloud!

  • Pieter Mulder - 2012-05-08 08:56

    After these games the visitors will any way come to cape town to spend there money. It is safer in any case.

      Juan - 2012-05-08 12:48

      That is so true Pieter, NO one visits SA and don't visit the mother city, just think the surprise when they enter this beautiful, clean, safe and well run city of ours!!

  • ShottaZee - 2012-05-08 09:03

    Cape Town never wanted to host. I remember De Lille speaking on radio that the costs are too much and they're not sure about returns. Besides, Cape Town people never fill stadiums unless a Joburg team is playing there.

  • ismail.lunat.35 - 2012-05-08 09:04

    Now they (the capetonians) complain!! But when negotiations were going in, they were all commenting, we dont want the AFCON coz we the capetonian tax payers will be paying from our coffers for the event and how the AFCON is a free entry to all the african refugees to the City. Now that they have been excluded from all the tourism promotions to the wealthy african markets, they are crying foul. First they say they dont want it, now that they get what they wanted, they are moaning... What is it that you want, my fellow capetonians??

      Jean - 2012-05-08 09:10

      We never wanted it you nut! And wealthy african markets my ass... We never really benefited from the world cup, now you want us th benefit from the poorest continent? CT chose not to host cos we will be footing the bill.

      steyts - 2012-05-08 09:18

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT A JOKE!!!! Most Capetonians are very happy that there won't be any matches played in CT. It will only end in another massive loss to CT and all those other cities will make a loss. NO THANKS!!! Bring on the stormers! A team that actually fills Newlands every single game they play!!

      Juan - 2012-05-08 12:52

      We are not complaining about not getting it (we didn't want it), we are complaining about the fact that it has been said we didn't meet the criteria!! I mean what criteria, is to safe here?? Maybe to clean, to well run and thus an embarresment for the rest of the country??

  • Sibusiso - 2012-05-08 09:07

    Cape town people failed to fill up games for the world cup and whenever a PSL team from cape town is playing, I only see 10 fans so it makes sense that cape town is not a host city. This has nothing to do with politics by the way if you have forgotten, let me remind you- Cape Town is part of South Africa.\r\nTo news24, this is a poor article, the english is bad, there are too many grammatical errors.

      steyts - 2012-05-08 09:20

      Sibusiso - Absolutely right! Soccer is not a big sport in CT like rugby... It doesn't make sense to host it in CT because like you said they will definitely not fill the stadiums which will in turn lead to a huge financial loss which the City of CT will have to pay eventually!

      Nigel - 2012-05-08 09:48

      Peter Mokaba Stadium is a huge success is it Sibusiso? Don't be an ass.

      Rohann - 2012-05-08 11:33

      WTF are you guys talkin about? It was nearly impossible to get tickets for any game at Cape Towns stadium during the world cup. Every game was nearly sold out. I was at the SA vs USA friendly at Cape Towns stadium last year and there was very few open seats, none infact close to where I was sitting. So please get your facts straigt.

      steyts - 2012-05-09 08:40

      The world cup was something different and everyone wanted to be part of it! You can't compare the two tounaments with each other. The biggest spectacle in the world compared to a tournament that is not even as big as the super rugby tournament. I'm afraid there won't be a huge demand for tickets at the stadium if SA doesn't play there. It will be empty!!

  • gregmcdavid - 2012-05-08 09:09

    What criteria? They didn't bend over and take it up the bumm?

  • steyts - 2012-05-08 09:21


      Rodney - 2012-05-08 10:19

      lol dude wrong forum

      steyts - 2012-05-09 08:40


  • Rodney - 2012-05-08 09:25

    same thing happend with the england club rugby final.Ct council are incompetant at planning and bidding 4 world class events .same with the rugby 7's

      steyts - 2012-05-09 08:41

      If that is the case, then in this instance it is a blessing in disguise that they are terrible at it!!

  • andrew.mackie.90 - 2012-05-08 09:30

    If anyone believes this rubbish they also believe in fairies. The real reason is that they were no doubt instructed by the sports ministry to chose Rustenburg and Mbombela due under utilization of the stadia built for the Soccer world cup to assist with maintenance costs.To me this is the more likely reason for the selected venues.

      Roelf - 2012-05-08 22:45

      How many times have CT beem filled to capacity with soccer games after WC? Mbombela is often filled .....get your facts...before you make statements

  • Jerome - 2012-05-08 09:31

    This smells of gaining votes at Manguang 2012 from those provinces nevermnd service delivery especially in da Eastern Cape!!!We will wait and see which stadiums are filled with paying spectators!!!!

  • darin.graham.7 - 2012-05-08 09:37

    It's probably because Cape Town is the only city that is run properly in South Africa. It's probably a good thing we are not involved in this.

  • Jannie - 2012-05-08 09:38

    Congrats CT, now we wont have hooligans roaming our streets! This also proofs that CT is ruled with integrity – not paying bribes and give kickbacks to the greedy criminals that run, sorry ruin the country everywhere else where the DA is not in control.

  • jim.dickson2 - 2012-05-08 09:43

    Cape Town wouldn't toe the line and pay exorbitant costs at taxpayers expense. I suppose the others were prepared to.............

  • Allan - 2012-05-08 09:56

    cANCer tacticks , I wonder mmm

  • hennie.botha.7 - 2012-05-08 09:57

    Good enough for the world cup? Not good enough for this?

  • The-third - 2012-05-08 10:00

    Yeah, as one esteemed commentator here has already stated. Cape Town makes the FIFA World Cup grade but it doesn't meet AFCONs lofty standards? heheheh.... HEHEHE... HAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAA. Yes.

  • Gaby - 2012-05-08 10:01

    If they don't know how many games are going to be played, they can't have a budget. It's called planning.

  • jurgen.eksteen - 2012-05-08 10:02

    The main criteria that knocked out Cape Town was that it was not governed by the "Correct Party" in their eyes. I guess that all the infrastructure and working policies are too intimidating for them. "What? Tar on their roads? Nô uncollected garbage in the streets? Completed building projects? Air you can see through? ... What Witchcraft is this? Nô nô nô, this won't do."

  • chris.booise - 2012-05-08 10:15

    Are we suppose to believe this crap? How can a major city like Cape Town not meet the criteria?

  • Hester - 2012-05-08 10:48

    What a lot of crap. Helen Zille told them she can use the R200m better than spend it on the opening ceremony and first game or the tournament.

  • hans.schouwstra.7 - 2012-05-08 11:18

    haha what a joke, CT was goog enough to host the world cup but not afcon, ag please if you have to find a reason/lie come up with something beter.

      zybt99 - 2012-05-08 16:46

      Cape Town was not good enough to host during the match. It was included due to political pressure. The city did not have a proper bid and they did not have a big enough fan base but politics dictated that it be included. And we all saw how well that went.

  • Ally - 2012-05-08 11:56

    Cape town "failed" to pay bribes. Side note: "no bad blood that saw Cape Town ruled out" ... please, bad blood doesn't have eyes to see anything. Please write decent grammar -- journalism on this site deteriorates by the day.

  • ruben.maistry - 2012-05-08 13:26

    A whole lot of bull#!*. Moving the goal post again.

  • lubabalo.kahla - 2012-05-08 14:23

    "Number one was eThekwini followed by Nelson Mandela Bay, then Rustenburg and Mbombela, in that order". then why will the opening game and the Closing be hosted by Soccer City if it was not leading. anyway I doubt verrrrrrry verrrry muchhhh we would see stadiums full.

  • wynardc - 2012-05-08 22:01

    CT was good enough to host a international event but didnt get enough pionts to host a continental showpiece...really? Thts a load of BS!!!

  • pages:
  • 1