IndoCarib
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2011
- Messages
- 10,784
- Reaction score
- -14
- Country
- Location
Brazil isn't alone in having a national identity so tied to a single sport. India, for one, could claim to be more obsessed with cricket than Brazil is with soccer.
It is impossible to quantify which country is more passionate about their favorite sport. But, at the risk of angering a billion people from Kashmir to Kerala, Brazilian soccer fans are at least more committed to theirs.
At this World Cup, Brazilians have filled the stadiums no matter who was playing. In Cuiaba, for example, the Arena Pantanal was packed every match. The western Brazilian city of 500,000 people is no soccer heartland, but it embraced the tournament even though the Seleção didn't pay a visit.
When India jointly hosted the last Cricket World Cup, its grounds were often half empty. Delhi's ragged Feroz Shah Kotla Stadium, which would've been put down years ago if it were a dog, was a sea of dirty, empty seats for an evening match between South Africa and the West Indies. Likewise, Chennai's M.A. Chidambaram Stadium was a third full, at best, for a weekend match between England and South Africa.
In Indian cities populated by millions, World Cup matches between cricket's elite teams failed to fill stadiums. In remote Cuiaba, tens of thousands of Brazilians dressed in the yellow national shirt turned up to watch South Korea play Russia, one of the least glamorous ties of this World Cup. They cheered for South Korea, FYI.
In India, even when the national team is playing, fans have been known to only show up to see a certain batsman and then leave when he is dismissed.
There is widespread poverty in India—much worse than in Brazil—but that doesn't mean hundreds of millions of people can't afford to go to a cricket match. Tickets for the 2011 Cricket World Cup weren't prohibitively expensive, selling for as little as $0.20 in Sri Lanka, which co-hosted with Bangladesh and India. The cheapest tickets weren't much more in India, at least in the group stage.
It's not entirely the public's fault. There were problems with ticket distribution throughout the 2011 World Cup. Security personnel at Indian cricket stadiums do their best to sap all the fun out of attending a match. Spectators are barred from bringing a host of belongings, including cameras, into stadiums. I've had chewing gum confiscated—perhaps they were worried it might get stuck in my hair—and a friend even had a lonely condom taken from his wallet and thrown away. Good job it had expired in the middle of the 1990s.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/why-soccer-in-brazil-is-better-than-cricket-in-india-1405007149
It is impossible to quantify which country is more passionate about their favorite sport. But, at the risk of angering a billion people from Kashmir to Kerala, Brazilian soccer fans are at least more committed to theirs.
At this World Cup, Brazilians have filled the stadiums no matter who was playing. In Cuiaba, for example, the Arena Pantanal was packed every match. The western Brazilian city of 500,000 people is no soccer heartland, but it embraced the tournament even though the Seleção didn't pay a visit.
When India jointly hosted the last Cricket World Cup, its grounds were often half empty. Delhi's ragged Feroz Shah Kotla Stadium, which would've been put down years ago if it were a dog, was a sea of dirty, empty seats for an evening match between South Africa and the West Indies. Likewise, Chennai's M.A. Chidambaram Stadium was a third full, at best, for a weekend match between England and South Africa.
In Indian cities populated by millions, World Cup matches between cricket's elite teams failed to fill stadiums. In remote Cuiaba, tens of thousands of Brazilians dressed in the yellow national shirt turned up to watch South Korea play Russia, one of the least glamorous ties of this World Cup. They cheered for South Korea, FYI.
In India, even when the national team is playing, fans have been known to only show up to see a certain batsman and then leave when he is dismissed.
There is widespread poverty in India—much worse than in Brazil—but that doesn't mean hundreds of millions of people can't afford to go to a cricket match. Tickets for the 2011 Cricket World Cup weren't prohibitively expensive, selling for as little as $0.20 in Sri Lanka, which co-hosted with Bangladesh and India. The cheapest tickets weren't much more in India, at least in the group stage.
It's not entirely the public's fault. There were problems with ticket distribution throughout the 2011 World Cup. Security personnel at Indian cricket stadiums do their best to sap all the fun out of attending a match. Spectators are barred from bringing a host of belongings, including cameras, into stadiums. I've had chewing gum confiscated—perhaps they were worried it might get stuck in my hair—and a friend even had a lonely condom taken from his wallet and thrown away. Good job it had expired in the middle of the 1990s.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/why-soccer-in-brazil-is-better-than-cricket-in-india-1405007149
