Plenty of expectations came into play this Tuesday. No matter how many goals German strikers scored – although no one hoped there would be this many – they were sufficient to bring down spirits and, like cold water, bring Brazilians back to reality.
Since the beginning, Brazil had an overwhelming amount of stakes riding on every match. More than a trophy, results were expected to bring back hope to the population, interfering in the results of the upcoming elections, defining stock market behaviour and magnifying or appeasing protests. In times of speculation, even sporting results strain pre-existing dichotomies.
When the formal announcement that Brazil would host the tournament came in 2007, none of the country’s neighbours had doubts about it. True to its underdog mind-set, the country was the only one to apply for the role after Fifa’s president Joseph Blatter publically announced that the next host should come from South America, four years before.
The then President Luiz Inacio da Silva kept his promises to promote the country as a major nation, applying for (and getting) two of the world’s major sporting events – World Cup and Olympics.
“In these eleven years, few voices questioned such attitude or it’s possible backlash,” evaluates university professor Carlos Eduardo Lins da Silva, previous deputy director of Folha de São Paulo, the most influential newspaper in the country.
Even previous experience with the Pan-American Games, which estimated costs 793% larger than originally planned according to the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts (TCU) wasn’t enough to motivate tougher press coverage on whether the event really benefits local population.
Successor Dilma Rousseff picked up the bill. Congress learned from the experience. Under almost full omission of the press, the government came up with a unique approach: the World Cup General Act, a bill that granted the Executive a Differential Outsourcing Scheme, less rigorous than the standard procurement bidding system. “If it weren’t for demonstrations last year, perhaps journalistic inattention would have persisted until today,” Silva completes.
The sudden media awakening, as from June 2013, means that Brazilian politics, economy and society have been put under the magnifying glass. Despite slight distortions in the representation of stakeholder interests, old social issues are finally undergoing discussion in the international sphere. Now there are two things to look out for: national elections, in October, and stock market behaviour.
For the vast majority of Brazilians, football is a fundamental part of personal and social identity. The choice of a football team is closely linked to colonial heritage, social class, personal home address and family background. Fan behaviour can be predicted, to certain extent, by which organised supporting group he or she belongs to.
Football associations own community cultural centres and samba schools, as well as the swimming pools that will be used every summer. With game transmissions two to three nights a week, plus daily news programmes, contact with the sport is unavoidable. These taken into account, championship results have social impact.
Now, more may be riding on the next match for the third place than on the previous one. Another humiliation may mean Brazilians losing the little national pride left untainted. Chances are supporters might leave mundane pleasures and join those in the streets – small riots had already broken on Tuesday night. Outside Mineirão, there were fights, confusion and complaining after the defeat.
On a positive note, results might have been worse if Brazil made it to the final. Elitists feared ecstatic crowds might have outshined the few accomplishments protesters have conquered since last year, allowing Congress to back up on fundamental issues. Even proposals considered bizarre, such as the “gay cure” project, have been brought under vote again, despite popular demand for egalitarian treatment for all citizens.
The country mourns the likely fourth place in football, but still needs to mobilise itself to improve its position in other lists. In the Human Development Index (HDI), Brazil is the 85th among 106 countries. In the classification of global education, made by UNESCO, the country occupies the 88th place among 127 countries. In a student assessment made by the Organization for Cooperation and Economic Development (OECS), Brazil is the 58th of 65 countries.
These are the results that took youth to the streets in 2013, and are sure to influence polls later this year. It is no wonder the statement made by defender David Luiz, after the 7-1 defeat against Germany, struck a chord. He apologised and said he wanted to make the Brazilian people “smile at least in football.”
In response, Senator Cristovam Buarque (Democratic Workers’ Party – PDT) declared feeling uneasy to be part of a government that doesn’t fulfil the country’s need. Recognised for his activism on behalf of education, he stated this morning that it is parliamentarians, ministers and heads of executive power who should apologise to the Brazilian people, since “they cannot take the country even to fourth place in more important areas.”
Political backlash
No-one waits more anxiously for the next developments than presidential candidates. Fernando Gabeira, one of the most respected Brazilian journalists, summed up better than anyone the real focus of the Brazilian national team in 2014. “Dilma, with ‘the World Cup of World Cups’, wants to face the biggest election of all by placing her hopes in the feet of athletes.”
So far, positive results and consequent popular optimism have kept her ahead in the polls. Research institutes Sensus and Datafolha believe in victory in the first turn. IBOPE does not seal the possibility of a second, but still predicts re-election. She owns 34% of voting intentions.
Seleção’s role became particularly important considering former president Lula’s unpopular comments regarding preparations in infrastructure. His support, which was the main asset on her first candidacy, can now be seen as a disservice to Dilma. In May, the former president spared no humour to rebut criticism of delays in the construction of subways. On the occasion, he recommended the public go barefoot, on bicycles or even use donkeys to see World Cup matches.
Problem was in his choice of words. “The fools”, as he referred, “who want to get to the stadium straight off the subway”, may also be the ones demanding government cleansing, consistent fight against corruption, and utilities that work.
Maybe this extra dose of pressure justifies the players tearing up each time the national anthem was played. It certainly explains the number of times the current president has been booed and collectively swore at during the tournament.
Money matters
Specialists emphasise that this calendar alignment isn’t new to Brazilians. It is true that the championship will take place in the middle of party convention period, which officially define nominations and alliances. But the presidential term lasts four years; therefore both events usually coincide, although not in home turf.
The difference in relation to previous years is that the pre-announced protests and strikes can impact the polls, in case they return within the next days. Regarding market, business magazine Exame makes it clear: if Brazil is able to look cheerfully at the success of the event, Dilma is re-elected, but stock markets plummet.
Judging by previous market moves, shares reach higher values when the president’s poll performance is not favourable. In case of re-election, trend is another downfall of BM&FBovespa. So when Brazil loses, the economy wins. Question is, at what cost?
A report published by Santander a week before the World Cup had already announced the event would be an own goal for the financial services industry. Two analysts, Henrique Navarro and Renata Cabral, explained that “the expected reduction in the activities on match days affect financial services firms, since the results are directly linked to economic activity.”
Every time Brazilian team entered the pitch, national holidays were declared after 1 pm. The industry was pulled to a halt. Among banks, Itaú Unibanco, Bradesco and Banco do Brasil also suffered losses as transaction numbers went down.
Guesses are the performance of the country’s economy will be much more relevant to voters than winning the sixth title. The polls will replace the streets. Soon enough, the tournament will be over, but its heritage will stick around for some time: and not in the shape of stadiums or mobility.
On a side note, FIFA finds itself in troubled waters. Idealism gave way. At least at the state level, more criticality is expected from the more than 138 million voters. For those who wanted to project a positive image of Brazil, the dream of an ideal audience for the World Cup has been run aground, with the population taking on the leading role of the media agenda. In the alignment of the World Cup with Brazilian elections, nerves are becoming more sensitive. And FIFA struggles in public relations initiatives.
With the first news from Qatar, there are now two derailments on the horizon. Although the Federation has expressed heat as the main threat to the 2022 games, the estimated death of 1200 workers already puts into question what role, after all, the competition has in developing spirits of good sportsmanship and solidarity.
