THE HISTORY OF FOOTBALL WORLD CUP

The football World Cup has its origins in the modern Olympic Games. When Baron Pierre De Coubertin resurrected the Olympics in 1896, he envisaged that they would become the world championships of many sports.

From 1900 to 1928, an Olympic football tournament was held with the following teams winning gold:

• 1900 Great Britain (Olympics held in Paris, France).
• 1904 Canada (held in St Louis, USA).
• 1906 Denmark (held in Athens, Greece).
• 1908 Great Britain (held in London, England).
• 1912 Great Britain (held in Stockholm, Sweden).
• 1920 Belgium (held in Antwerp, Belgium).
• 1924 Uruguay (held in Paris, France).
• 1928 Uruguay (held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands).

FIFA¹ was formed in France on 21 May, 1904. Although FIFA tried to organise an international tournament of its own, the 1908 Olympic tournament was organised by Daniel Burley Woolfall on their behalf. It was not until Jules Rimet became FIFA's third president on 1 March, 1921, that FIFA began seriously to consider trying again. They were spurred on by the success of the 1920 Olympic tournament in Belgium.

The turning point occurred in 1927, when the 1932 Olympic Games were awarded to Los Angeles. Due to the sport's unpopularity in America, no plans were included for a football tournament. Further disagreement between FIFA and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) over the definition of amateurs, led to an inaugural World Cup being held in 1930, while there was no Olympic soccer tournament held in 1932.

Subsequently, the Olympic football tournament staggered along, allowing only players of amateur status, while the World Cup accepted professionals and went from strength to strength. It was not until 1984 that professionals were allowed into the Olympics, and the world's best players and teams were eligible to compete. FIFA, however, were worried that the Olympic tournament might detract from the prestige of the World Cup, and so the Olympic teams were restricted to professionals who had never played in the World Cup tournaments. This later changed to players under 23 years of age, with two exemptions allowed.

The Tournaments

The first World Cup tournament was held in Uruguay in 1930. Thirteen nations competed, and only four European countries made the long sea voyage. The final was eventually won by hosts Uruguay, who beat neighbours Argentina 4-2, continuing the dominance they had shown in the 1920s Olympic tournaments.

In 1934, the tournament moved back to Europe, and Italy both hosted and won it, beating Czechoslovakia 2-1 in the final. Just as the Nazis did at the 1936 Berlin Olympics, the Fascist ruling party used sport as a way to promote their ideologies, and the Italian football team became the best in the world. Four years later, in 1938 the Italians retained their trophy in Paris, beating Hungary 4-2.

For the next 12 years the Italians held on to the trophy², as World War II stopped tournaments being held in 1942 or 1946. In 1950 the tournament returned to South America, where hosts Brazil were upset 2-1 by Uruguay in front of almost 200,000 supporters.

In 1954 the tournament moved on to Switzerland. The aftermath of World War II had now passed. The Eastern Europeans entered the tournament, and West Germany were admitted. The favourites to win were the 'Mighty Magyars' of Hungary, who in 1953 had become the first team to defeat England at Wembley. Surprisingly, though, they were beaten 3-2 in the final by West Germany, a team that they had beaten in the group stages. It was to be Hungary's only loss in competitive matches between 1950 and 1956.

Nineteen fifty-eight saw the introduction of perhaps the world's greatest ever player, and the country that was to dominate world football for the next 12 years. Brazil's 17-year-old striker Pelé scored six goals, including a hat-trick in the semi-final against France, and two more in the final where Brazil beat hosts Sweden 5-2 to win their first World Cup final. Just Fontaine of France scored a record 13 goals in only six matches.

In 1962, the finals returned to South America. In Chile, despite losing Pelé in the early rounds because of injury, Brazil retained their trophy by beating Czechoslovakia 3-1.

Continuing the alternation between Europe and South America, football came home to England in 1966, where Alf Ramsey's 'Wingless Wonders' gelled to become the World Champions. In an exciting Wembley final, West Germany equalised in the last minute of normal time to send it into extra-time. Geoff Hurst then became the only man to score a hat-trick in the final, which included England's hotly disputed third goal which the Russian linesman judged to have crossed the line.

In 1970, football blasted into the modern era. Satellite technology beamed live colour pictures around the world from Mexico, while on the pitch red and yellow cards and substitutions were used for the first time. In total, the final eight games of the tournament produced 34 goals. Brazil returned to their winning ways with perhaps the greatest team in World Cup history, beating Italy 4-1 in the final. Because they'd now won the World Cup for a third time, they were allowed to keep the Jules Rimet Trophy.

Nineteen seventy-four saw the future become orange, as the Dutch and their brand of 'Total Football' enthralled millions. Inspired by Johan Cruyff, the Netherlands reached the final and took the lead through the first ever penalty in a World Cup final. However, their opponents, hosts West Germany, replied with a penalty of their own and then scored a second to win 2-1. Inspirational leader and captain Franz Beckenbauer became the first man to lift the new FIFA World Cup trophy.

The Dutch returned to the final four years later to meet the hosts Argentina. Just as 50 years earlier, Mussolini had wanted to show the world his political power, so did the ruling military junta. Although a very good team, there were suspicions as to how Argentina reached the 1978 final. Needing to beat Peru 4-0 in their last second phase group match, they won 6-0. So, at the expense of Brazil, they went on to beat Holland 3-1 in extra time, and consign the Dutch to runners-up status for a second successive final.

Spain hosted the 1982 tournament, which expanded from 16 to 24 teams. At its best the tournament produced an epic five-goal battle between Italy and Brazil, with Paolo Rossi scoring a hat-trick, and the first game ever to be decided on penalties. West Germany came back from 3-1 down in extra time to draw 3-3 and then win 5-4 on penalties against France. At its worst, it's remembered for goalkeeper Harald Schumacher breaking the jaw of France's Patrick Battiston in the same match, and the Germans and Austria playing out a lacklustre 1-0 win for Germany to ensure that both teams qualified from the group stages at the expense of Algeria. In the end, Italy lifted the trophy for a third time by beating West Germany 3-1.

The World Cup returned to Mexico in 1986, following Colombia's late withdrawal as hosts. The tournament was dominated by the play of one man, Diego Maradona of Argentina. He is remembered for his two goals that knocked England out at the quarter-final stage. The first, which became known as 'The Hand of God' he punched into the England net. The second was a superb surging run from inside his own half past seven English players, and is perhaps the greatest World Cup goal ever. Two more goals in the semi-final saw Argentina past Belgium into the final, where they met West Germany. In a tense and thrilling encounter, the Germans came from two goals down to equalise with less than 10 minutes left, before Burruchaga scored the winning goal with six minutes to go. Maradona had inspired his team to the top of the world.

Four years later the finals returned to Italy. The 1990 tournament's surprise team were Cameroon, who beat defending champions Argentina 1-0 in the opening match. They became the first African team to reach the quarter-finals, where they were despatched by two Gary Lineker penalties, the second coming in extra-time as England came from behind to win 3-2. The semi-finals both went to penalties, and then it was a repeat of the 1986 final as West Germany (now in their third successive final) finally became world champions under the management of former captain Franz Beckenbauer. A bad-tempered final saw West Germany conquer the Argentinians 1-0. Argentina ended the game with nine men on the field, as Pedro Monzon and Gustavo Dezotti became the first players ever to be sent off in a final.

The commercialisation of football at the turn of the 1990s saw FIFA wanting to conquer its last remaining frontier - the United States of America. The 1994 tournament was therefore held in the USA, to the chagrin of many commentators. Although all the matches were sold out, and American organisation was superb, the tournament itself failed to generate any long-lasting memories. Even the final became a disappointment as Brazil and Italy played out a 0-0 draw, which led to the first-ever penalty shoot-out in a final. In the end, it was Brazil that finally ended over 20 years of waiting for their fans as they won 3-2 on penalties.

The 1998 finals returned to the more traditional staging grounds of Europe, where hosts France played superb football to lift the World Cup for the first time. A solid defence was supplemented by the creative genius of Zinedine Zidane in midfield. Zidane scored the first two goals before half-time as France beat an off-form Brazil 3-0. The tournament expanded to include 32 teams and saw the Golden Goal rule introduced. The rule meant that games in the knock-out stages that were level after 90 minutes were settled by the first goal scored in extra time. The rule only decided one match: France's 1-0 victory over Paraguay in the second round.

FIFA's push to conquer new territories sees the 2002 World Cup finals being hosted in Asia, by Japan and South Korea. This trend was expected to continue four years later, with South Africa expected to be chosen as the venue for what would have been the first finals to be held in Africa. In the event, however, a close and hotly-disputed vote saw Germany being chosen as the hosts for 2006.

Other Entries in This Project

• Football World Cup, 1930, Uruguay
• Football World Cup, 1934, Italy
• Football World Cup, 1938, France
• Football World Cup, 1950, Brazil
• Football World Cup, 1954, Switzerland
• Football World Cup, 1958, Sweden
• Football World Cup, 1962, Chile
• Football World Cup, 1966, England
• Football World Cup, 1970, Mexico
• Football World Cup, 1974, West Germany
• Football World Cup, 1978, Argentina
• Football World Cup, 1982, Spain
• Football World Cup, 1986, Mexico
• Football World Cup, 1990, Italy
• Football World Cup, 1994, USA
• Football World Cup, 1998, France
• Football World Cup, 2002, Japan and South Korea

---

¹ Football's world governing body. The Federation Internationale de Football Association.
² The trophy was reportedly kept under the bed of a member of the Italian FA.

CRITICISM OF THE AGENDA SETTING THEORY

Agenda Setting is the media's attempt to create and transfer salient issues into the public domain to enable the public to discuss,deliberate or debate on these issues to make informed decisions. Basically,Agenda Setting talks about how the mass media pay attention or highlight certain issues while neglecting others.This theory fails to address certain pertinent issues which I proceed to discuss.

The Agenda Setting theory assumes that if people are exposed to the same media contents,they will place importance on the same issues.This assumption is not true.People have different frames of reference, and therefore what one may consider important after filtering the issues through his frame of reference is different from the other person's.People are therefore not always likely to place importance on the same issues even if they are all exposed to the same media content.

Secondly,this theory fails to consider the personal interest of the individual.Any issue considered salient by the mass media and put in the public domain will not necessarily be considered salient by the public.The audience consciously choose a media product that gives him gratification or that addresses his needs,and it is such issues he may consider to be salient.This theory assumes that once the media considers any issue to be salient and give it dominance,the public automatically regards the issue as salient.The public only considers such issues salient if they personally have interest in them.In such situation,one cannot claim that the issues are considered salient by the audience simply because the media regard them as salient,but rather because they serve the interest of the public.

The Agenda Setting theory uses a very scientific approach,not humanistic,and therefore in practical terms it is not able to stand the test of scrutiny since human beings are known to be very unpredictable.Nonetheless,it is a very useful theory in the effect tradition of the mass media.

THE DRAWBACKS OF THE USES AND GRATIFICATION THEORY

The uses and gratification theory lies at the extreme end of the media effects tradition.It takes a more humanistic approach to looking at media use.It asks what the audience can do to the media. The uses and gratification theory,though a very good theory,has some drawbacks.

First,uses and gratification theory is primarily functional in its orientation,and it tends to ignore the dysfunctions of media in society and culture(Littlejohn,1989).In essence,uses and gratification research,like other empirical approaches,plays a conservative role in society by maintaining the status quo(Anderson,1996)It tends to view media in mainly positive ways and as capable of meeting audience needs.Little attention,according to critical scholars is paid to the negative cultural effects that media have on society.

Second,uses and gratification research portrays media consumption as primarily rational and individualistic,whereby individuals control consumption according to conscious goals.This assumes that the audience are aware of every factor entering their media choices and do not misjudge the causes of their behaviour.Little attention is therefore afforded to the ways in which the media may be consumed mindlessly or ritualistically.

Regardless of the above drawbacks,uses and gratification can be very useful from the functional perspective.This theory is indeed a very profound theory of the effect tradition.

CRITIQUE OF THE HYPODERMIC NEEDLE THEORY

This theory of communication,also known as the magic bullet,holds that mass media have a direct, immediate and powerful effect on their audiences.When the media content is unmitigated by other people or process, the effect is said to be direct.This theory simply presents the listener as a passive one who simply gets influenced by the media content and produces the reaction for which the media content was meant to elicit from him/her.
Such a theory is not empirical. Many human experiences have shown that the audiences are capable of forming their own judgment of media contents.Audiences of mass media get exposed to many advertisements,yet quite a number of the products which get advertised do not receive the patronage for which the advertisements were meant to elicit.
It will be very instructive to cite the 2008 electioneering campaign in Ghana.It was clear that the incumbent enjoyed a lot of media coverage.The incumbent used all available means to convince the Ghanaian electorates to vote the Government back to power because of the Government's ''great achievements''.But what happened in the elections? In spite of the huge media visibility the Government enjoyed,with all the many adverts,it lost in both the presidential and parliamentary elections. This tells you that the issue of whether or not a person is influenced by the mass media does not solely depends on the media content and what it is meant to accomplish as the theory sought to create but it depends on the audiences as well.The audiences can consciously decide to be impervious to the media content.

THE DRAMA IN OBAMA

I woke up yesterday morning to hear through the Ghanaian local media a rather staggering and unexpected imputations from Michelle Obama to the fidelity of her husband,Mr.Barack Obama.
According to the story,Michelle had caught her husband on countless occasions have a clandestine cozy chat with Oprah Winfrey.Michelle was therefore beginning to suspect that her husband may be having something to do with Oprah Winfrey.When I heard this story,the first question I asked myself was ''IS THIS TRUE?'' I asked a couple of friends who confirmed that they had equally heard the story on other networks.How on earth could Michelle Obama ever think that Barack Obama would have an extra-marital affair with Oprah.But upon a second reflection,I've come to realised that indeed appearances can be as deceiving as the devil.
Oprah,granted,is old but believe you me,she's attractive enough to snap Barack from Michelle.Oh! sorry!! did I say snap? I meant to say she's attractive enough to have a relationship with Obama alongside Michelle.But what's Barack saying? According to that news report,Barack claimed Oprah helped him in his presidential bid and therefore he's deeply indebted to Oprah.He also said his popularity on the American political landscape has seriously plummeted,therefore their phone conversations have primarily centered on how he could use Oprah to help him regain that political popularity.Do you think Barack's reasons are frivolous and sophomoric?
Before you answer this question,put yourself in Barack's shoes.