Grenada National Cricket Stadium. AP Photo/Harold Quash.

The mistake was, perhaps, understandable. After all, it could just as easily have been Taiwan who had funded the stadium, and in part, they had. In December 2004, not long after Ivan had hit the island, Grenada’s Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell made a surprise visit to Beijing, upsetting Grenada’s political establishment. They had forged close relations with Taiwan, with whom they had formed diplomatic relations in 1989, and had already received a pledge of $40 million in aid to rebuild the hurricane-wrecked national stadium and other infrastructure.

On hearing of Mitchell’s trip, Taiwan’s Foreign Ministry tartly severed relations with Grenada and stated that “The government of the Republic of China regrets Prime Minister Mitchell’s lack of foresight. We have stated sincerely our intention of not participating in a meaningless game of “dollar diplomacy” with China, and will never let Grenada waver between the two sides of the Strait in order to seek profits. The government of the Republic of China expresses its serious protest against, and condemns, the People’s Republic of China for its use of “dollar diplomacy” to drive us out of the international community.”

Taiwan realized they had been trumped. Mitchell had worked out a better deal for Grenada from Beijing. Stung, Taiwan has since been trying to recover $28.1 million in loans dating back to the 1990s, even attempting to seize Grenadian properties in the United States. That loan had funded the cricket stadium’s original construction in 1998.

Meanwhile, 500 Chinese workers toiled day and night for a year to build Grenada’s new stadium. And elsewhere in the Caribbean, another cricket stadium showcased in the 2007 World Cup also came courtesy of China, Sir Vivian Richards Stadium in Antigua, at a cost of $21 million.

Sir Vivian Richards Stadium, Antigua. AP Photo/Jonhnny Jno-Baptiste.

Taiwan, though lacking the extensive reserves and free spending ability of its rival, also scored with the $12 million renovation of the Warner Park cricket facility in St. Kitts & Nevis.

Warner Park Stadium, St Kitts and Nevis. AP Photo/Lynne Sladky.

This stadium construction rivalry is the result of each nation’s aim to receive “one China” recognition from the Caribbean nations: with the latter trading an unusual resource, the identification of sovereignty, for financial assistance.

Asia and the Africa Cup of Nations

Outside the cricket-mad Caribbean, twenty-first century dollar diplomacy has had a similarly dramatic impact on football stadium infrastructure, and is proving particularly significant for the Africa Cup of Nations. Andrew Guest wrote extensively about that on this space two years ago, looking at China’s role in building the stadia used for Angola’s hosting of the Africa Cup of Nations. Andrew focused on China’s motivation from a different diplomatic angle, noting that the stadium could be seen as a chip in China’s bid for access to Angolan oil in competition with the United States.

Estádio da Tundavala, Angola. AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell.

Angola is far from alone in benefiting from China’s “dollar diplomacy”, whether motivated by competition with Taiwan or the United States. Zambia’s shiny new 41,000 capacity Ndola Stadium came at a cost to the Chinese of $65 million, while in 2012, we will see another Africa Cup of Nations played at a Chinese built stadium in Libreville, capital of Gabon.

Stade d’Angondjé, Libreville, Gabon

As well as the politics in play, the construction of the stadia themselves raise some questions. Typically, these Chinese-funded stadiums are built relatively cheaply and quickly, and a large part of the reason for that is China’s use of its own workers and technicians in large numbers, instead of training local workers. And when local workers are used, problems have arisen.

In Zambia, for example, the construction of a Chinese-funded shiny new stadium has not allayed suspicions in the country about China’s motives and methods of assistance. Just two months ago, Michael Sata – a vocal critic of Chinese investment – was elected as the country’s president. He has in the past demanded the deportation of Chinese workers, and accused Chinese companies of mistreating Zambian workers (it should be said, whispers have long persisted that Sata has received funding from Taiwan). Sata, though, has toned down his criticism of China in recent months – perhaps a sign that China’s dollar diplomacy is, indeed, working.

Yet on a local scale, serious questions are still being raised in Zambia. China’s Anhui Foreign Economic Construction Company has overseen fatalities and strikes that have raised major question marks about the conditions workers have been placed in at the Ndola stadium construction site. Workers downed tools in the spring over unpaid wages, with one worker saying “We don’t know what will become of us. This stadium is finishing in two months time, so who is going to pay our benefits? Is it the Chinese or the Zambian government?” He continued, “We are not ready to go back for work until we get answers from government and the same government should tell their Chinese friends to improve our conditions of services.” This came shortly after a fire killed two workers at the site.

In Costa Rica, similar controversy has arisen. Eric Beard on the Football Ramble covered this superbly recently, noting the concessions Costa Rica’s then-president Oscar Arias made to China in return for the “donation” of a new 35,000 capacity home for Costa Rican football, Estadio Nacional.

“Arias agreed that Chinese workers could build the stadium, despite the fact that Costa Rica was stricken with unemployment from the global economic crisis,” Beard writes. “He allowed the Chinese company in charge of the project, AFEC, to entirely bypass Costa Rica’s labor laws, which are notoriously strict. Though Costa Rica is a proud advocate of human rights, Chinese employees of AFEC worked inhumane hours right under the nose of the Costa Rican democracy. There was even one casualty on the project, as 37-year-old Liu Hong Bin was hit by a construction vehicle in November 2010. Putting human rights aside, the stadium barely stimulated Costa Rica’s economy, as even most of the materials used were shipped over from China.”

And as is the case elsewhere, a sparkling new stadium came at the cost of disrupted relations with Taiwan and with a free trade agreement with China, along with questions about labor rights and worker safety. As China’s international power grows, expect to see China’s stadium diplomacy to continue its controversial path.

Costa Rica fans seek a glimpse of the U.S. team in San Jose. Date unknown.

Photo credit: bluerondo on Flickr, via the Pitch Invasion Photo Pool.

The Dynamo did not even play the true 11-a-side game seen around the world. Instead, they played a 5v5 indoor game more akin to hockey – walls and penalty boxes included – that was the only professional soccer in the US after the collapse of the North American Soccer League. The Dynamo played in the National Professional Soccer League, but for all I knew at the time, it was as good as the Champions League.

When MLS came along in 1996, I had learned enough about the world game to be embarrassed by my previous infatuation with the Dayton Dynamo. I had, in fact, become something of a soccer snob and held my nose at Americanizations such as having the clock count down on the scoreboard and hockey-style shootouts to break ties. But the opportunity to watch true professional outdoor soccer was enough for me to hold my nose at its silly “innovations.”

I was at the first Columbus Crew game and can still recall Bo Oshonyi’s long punt to Brian McBride, which the then unknown striker put away with aplomb (the American football-sized field made such a goal easier). My soccer-watching diet was getting better. The modest meal of early MLS was dramatically better than the scraps that were the NPSL, but I knew others were eating five-course meals, and I wanted at least a taste.

For that, I would have to wait until 1997. During the first half of that year, I was an exchange student in Costa Rica. Even before I left, I had circled the date on the calendar when the US would play the Ticos in a qualifier in the capital, San Jose. March 23, 2007, come hell or high water, I would be at Saprissa Stadium.

They didn't quite get David's name right.

A few weeks before the game, tickets went on sale. I had heard that demand would be fierce and so I skipped school and headed to the stadium. I arrived to find a long line that included many scalpers. As I fretted in line for several hours, a reporter for Costa Rica’s largest newspaper La Nación approached me and asked if he could interview me. I said sure and we talked about my strong desire to see the game. I was quoted in the paper the next day saying, “I’m from Ohio and the national team never plays there” (this was before the building of Crew Stadium).

And though I have no memory of this now, I apparently also told the reporter that if I couldn’t get tickets at the stadium, I would go to the American embassy to ask if they could help me (little good that would have done me). After nearly half a day of waiting, I gave in and paid a scalper the equivalent of $70 for two tickets to the game, an astronomical mark-up of the face value. I was slightly embarrassed at having paid so much for the tickets, but at least I was going to the game!

When game day finally arrived, I approached the Saprissa Stadium feeling proud of my special status as a ticket holder only to find that scalpers had had trouble selling their wares and tickets were going for far less than what I had paid. Ignorant gringo that I was, I didn’t realize that the game was taking place during Holy Week, a period during which many Costa Ricans head out of town. The lack of demand meant that ticket prices plummeted on game day, by kick-off going for around $1 a piece.

I entered the stadium along with an exchange student friend of mine and we realized that our seats would leave us all alone in a stadium full of Costa Ricans, most of whom seemed friendly (but then, the game hadn’t started yet). Seeing some other American fans across the way, we sweet-talked the stewards into letting us into that section. We may have been a small group (50 at the most), but we were excited, passionate in our support of the US national team.

Roy Lassiter

Pre-game was mostly filled with Costa Rican fans taunting American forward Roy Lassiter with chants of “Lassiter ladrón.” Lassiter had played in Costa Rica for several years, during which time he had apparently not paid his taxes (a la Diego Maradona), a fact that the authorities reminded him of on his return to the country with the national team. Other American players were “greeted” to Costa Rica with bags of urine and batteries hurled at their heads.

The game itself is mostly a blur in my mind. I seem to recall that it was exciting, and indeed it must have been, as it finished 3-2 to the Costa Ricans. Mostly, I remember the atmosphere. It was incredible to witness the noise as the players came onto the field. The roar of the crowd was deafening and the confetti they threw on the field turned it from green to white. Throughout the game, the entire stadium sang in unison: “Vamos, vamos los ticos. Que esta tarde tenemos que ganar” (“Let’s go, let’s go Ticos. Today we must win”). We American fans got chuckles of approval from neighboring fans when we substituted gringos for Ticos and sang along with them.

The general level of English instruction in Costa Rican schools is comically bad, but there is one word that nearly everyone in the country – or at least nearly everyone in the stadium that day – knows: sorry. Showers of “sorry, sorry, sorry” rained down on me and my fellow Americans as we left the stadium, but we had the good humor to laugh along with our taunters. We waved to fans who smiled at us as they practiced their English on us. In many ways, I think it’s for the best that Costa Rica won; I’m not sure how friendly the fans would have been if they had not.

I left the stadium that March day with a lighter wallet than should have been the case, but much richer in terms of soccer experience. I saw first-hand the passion that drives fans in Costa Rica, and throughout the world. It is an infectious passion, and I was sickened that day. I have yet to recover.

David Keyes writes the Culture of Soccer blog, thankfully now back after a long hiatus.

Big Story
The biggest drama of a long and interesting day of World Cup qualification was reserved for RFK Stadium in Washington DC. After a week that must have drained the U.S. players to the core, with the terrible near-death experience for forward Charlie Davies, Bob Bradley’s boys somehow found it in them to pull out a 95th minute equaliser by Jonathan Bornstein (“the ball just fell on my head and I put it away.”) against Costa Rica in a match that only mattered for their opponents.

And boy, did it matter for their opponents. That goal dropped Costa Rica into a tie with Honduras, who qualified automatically for the World Cup on goal difference after their 1-0 win over El Salvador (including redemption for Carlos Pavon). Honduras’ debt to the U.S. was summed up by this brilliant headline in English on a Honduran newspaper: “I love you so much Jonathan Bornstein”.

USA today reports that the win brought the turmoil-ridden country together for one night: “This is passion, this is love,” said Gerson Mendoza, an 18-year-old student celebrating in Tegucigalpa. “Here in the streets you have everyone — people who favored the coup and those who opposed it. But all are Hondurans.”

For Costa Rica, the sporting agony is almost too much to comment on: “¡Demasiado cruel!”

Worldwide News

• One reason to love Fabio Capello is a quote like this: “Yes I was a bit surprised [with Beckham receiving the man of the match award]. I just thought it was like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize after eight months as President of the United States. He gets the man of the match after 30 minutes here.” As for the England match itself, which it seemed to me didn’t matter very much despite the miles of column inches dedicated to it today in the British press, Kevin Gardside of the Telegraph perhaps sums up the absurdity of trying to draw any conclusions on England’s chances in South Africa by stating that “England’s B-listers looked anything but world champions.”  Well right. But only last year, England’s A-listers weren’t even good enough to qualify for Euro 2008, so it seems a bit churlish to be complaining about this.
• So Argentina have made it to South Africa, and Maradona didn’t waste much time laying into the press. As Marcela Mora y Araujo comments, Argentina’s qualification masks deeper problems in Argentinian football that may now go unaddressed.
• When Saturday Comes looks at what happened to the Czech Republic, who failed to qualify for the World Cup, putting it down largely to the day Tomas Rosicky picked up a serious injury.
• Stan Kroenke continues to edge up his share of Arsenal, and comes closer to being the first owner of MLS and Premier League clubs.
• Most misleading headline ever?  Goal.com’s headline turns up in my feed reader as “World Cup Special: Revealed – Italy’s 23 Players For The 2010 World Cup”. Boy, I think, Lippi’s not wasting any time, is he? Of course, the article doesn’t appear to be quite certain after all. “Others are fighting it out for a squad place,” Carlo Garganese writes, “While a select few such as Cassano are outsiders but cannot be completely ruled out if things go their way.” Oh. But then, Garganese seems to think he does have the list, as he continues “Below is a full run-down of how Italy’s 23 places will be taken…”  What now?

The Sweeper appears daily. For more rambling and links throughout the day every day, follow your editor Tom Dunmore @pitchinvasion on Twitter.

The spotlight was far brighter on the previous Gold Cup finals held just two years ago in this city. Most countries sent their ‘A’ squads: the U.S. rightly prioritised their own confederation’s contest over the Copa America they would participate in shortly after, probably because a spot in the Confederations Cup was the carrot for the winning team. Holding the semi-finals and final in Chicago at Soldier Field allowed the buzz to envelope the soccer-loving community in the city, and the final itself was a classic: a capacity 60,000 crowd at Soldier Field saw the U.S. defeat Mexico on a beautiful sunny day before a crowd clearly partisan for El Tricolor.

Gold Cup Final 2007, Soldier Field, Chicago

That buzz isn’t quite the same this year in Chicago, even though I’m looking forward to tonight. What’s different?

For a start, it seems awfully soon for the same semi-finals of the same international tournament to played in the same city (though the final will this year be held in New Jersey).  There’s a strong argument to be made that the Gold Cup ought to be held only every four years instead of biennially. This would ensure a great prize — qualification to represent CONCACAF at the Confederations Cup (now held only every four years) — is available every time (the US certainly took advantage of their opportunity in South Africa).

Such a change would of course give the tournament greater scarcity value. And it would also make it easier for MLS to do what it really should do during these important national team tournaments — stop domestic club play (even if only for the weekend of the final) to focus attention on the Gold Cup.

Indeed, in the 1970s and 1980s, the CONCACAF championship was held only every four years — and the prize was even greater than qualification for the Confederations Cup. At stake was CONCACAF’s sole berth in the World Cup finals. No fewer than six different countries won the tournament out of the ten tournaments held between 1963 and 1989 in eight different countries.

Mexico and U.S. fans at the 2007 Gold Cup Final in Chicago

But in 1991 CONCACAF decided their regional tournament needed a rebranding, renaming it the Gold Cup and holding it roughly every two years since, with World Cup qualification no longer the prize. It has been hosted in the US every time (Mexico were co-hosts in 1993 and 2003), presumably because of the facilities available and the crowds that can be attracted across the country with such considerable immigrant populations from so many CONCACAF nations. Tonight’s semi-finals will surely feature more fans of Costa Rica, Mexico and Honduras than the Stars and Stripes.

The expansion of the tournament to twelve teams means it’s probable only Mexico could also even conceivably host the tournament logistically now, and the financial incentive for packed stadiums every two years in the US is likely to ensure the same set-up continues for some time, at least as long as CONCACAF is run by Jack Warner.

Something has probably been lost from the days when Haiti could host the CONCACAF championship in 1973 and surprise the world by winning it and heading to West Germany for the World Cup finals the next year. The hegemony of the US and Mexico has been broken only once in Gold Cup history, with Canada’s victory the lone non US or Mexican win (both countries have won it four times).

The Gold Cup has been a financial success since its inception, but it probably needs a few more upsets and little more scarcity value to ensure the kind of buzz we saw two years ago in Chicago is replicated every time.

The players of both teams, as well as the referees, ran toward the field entrance located behind one of the goals — in the section where the disturbances are taking place. They’re running under heavy guard by the riot cops.

As I was writing that previous sentence, another unit of riot police charged through the section where most of the disturbances were taking place, and they seem to have taken control. You can see images of injured police officers being carried away, and of innocent fans, many holding small children, looking on in amazement and horror.

The situation seems to be out of control. I’m listening to the Spanish-language commentator on Gol TV right now (it’s the Costa Rican feed actually), and it seems that Alajuelense’s barras only arrived at the match during the second half, and they devoted their time to making chants and threats against the directors of the club.

Video of the game is below; the crowd trouble is shown from 7:00 into the video onwards.

The events proved devastating for Alajuelense. Manager Carlos Restrepo and General Manage Francisco Aguilar both resigned, the club were fined US$10,000, their stadium was banned from hosting international games for six months, and Municipal were awarded a 3-0 victory.