"Hosting major sporting events create more problems than benefits." Do you agree

With the recent upcoming of prestigious sports events, such as the World Cup, Asian Games, and the Olympics, one may easily notice news reports on what host countries do in order to prepare for these events. Often or not, to some people, hosting of such events may be equivalent to digging one’s own graves by creating more problems than benefits. My stand to the statement “Hosting major sporting events create more problems than benefits” is that I disagree with it to a certain extent. Indeed there are problems, but they do not undermine the benefits provided in some areas, as listed in the essay. In other instances, the whole case may prove otherwise.

By hosting major sporting events, one benefit that may arise for the host country is the economic boost. Indeed, some critics may have argued that large amount of money has to be spent before and during the hosting, for areas like construction of new stadiums and improvement of services etcetera, which in the profits gained may not be worth it. For example, China spent billions on renovating historical sites to prepare for the influx of visitors during the 2008 Olympics. However, from another perspective, in a long run, such a “problem” may become a benefit instead. This will attract more tourists, in turning boosting the tourism sector and the country’s economy. Rebuilding and renovation of tourist haunts signifies a better service and place for these tourists. Even though the sporting event may be over, there is no reason why tourists will not visit the host country anymore. The influx of tourists will still continue, and may even increase because of the sacrifices made by the host country. Hence, from an economic viewpoint, hosting major sporting events does not create more problems than benefits.

On a national level, hosting sporting events does not create more problems than benefits. As a country which gets to host prestigious international sporting events, it can be regarded as an honour. This is because one has to undergo strict selection in order to clinch such a deal. For example, countries which wish to host the Summer Olympic Games or the Winter Olympic Games must bid for the organisation with the (International Olympics committee) IOC, which has the ultimate authority of deciding where the Games will take place. IOC members will vote for the most suitable host country. By clinching the deal, this proves that the host country has the capability to organise such events. This boosts the morale of the country, and national pride is upheld. Hence from a national level, hosting major sporting events does not create more problems than benefits.

However, hosting of sporting events may have its fair share of problems, which is more than the benefits gained. This can be seen from the social perspective. There are instances where tourists made a din out of their country’s loss in sports matches, for example, wrecking public utilities in host countries. As a result, money has to be spent to employ the police to deter such incidents from occurring. Money spent here could have been wisely spent on other crucial aspects, such as education and defence. During the 2006 World Cup, Germany spent millions of Euros to employ 100.000 police officers to be stationed countrywide, to prevent unnecessary riots caused by England fans, probably well-known for being notorious “havoc-creators” for some. In this case, the given statement is true to a large extent.

From the environmental viewpoint, the statement may be seen as true to a large extent. Often in typical scenarios, after the ending of any sporting events, it is not difficult to spot litter left behind by inconsiderate tourists who finished watching matches, not only inside and outside stadiums, but also along the streets. As a result, cleaners have to be hired to clear the mess, which requires a considerable amount of money. Again, this further supports the stand of the given statement.

In conclusion, hosting major sporting events can be seen as a privilege. This is because such a chance is rare to come by, and one must have its capability recognised by other nations in order to clinch the once-in-a-blue-moon deal. For any major events, there are always bound to have problems and benefits. On closer scrutiny, it is noted that the given statement may not hold true for all aspects, hence it can only be agreeable to a certain extent. All in all, what matters most is that the hosting countries are willing to bear the consequences and enjoy the fruits of labour at the same time, without any regrets. To hosting countries, such an experience certainly proves to be rewarding, as there are always lessons to learn from.