Is South Africa a turning point for world football?

Are we seeing the worst World Cup ever? Or perhaps best one sounds more like it? What else explains the inclusion of Japan, the United States and South Korea in the last 16? The on-going tournament is a let-down for many, but much of that may have something to do with them rooting for the wrong team. Perhaps the frustration has been vented wrongly toward vuvuzela and the Jabulani soccer ball, and the best measurement of success or failure of this World Cup is not the sombre mood in Paris but in the streets of Seoul flooded with a million celebrators in red.

France, Italy and occasionally even Brazil and Spain have been made to look ordinary by lesser teams. Switzerland put one past Spain and held on unbelievingly to win. North Korea scored one against Brazil and valiantly lost 1-2. The United States, despite the contained passion of their fans, have been World Cup's unlikely heroes so far. While bigger teams whined about "unfair" refereeing decisions, the US players endured one bad call and bad luck after another, having two good goals disallowed in two crucial games, kept their heads up and proceeded to qualify for the knock-out stage.

One, two, or even three big upsets in a major soccer tournament may qualify as a fluke. But in this World Cup we've never known what's going to happen after the kick-off. Fewer matches have ended as expected than ones that have raised eyebrows worldwide.

Were referees bad? Yes, and there is no surprise there, given Fifa's stubborn refusal to use technology to aid life-or-death decisions. But most of the time it was the small teams that were on the wrong end of bad calls. Was Jabulani a bad model? Possible, but everyone has been playing the same ball so there shouldn't be any complaint there. The same goes for the nerve-stretching effects of vuvuzela, but, again, the noise does not exempt anyone. It has been an equal playing field no matter what.

 Imagine you are fans of Switzerland, Japan, South Korea or the United States. This must be anything but a bad World Cup. Of course fans of France or Italy must be feeling differently, but the reason why is probably the enhanced quality of football outside the conventional "superpower" territory of the sport. The "boring" play by England against the USA or Algeria may have to do with the latters' ability to blunt the former's star-studded attack.

Seeing Brazil's Ricardo Kaka and Argentina's Lionel Messi play and we can't say soccer is regressing. But qualities sometimes cancel each other out, meaning a boring game doesn't necessarily represent two bad sides. Clashing qualities sometimes frustrate the viewers because attacks are pre-empted, goals do not flow and players are forced to be cautious, knowing what damage their opponents can do to them. What we are seeing in South Africa may be soccer in a state of major transformation. The most stunning free-kick so far was produced by Japan while the most dramatic moment belonged to the never-say-die US team for its last-gasp goal against Algeria that earned the Americans an unthinkable qualification.

This World Cup may still produce a traditional winner. Either Germany, or Argentina, or Brazil may yet go on to clinch the prestigious trophy, but standing in their way include quite a few unfamiliar names from unfamiliar places. Soccer has been immensely popular despite its predictability. Unchallenged supremacy has been there so long it is, ironically, part of the charm. Now, let's add some elements of surprise and see how it goes. Soccer probably doesn't need more fans; it needs more of the Australian, South Korean, Japanese players and the likes who have made this World Cup the most intriguing one in a long time.