【Native Speaker每日综合训练—37系列】【37-18】经管 World Cup

小蘑菇开始打怪

内容:小蘑菇开始打怪  编辑：小蘑菇开始打怪

Official Weibo, here ---> http://weibo.com/u/3476904471

写在前面：
给大家讲一个鬼故事，考试周来了...
今天，其实本来想找一些关于战略和模型的文章，毕竟和课程相关啊，但是看到obstacle那篇讲世界杯经济的所以就...反正战略什么的大家也都不喜看（我也不爱看...）
Speaker：听力不难，PPT非常可爱！
Speed：第一篇关于FIFA的结构和管理。第二篇貌似有点儿文史哲的意思？巴西的主场优势。不懂足球也不知道这届谁会赢。。
Obstacle：巴西可以从世界杯中获得的经济利益嘛？办世界杯到底值不值？

Enjoy reading~~

Part I: Speaker

8 Secrets of Success



http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_st_john_s_8_secrets_of_success

Source: TED

[Rephrase 1, 04:16]

小蘑菇开始打怪

Part II: Speed

Beautiful game, dirty business
Jun 7th 2014 | From the print edition


[Time 2]
THE mesmerising wizardry of Lionel Messi and the muscular grace of Cristiano Ronaldo are joys to behold. But for deep-dyed internationalists like this newspaper, the game’s true beauty lies in its long reach, from east to west and north to south. Football, more than any other sport, has thrived on globalization. Nearly half of humanity will watch at least part of the World Cup, which kicks off in Brazil on June 12th.

So it is sad that the tournament begins under a cloud as big as the Maracanã stadium. Documents obtained by Britain’s Sunday Times have allegedly revealed secret payments that helped Qatar win the hosting rights to the World Cup in 2022 (see article). If that competition was fixed, it has company. A report by FIFA, football’s governing body, is said to have found that several exhibition matches were rigged ahead of the World Cup in 2010. And as usual, no one has been punished.

This only prompts other questions. Why on earth did anyone think holding the World Cup in the middle of the Arabian summer was a good idea? Why is football so far behind other sports like rugby, cricket and tennis in using technology to double-check refereeing decisions? And why is the world’s greatest game led by such a group of mediocrities, notably Sepp Blatter, FIFA’s boss since 1998? In any other organization, the endless financial scandals would have led to his ouster years ago. But more than that, he seems hopelessly out of date; from sexist remarks about women to interrupting a minute’s silence for Nelson Mandela after only 11 seconds, the 78-year-old is the sort of dinosaur that left corporate boardrooms in the 1970s. Nor is it exactly heartening that the attempts to stop Mr Blatter enjoying a fifth term are being led by Michel Platini, Europe’s leading soccercrat, who was once a wonderful midfielder but played a woeful role in supporting the Qatar bid.
[218 words]

[Time 3]
Our cheating rotten scoundrels are better than yours

Many football fans are indifferent to all this. What matters to them is the beautiful game, not the tired old suits who run it. And FIFA’s moral turpitude is hardly unique. The International Olympic Committee, after all, faced a Qatar-like scandal over the awarding of the winter games in 2002 (though it has made a much bigger attempt to clean itself up). The boss of Formula One, Bernie Ecclestone, stands accused of bribery in Germany, while American basketball has just had to sack an owner for racist remarks. Cricket, the second-most-global sport, has had its own match-fixing scandals. American football could be overwhelmed by compensation claims for injuries.
But football fans are wrong to think there is no cost to all this. First, corruption and complacency at the top makes it harder to fight skulduggery on the pitch. Ever larger amounts of money are now being bet on each game—it may be $1 billion a match at the World Cup. Under external pressure to reform, FIFA has recently brought in some good people, including a respected ethics tsar, Mark Pieth. But who will listen to lectures about reform from an outfit whose public face is Mr Blatter?

Second, big-time corruption isn’t victimless; nor does it end when a host country is chosen. For shady regimes—the type that bribe football officials—a major sporting event is also a chance to defraud state coffers, for example by awarding fat contracts to cronies. Tournaments that ought to be national celebrations risk becoming festivals of graft.

Finally, there is a great opportunity cost. Football is not as global as it might be (see article). The game has failed to conquer the world’s three biggest countries: China, India and America. In the United States soccer, as they call it, is played but not watched. In China and India the opposite is true. The latter two will not be playing in Brazil (indeed, they have played in the World Cup finals just once between them).

In FIFA’s defence, the big three’s reticence owes much to their respective histories and cultures and the strength of existing sports, notably cricket in India. And football is slowly gaining ground: in the United States the first cohort of American parents to grow up with the game are now passing it on to their children. But that only underlines the madness of FIFA giving the cup to Qatar, not America. And the foul air from FIFA’s headquarters in Switzerland will hardly reassure young fans in China who are heartily sick of the corruption and match-fixing in their domestic soccer leagues.
[385 words]

[Time 4]
A Seppless world
It would be good to get rid of Mr Blatter, but that would not solve FIFA’s structural problem. Though legally incorporated as a Swiss non-profit organization, FIFA has no master. Those who might hold it to account, such as national or regional football organizations, depend on its cash. High barriers to entry make it unlikely that a rival will emerge, so FIFA has a natural monopoly over international football. An entity like this should be regulated, but FIFA answers to no government.

All the same, more could be done. The Swiss should demand a clean-up or withdraw FIFA’s favorable tax status. Sponsors should also weigh in on graft and on the need to push forward with new technology: an immediate video review of every penalty and goal awarded would be a start.

The hardest bit of the puzzle is the host-selection process. One option would be to stick the World Cup in one country and leave it there; but that nation’s home team would have a big advantage, and tournaments benefit from moving between different time zones. An economically rational option would be to give this year’s winner, and each successive champion, the option of either hosting the tournament in eight years’ time or auctioning off that right to the highest bidder. That would favor football’s powerhouses. But as most of them already have the stadiums, there would be less waste—and it would provide even more of an incentive to win.

Sadly, soccer fans are romantic nationalists, not logical economists—so our proposal stands less chance of winning than England does. One small step towards sanity would be formally to rotate the tournament, so it went, say, from Europe to Africa to Asia to the Americas, which would at least stop intercontinental corruption. But very little of this will happen without change at the top in Zurich.
[311 words]


Source: Economist
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21603433-football-great-sport-it-could-be-so-much-better-if-it-were-run-honestly-beautiful-game

Brazil's home advantage in the World Cup
Jun 11th 2014, 23:50 by A.A.P.

[Time 5]
IN 2010 700m people huddled together in front of their television sets to watch the World Cup final between the Netherlands and Spain. Even more are expected to tune in to this year's contest, which kicks off on June 12th with a match between Brazil and Croatia in São Paulo. Brazil are the runaway favorites to win the tournament, with bookmakers offering odds of less than three to one on the home team lifting the trophy. The Economist's ownfaintly dubious analysis gives Brazil by far the best chance of winning. Many pundits agree that the country will benefit from a strong home advantage, as local crowds roar on theSeleção. How much does playing on home turf really affect a team's performance?

Armchair analysts and sports scientists have come up with all sorts of theories to explain why playing at home helps. In 2007 a study investigated the influence of crowd noise on referees in the English football Premier League. It showed that some were more likely to flash yellow cards and award penalties against touring players than the hosts, because they relied on the split-second rise in the home crowd's roar as a cue to determine if a tackle deserved punishment. In the most recent season of the Spanish football Liga, two-thirds of all penalty kicks were awarded to the home team. Biased referees are not the only worry for visiting teams. Hectic travel schedules can tire them out and unfamiliar conditions can spook them. Foreign teams sometimes struggle against Bolivia at its Hernando Siles stadium, which lies at a headache-inducing altitude of 3,636 metres (11,932 feet). A bit of gamesmanship also comes in handy. One successful London football club reputedly offers a cramped away-team dressing room with low kit-lockers and high shirt-hangers.
[293 words]


[Time 6]
Do these factors really make a difference? The numbers suggest that they do. In the latest English football season, the top 20 clubs enjoyed a home success rate of 50%, while their victory rate on the road was 32%. In 12 of the past 19 World Cups the host nation has made it to the semi-finals and six times it has gone on to win. The effect can be seen in other sports too. Before the start of the London Olympics in 2012, UK Sport, a government agency, pored over the results of more than 100 big tournaments across 14 Olympic sports and predicted that the London home advantage would boost Britain's medal haul by as much as 25%. As it turned out, Britain bettered its 2008 performance by winning 18 more medals (10 of them gold), an improvement of 38%. At the Beijing games, China won 59% more medals than it had done at the 2004 Athens games. Russia topped the medal table in Sochi; in the previous winter Olympics it had come sixth.

Given these numbers, it is not surprising that teams have poured money into maximizing their home advantage. The Beaver stadium at Pennsylvania State University, for example, was acoustically tweaked to amplify noise levels during the college American-football matches that take place there. (A study from 2009 found that American-football crowds maintain a quiet hum of 75-80 decibels during "home plays", but blare at 110-115 decibels when a visiting team has the ball, impairing the quarterback’s range of communication.) Brazil has spent a fortune on a lavish, if somewhat leisurely, programme of stadium construction and renovation. In all its home advantage is worth the equivalent of a 0.6-goal head start in every match, according to Goldman Sachs, an investment bank. Like most others, Goldman predicts that Brazil will triumph this year. Other countries' fans will have to hope for a miracle—and perhaps bid to stage the Cup on their own home turf next time.
[328 words]


Source: Economist
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/06/economist-explains-6

小蘑菇开始打怪

Part III: Obstacle

Who are the real winners and losers of the 2014 World Cup?
By Eoghan Macguire and Sofia Fernandes June 11, 2014

[Paraphrase 7]
(CNN) -- When Maria Elza de Fatima learned the World Cup was coming to Brazil in 2014, she thought the good times were soon to return.

Once the owner of a busy clothing stall, the 59-year-old Sao Paulo resident had scraped around for work since her license expired and wasn't renewed by city authorities.

But now the World Cup was coming to her home town -- along with many thousands of fans, visitors and tourists -- opportunities would abound, wouldn't they? It hasn't quite turned out that way.

De Fatima may be one of the lucky ones who has been able to secure an official World Cup job but what she can do and where she can work is limited.

Alongside roughly 600 others, she has been given permission to sell ice packs and soft drinks outside the Sao Paulo stadium.

Onlyofficial FIFA partners are allowed to hock their wares here and within the arena. De Fatima is all too aware that many others haven't been so fortunate.


She recalls the days when as many 22,000 stall-owners plied their trade on Sao Paulo's streets. A mere 600 jobs (although there are also temporary roles in other areas) isn't nearly enough for them, she laments.

"This World Cup is not for the Brazilians," de Fatima replies when asked whether Sao Paulo has experienced the boon she expected. "It is for the foreigners and FIFA friends."

Nationwide protests
De Fatima isn't the only disillusioned Brazilian.

A recent poll by the Pew Research Center found that 61% of respondents felt hosting the World Cup would be a bad thing for their country.

According to Marina Mattar of the Sao Paulo Popular Committee of the World Cup, an umbrella organization for disparate protest groups in the city, the tournament will bring a lot of money into Brazil, but mainly to a well-connected few.

"The World Cup is bringing benefits to Brazil but it's to the economic and political elites -- not to street vendors, not to small companies, entrepreneurs and not to workers in general," she said.

Key to this debate are the spiraling costs of building new stadia across the country to host matches during the World Cup.

Promotional literature released by the Brazilian government puts expenditure in terms of funds, loans and credit lines from the public purse for stadium projects at at $3.5 billion.

But a recent audit suggests the price has escalated to $4.2 billion.

"The stadiums are not being built for ordinary people because the price of the tickets is very high and many people will not be able to go watch football any more.

"Instead, the stadiums are in a way very good for big engineering companies to make money," Mattar said.

People have also been evicted from their homes to make way for projects relating to the World Cup and there has been the "pacification" of favelas, which has seen police forcibly occupy some of the poorer neighborhoods in the city, she added.

Such concerns are far from exclusive to Sao Paulo.

All across Brazil, street protests have raged in the last year while popular committee groups have also sprung up in Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte and beyond.

A multitude of grievances, not all directly related to the world Cup, have driven this discontent -- including rising transport prices, higher living costs, housing concerns and accusations of police brutality.

Fairness and equality are at the heart of these concerns.

While Brazil has grown rapidly since the turn of the century, creating a new middle class, inequality remains high and some fear the very poorest are being left behind.

According to the CIA World Facebook, Brazil ranks 17th out of 140 countries in terms of the highest levels of income disparity.

Protesters are asking why an emerging nation is spending billions on hosting a football tournament when that money could be better directed towards alleviating poverty.

"It is unacceptable to build a mega event that will provide high profits to FIFA ... while there are serious problems of social inequality in the country," said Jean Marcelo, an activist with the student protest group Domino Publico.

"The World Cup reaffirms an existing logic that rules the Brazilian government. It's a logic benefiting big businesses and a small elite who occupy the top of the social pyramid," he added.

But with new roads, airports and stadiums being built, all of which have brought jobs and improvements to the country's infrastructure, there are many who say the initial outlay, however eye-watering, will be worth it in the long term.

The Brazilian government estimates that 710,000 temporary and permanent jobs will be created during the tournament while fan spending alone is expected to total $13 billion.

On top of that, many Brazilian cities see the exposure they will gain hosting matches as an opportunity to position themselves as attractive destinations to potential investors and tourists now and in the future.

A World Cup for all?
"There has been significant investment in urban mobility projects, in airport modernization projects, in port modernization projects, telecommunications infrastructure and security infrastructure," Brazil's deputy sports minister Luis Fernandes told CNN.

"You have to remember that Brazil is still a developing nation... as well as providing jobs for hundreds of thousands of Brazilians, these investments will benefit people in terms of the services provided," he added.

"The fans who come to the World Cup won't be taking back with them the new urban transport solutions or airport extensions," Fernandes said.

Paulo Esteves, general supervisor at Rio de Janeiro-based think-tank, the BRICS Policy Center, agrees with this viewpoint.

"In a way, what we are seeing are investments that otherwise do not take place," he said. "The World Cup has been a kind of catalyst for this."

"The government did not take money from health or transportation to invest in stadiums. Investments in public health and transportation will go on and on."

Esteves is quick to add, however, that this doesn't mean public grievances are without merit, and believes the World Cup has created a platform for groups and people dissatisfied with how Brazil is developing as to unite and make their voices heard.

In recent weeks teachers, metro workers and bus drivers have gone on strike demanding better pay and conditions. Others have taken to the streets to campaign for better housing.

Rather than highlighting the negatives of hosting a football tournament, these protests "are really talking about the other side of economic modernization in Brazil," Esteves said.

"The World Cup is not a target per se but it is an opportunity to vocalize and make stronger ... claims for strengthening the process around political and social inclusion."

However, Mattar and others in protest movements maintain their opposition to the World Cup is based on principled rejection of spending decisions tied to what they regard as an elitist, closed event.

Yet, with billions of dollars already spent and the tournament about to start, they are realistic about what opposition can now achieve.
Still, Mattar hopes the anger felt by many Brazilians will reach the watching world and provide lessons for future hosts of big sporting events, including the next two World Cup host countries.

"We hope our legacy will be to show to people in Russia, Qatar and maybe in other places that these events and the way they are organized (make it) impossible they will bring any benefits," Mattar said.
[1269 words]


Source: CNN
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/11/sport/football/brazil-world-cup-benefits/index.html?hpt=ibu_c1

小蘑菇开始打怪

沙发一定要自己坐~~顺便带作业

speaker:

8 secrets to achieve success

passion, hard work, good, focus, push, serve, ideas, persist,

time2:

the game has thrived on globalization

the secret payments

why football are controlled by FIFA unlike other sports

time3:

the scandal in other sports

three places in the world which do not have big interest in football

time4:

the problem of FIFA’s structure

the corruption problem may not be solved sine most soccer fans are not logical economists

time5:

many people believe brazil will win this time for they have home advantages

some home helps, the audience and the climate

time6:

evidences make the guess more convincing

brazil will benefit in its economy

time7:

the world cup will be a good time for brazil to return

but the reality is that there is not enough jobs and the world cup is actually for the foreigners and FIFA friends

some people and organization think hosting the world cup would be a bad thing for the country

only a small amount of people will benefit

why the country spend money on this game other than invest in more valuable ways

some long-term advantages

the investment in public health and transportation will go on and on

行者无疆945

每次到小蘑菇当楼主的时候我都能占到前排~好默契啊！但是每次小蘑菇都是“自沙”....好忧桑啊...............

Time 2-4
Football, more than any other sport, has thriveed on globalization.
Since the potential structural problems in FIFA, the  football's governing body, the touranament begins under a cloud.
The most serious one is the secret payments that hepled Qatar win the hosting rights to the World Cup in 2022.
Although many kinds of sports have their own scandals, but football seems to have the most cost.
First, corruption and complacency at the top makes it harder to fight skulduggery on the pitch.
Now large amount of money are being bet on each game.
Second, the big-time corruption can cause damage to the game itself not only just in the process of choosing the host country.
Finally, a great opportunity cost since the game has failed to conquer the world's three biggest countries: China, India and America.
Since it's a structual problem, just getting rid of Mr Blatter can't solve the problem.
We should do according to the following steps:
1 push forward new technology
2 redesign the host-selection process
3 rotate the tournament all over the world to stop intercontinental corruption.

Time 5--6
Does home advantage really improve a team's performance?
The author gives three factors about that question:
1 biased referees
2 hectic travel schedules
3 gamesmanship
Then the data verified the positive affects of home advantage to their team.
Now it's no wonder that the teams today would pour plenty of money into maximizing their home advantage.
Based on this theory, a lot of people predict that Brazil will triumph this year.

掌管 6        00:05:11.78        00:16:32.39
掌管 5        00:01:51.23        00:11:20.61
掌管 4        00:02:14.77        00:09:29.37
掌管 3        00:02:09.17        00:07:14.60
掌管 2        00:02:55.03        00:05:05.42
掌管 1        00:02:10.38        00:02:10.38
.

疏离无罪

占~~~~~~自沙是优良传统~~

Speaker: 8 things lead to success:1 passion do sth for love 2 hardworking 3 do things damn god 4 focus yourself on things 5 push yourself and push away bad emotions 6 server other sth valuable 7 a good idea 8 persist doing sth even if you fail

01:56
Football is really a good game,but the FIFA is a dirty and controversial organization.It has many problems to be blamed.And the recent thing is the Qatar.

02:47
The problem in FIFA is not unique.Other sports organizations have similar problems.But the corruption and complacency of FIFA cost football a lot.

02:03
Getting rid of Mr Blatter will be a good choice,but it can not solve the problem.The problem of FIFA is structural. FIFA has a natural monopoly over international football.It needs to be regulated.

01:54
As the host of this year's word cup,Brazil has home advantages.One of the advantages is home crowd's roar.

01:36
Data shows that these factors really matters.And home advatages also have effects on other games such as Olympics.

07:35
Main Idea: Who really benefit from World Cup
Local residents think that the World Cup can improve their business.But acutally only FIFA partners can sell goods around the stadiums.Some residents said that this World Cup is not for the Brazilians but for the foreigners and FIFA friends.World Cup will bring benefit to economic and political elite,not to stree rendors and small businesses.
Brazil government spent 4.2 billion dollars on building stadiums for world cup.But brazilans can not afford to enter these stadium because of the expensive ticket.And strees protests have never stopped after Brazil won the host.A multitude of grievance,not all about world cup,have driven this discontent.People asked for fariness and equality.These are main problems in Brazil.People wanted to know why the government spent money on building stadiums rather than on education.
World Cup just provided a platfrom for people to speak out their appeal,not a target.In some way,World Cup really will bring some long-term benefits to Brazil.

psychoarya

［speaker］

eight things lead to success:

passion

work

focus

good: put your nose down and be damn good at something

push: push yourself; pushed by your mother

serve: you gotta serve someone and exchange for money

IDEAS: listen; observe; be curious; ask questions;problem solve; make connections

Persist: persist your failures and persist your CRAP:criticism; rejection; assholes; pressure

[speed]

2:17

before the world up, in 2010, several exhibition matcheswere rigged, and no one was punished for this.

Several questions about World Cup and football.

1:42

corruption is a serious problem in football field. Likeother international committees, FIFA also has moral problems.

First, corruption and complacency make it hard to fightfraud.

Second, wherever a match is held, there is a great chanceto bribe the referees or national officers.

Finally, football has not conquered China, America andIndia.

1:46

it is good for FIFA that Mr Blatter has left. But it isstill hard to reform FIFA’s structural problem.

FIFA needs to be regulated by one country or a union. Butit now answers to no government. The author says it is better to authorize theright to hold the gagme to the highest bidder or the successive winner in eightyears.

1:55

Spain is nearly a standing winner in World Cup. There aretwo main reasons: first the there are more penalties against visiting teamsthan home team. Second hectic schedules can tire visiting teams out and newcircumstances can spook them. For instance, a famous football club in Londonoffers cramped dressing room with high shirt-hangers and low kit-lockers.

1:42

Such factor mentioned above do make a difference. Thenumbers suggested that the chance for host country to win the game is 50%, andthe chance for them to win games on road is 32%. Several examples are presentedto show the difference.

For instance, when visiting teams play games in America,people will make more noises. For that, Spain has invested a lavish amount ofmoney to construct their stadiums, and they are expected to be the winner thisyear.

[obstacle]

7:27

main point: does World Cup really benefit the hostcountry?

A Brazilian woman says the stores in stadium are only forFIFA people not for them. Only 600 people are allowed to sell things outsidethe stadium. Therefore, it seems that World Cup is not for Brazilians but forelites at the top of the society.

A lot of people protest holding World up on the street. Brazilhas high level of income disparity. People are wondering that why the countryinvest hundreds of thousands of money in holding the match rather than in narrowingthe disparity. There are other concern such as police brutality and themovement of some houses.

However, the renovation of airports and otherinfrastructures create a lot of temporary and permanent jobs for Brazilians.

wnj2611339

----Speaker
Through 7 years' 500 interviews, the author concluded 8 factors that lead to success. Such factors are:
Passion-  do it for love, not for money,
Work- work hard and enjoy your work,
Good-be very good at something, and to be good, you need practice,
Focus-focus yourself on one thing,
Push-push yourself through shyness and self-doubt,
Serve-serve others something of value,
Ideas-how to create ideas? Listen, observe, be curious, ask questions, problem solve, and make connections,
Persist-persist through failure and CRAP.

----Speed
[Time 2] 2'04''
The popularity of football
Documents show that Qatar wins the holding rights of 2020 World Cup through secret payment. Therefore, such fact raises more doubts.
[Time 3] 2'12''
Football fans only care about the game itself, rather than the inside story of the game.
However, it is wrong to think that such black curtain matters little for three reasons:
1. the difficulty to fight against the  skulduggery in the game; (skulduggery:作假）
2. the harm to others; (victimless: 不侵害他人的)
3. huge opportunity cost of the game.
[Time 4] 1'30''
FIFA has no master, and People who have money control it. FIFA answers to no government  (hold ... to account: 对...负责)
Suggestions on how to regulate FIFA, especially the host-selection process; however, recommendation of rotating the tournament may hardly come true.
[Time 5] 2'09''
Question: in football, whether country will benefit home advantage?
Explanations: hosts are less likely to get yellow cards and awards penalties than touring players, and they got a bit gamesmanship. （gamesmanship: 制胜绝招）
[Time 6] 1'08''
Data shows that the above factors do make a difference; therefore, it is not surprising that countries will invest huge amounts of money to maximize their home advantages.

----Obstacles 6'54''
Most respondents of a recent poll felt that hosting the World Cup is a bad thing for their country, because its benefit only limited to the economic and political elites, not to the general citizens. It really costs the country too much to build new stadia, and such stadiums are not built for ordinary people. Issues such as increasing costs of houses and transportations, and social inequality are raised too.
However, hosting such event have brought jobs and improvements to the country's infrastructure, and will attract potential investors and tourists now and in the future.
The author looked at the hosting issue in a critical way. Even though, hosting World Cup brings investments for Brazil, the author thought that the World Cup gave the public a platform to vocalize their opinion. And Mattar hoped that Brazilians' anger would teach a lesson to future hosting countries.

Talitha

2:2'45
World Cup has gone global. Half of the population watch some part of the game. However, many dirty business is under the game.

3:3:35
football corruption is not the only corruption. Great opportunity cost relates to football. Football is not popular in the three major countries, China, India and America.

4:2‘11
get rid of Mr B will not solve the corruption problem of World Cup. WC is a monopoly business, no rivals are able to enter the industry.author suggests to rotate the location of WC to prevent the corruption but still hopeless.

5:2
team play at home country has higher opportunity to win. judges are bias as they give more yellow cards and penalty due to the roaring of the crowd.

6:1:40
noise factors does affect the result of the tournament. author gives different numbers to prove his point.

houfei0713

交作业咯~辛苦楼主：）
Speaker:
The speaker concluded eight secrets——passion, work, practise, focus, push, serve, idea and persist——to success.

Time2: 2'02'' 108w/m
The football game is beautiful but the shady business is ugly. The decision that the host of 2022 World Cup was Qatar is made in a dark way, a scandal with nobody punished. There are quite a lot of doubts in football field, however no one could explain.

Time3: 2'42'' 143w/m
The scandals caused by FIFA are one by one. Nevertheless, fans don't expect the serious consequences. First...second...finally, there is a great opportunity cost. The football fails to conquer China, India and USA.

Time4: 2'06'' 148w/m
That the FIFA is unregulated causes its corruption. Measures should be done to improve the situation. The host-election process, which is the hardest problem to solve, should be modified and developed.

Time5: 2'01'' 146w/m
The host team has better chance to win: First, the referee is under great pressure from the crowd; Second, the environment of the stadium of the host is somewhat hard to the guest team.

Time6: 2'02'' 161w/m
Being the host of sport matches will dramatically increase a team's performance. Much money is invested to maximize the host effect, and many measures are carried out either. Goldman gives a predict that Brazil will win the triumph.

Obstacle: 8'00'' 158w/m
Many Brazilians argue that the host of World Cup won't benefit the local normal people. The host gives a chance for Brazilians to express their dissatisfactions for the social inequality in this country. Though preparation for the tournament bring lots of job positions and several business chances, the Brazilians still hope that the government pay more attention to people's life and that their actions warn others countries.