Protests ahead of the World Cup, which starts tomorrow, have shaken the perception of a football-crazy Brazil. But the fallout is the result of a society where football is no longer an antidote as Kurt Sansone finds out.

Alcohol was once banned in Brazilian stadiums but the law had to change because of the World Cup. The rule change was forced onto the host country by Fifa, the world football governing body, because brewer Budweiser is a World Cup sponsor.

Football fans in stadia hosting World Cup matches will be able to guzzle thousands of litres of cold beer but Fifa’s imposition has not gone down too well among some Brazilians, according to Fr Ġwann Xerri.

Fr Xerri, a Dominican missionary in Brazil, says Fifa’s overbearing presence and the fact that it stands to make millions from the World Cup is just one of many issues that have fuelled protests ahead of the tournament.

People are critical of the corruption they see, the high transport prices and what they believe is Fifa’s arrogance

From the very start there were those who believed the World Cup would be a blessing for the construction companies that would delay infrastructural projects to continue siphoning off public funds, he adds.

But despite the widespread protests, Fr Xerri does not believe the Brazilian government, led by Dilma Rousseff, is in crisis. He expects her to be re-elected later this year when the presidential election is due, even if she may be forced into a run-off.

Ms Rousseff heads the third successive leftist administration – the first two were headed by Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva – in what is widely acknowledged as a decade of prosperity that has pulled many out of poverty.

And while the social unrest has left many across the world baffled at how a football-loving nation could tarnish the world’s foremost tournament, Fr Xerri is not surprised.

“In many ways what we are witnessing today is the success of the social change of the past decade because people are more educated, able to think critically and football is no longer the antidote it may have been in the past,” he says.

People are critical of the corruption they see, the high transport prices and what they believe is Fifa’s arrogance, he adds.

The picture he paints is of a complex society where not everybody loves football and where probably millions will still celebrate if Brazil wins.

But, as with every World Cup, questions are often raised about the lasting impact of such tournaments on the lives of ordinary people in the host country.

The jury is still out on whether the World Cup in South Africa four years ago left a positive legacy but when economist Karm Farrugia last visited relatives there, it only took him 20 minutes to reach Johannesburg centre from the airport. He rode the Gautrain, Africa’s first high speed train, a legacy of the World Cup.

“South Africa is only now reaping the benefits of its investment in the World Cup and many South Africans who had objected to the money spent at the time now argue it was a blessing in disguise,” Mr Farrugia says.

South Africa spent almost €2.2 billion to upgrade stadiums, improve transport links and refurbish airports.

Mr Farrugia believes hosting a tournament like the World Cup is economically worthwhile but he argues the large investment has to be managed “wisely” because it could easily go astray. “Brazil could have done better in the way the organisation was handled but what is happening now risks compromising the country’s good reputation,” he says.

An immediate impact of the tournament is the revenue generated by supporters and tourists who travel to the country to watch the games. Mr Farrugia says these are likely to be well-off visitors.

And if the country leaves a positive impression, the legacy on tourism may well live beyond the month-long tournament, he adds.

But not everyone shares this positive outlook.

Emren John Vella, who researched football economics as part of his studies at the University of Malta’s Islands and Small States Institute, insists the economic benefits of the South Africa World Cup failed to live ­­­­up to the propaganda.

He says it is complicated to establish just how advantageous major sporting events are on local economies but notes a key component is the ability to attract tourists from other countries.

“It is estimated that the 2010 host nation attracted about 220,000 extra tourists from countries outside southern Africa. This could be a beneficial yet hugely expensive strategy to develop tourism in developing countries.”

Mr Vella notes that Brazil is wrestling with inflation and a possible real estate bubble, which he argues have prompted protests.

As Brazil play Croatia tomorrow in the inaugural match, the cheering sounds inside the stadium may very well drown out the chants of protest. Whether this will also be true for the streets still has to be seen but one thing is certain: Brazilian society is much more than just about football.