So, the Confederations Cup is over and much of the pessimistic handringing beforehand proved unfounded.

Despite some real logistical problems, the general verdict seems to be that the tournament was a success with enthusiastic and colourful crowds and some classy and unpredictable football, not least the United States' shock semi-final defeat of Spain and a thrilling final where Brazil went 2-0 down to the Americans before storming back to win 3-2 and ensure the football world was not thrown off its axis.

Crucially, South Africa's own team, Bafana Bafana, did a lot better than many of their own fans had expected. The side suffered a lot of bad press from their terrible pre-competition form -- they did not even qualify for next year's African Nations Cup finals -- and Brazilian coach Joel Santana had been treated with scepticism by football writers and fans alike. Even Danny Jordaan, chief executive of the organising committee for next year's World Cup, expressed concern over their form.

After a slow start, however, South Africa turned in a creditable, if not outstanding performance. They reached the semi-final and held eventual champions Brazil until the 88th minute when they went down to a scorching free kick by Daniel Alves. And in the third place final they pushed European champions Spain into extra time before finally losing 3-2, again to a freekick.

They badly need more strike power and it looks like Santana must make peace with English-based striker Benni McCarthy who was dropped from the team for his apparent lack of commitment. But their performance gave grounds for some optimism.

Bafana Bafana's Confederations Cup performance was key to the 2010 World Cup because it will encourage local fan participation -- a constant worry for the organisers, who expressed concern before this tournament about lack of home enthusiasm.

Nevertheless, there are continuing worries that even the cheapest World Cup tickets are still too expensive for working class South Africans and that they will be unwilling to pay in advance for entrance in a year's time, something which goes directly against the entrenched local custom of buying tickets on match days.

World Cup matches attended predominantly by foreign fans and restrained, middle class South Africans would be a huge disappointment for the first World Cup held in Africa, where the unique local atmosphere was a major selling point.

That isn't the only worry in considering what the Confederations Cup tells us about the likely success of next year's much bigger global competition.

FIFA boss Sepp Blatter gave organisers 7.5 points out of 10 for the Confederations Cup but World Cup veterans said this was nothing to be complacent about, given his likely tendency to talk up the tournament. Even Blatter said South Africa had to do "a little bit more" and FIFA Secretary General Jerome Valcke was more direct, acknowledging problems with transport, security and accommodation capacity, which is still significantly below what will be required next year.

Security is a particularly sensitive issue, given South Africa's frightening reputation for violent crime, so it was unfortunate that the Confederations Cup saw alleged thefts from both Egyptian and Brazilian teams, although some of the circumstances remain mirky.

More serious were security lapses in access to stadiums and other areas. Such failures must be cleared up in the time that remains if fans are to follow their teams without constantly looking over their shoulders.

So the Confederations Cup provided both encouragement and warnings. Okay so far, but much more to be done. The next 12 months may be both nerve racking and frenetic for the organisers but we are all still hoping for a reasonably trouble-free football extravaganza with the special atmosphere that only Africa can give it--including those pesky vuvuzela trumpets...

PHOTO: A South African fan at the June 28 Confederations Cup final REUTERS/Dylan Martinez

The debate around the vuvuzela was always going to generate big noise but for some South African commentators it has become almost a neo-colonial conflict.

The noisy trumpet, which dominates the sound waves around the stadiums during the Confederations Cup, has got a lot of people covering their ears.

Complaints from TV viewers across Europe have been vociferous enough for the future of the plastic pest to become the major item on the agenda at the series of press conferences FIFA president Sepp Blatter has held during the tournament in South Africa.

Blatter has said it will stay — he wants to celebrate local custom and is inviting the rest of the world to do so too.

FIFA’s television arm, HBS, are more cautious but say privately, at the end of the day what Blatter says goes.

The European TV stations, who pay a lot of the money that funds FIFA, Blatter and the World Cup, could have the vuvuzela banned if they bleated enough. But most of the noise, so far, has come from enraged South Africa columnists, who have rounded on the poor Dutch journalist who first sought Blatter’s response to complaints from European television viewers.

In Africa, there is a sensitivity to being told what to do from outside and a pride in seeking to create a unique World Cup in 2010. Some of the stuff written though has been a little churlish. See here, here and here for a flavour.

At the end the day, it is the big TV money that talks. If the world’s broadcasters feel the cacophony of vuvuzelas detracts from the viewing pleasure of their public, FIFA will be forced to back down and ban the trumpets from the 2010 World Cup stadiums.

It won’t have anything to do with any ‘ism, just cold hard cash.

For all their scepticism about South Africa’s potential to host the World Cup, the build-up to the test event, the Confederations Cup, has so far gone without any major hitches.

It is a dream scenario for the home nation and FIFA, still trying to temper the doubters and persuade the world all will be ready by 2010, has added to the chorus of congratulations.

Sepp Blatter devoted a good deal of his traditional pre-tournament news conference on Friday to pouring scorn on the doubters.

Admittedly, there is much last minute activity and privately officials have spoken of the frustration of a society where urgency is not always a priority.

But in a country desperate to prove it can put on an event of the magnitude of the World Cup, South Africa is ahead in the PR race.

The only setback, ironically, has been the weather. It might be winter but on the Highveld, where the four venues for the Confederation Cup are situated, the cold season is normally mildly pleasant.

The air is brisk and after hours it gets cold but the days are usually filled with sunshine. Except for this week. Teams arrived to frigid conditions and unseasonal rain and spent the first days bemused by the weather.

The Italians, in particular, made much of the wet. Their friendly win against New Zealand in Pretoria on Wednesday was played in a constant downpour and the non-playing staff and spectators were bundled up as if on an Artic expedition.

The television pictures beamed back to Italy would certainly have put off a few potential tourists, who had planned to come out for the 2010 tournament.

But on the eve of kick off of the first game, South Africa v Iraq on Sunday, the sunshine has come out. Now the pressure is back on the organisers.

PHOTO: South Africa's President Jacob Zuma reacts after being given a soccer jersey by the national soccer team before their training session at Orlando stadium in Soweto June 13, 2009. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko

The countdown has begun for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, an event, now only a year away, that could change perceptions about the whole continent and show the globe a festival of sport that reverses obstinate stereotypes of a region in constant crisis and violence.

Africans are deeply frustrated by the tendency of foreigners, including investors, to see Africa almost as one country instead of more than 50 extremely diverse nations. Meltdown in Zimbabwe can impact on investors' perceptions of countries thousands of miles away on the other side of the continent. By the same token, a successful World Cup will not only change the way people see Africa but also encourage future mega events and the huge investment that they can bring.

So, much more is riding on 2010 than a mere sporting spectacle, albeit the most watched sports event in the world and the biggest ever held in Africa. A successful tournament, with the special atmosphere that happy, dancing and singing local supporters can bring, should land a tourist and investment bonanza for South Africa in particular, but also help the surrounding region and countries further afield.

If the tournament falls short, the reverse will be true.

Even as late as the end of last year, the negative voices were still loudly casting doubt on South Africa's ability to organise such a huge event, suggesting everything from stadiums to transport routes would not be ready. White South Africans, many still sceptical about black rule 15 years after the end of apartheid and keener on rugby and cricket than football, were among the cynics.

But recently the Jeremiahs have begun to quieten down and it is now generally accepted that all 10 stadiums, half of them new, will be ready months ahead of the competition. This month's eight-nation Confederations Cup --although it has little of the buzz of the bigger event -- will give an idea of South African organisation and test four of those stadiums.

Still, big challenges remain and there is no room for complacency. Much work is still to be finished if the World Cup is to succeed and be the greatest edition ever, as both its organisers and President Jacob Zuma have promised.

The biggest potential spoiler is undoubtedly South Africa's daunting reputation for violent crime. Organisers clearly see the danger -- significant attacks on foreign fans would be disastrous for the World Cup.

Police are recruiting thousands of new members and will deploy 40,000 specially trained men to protect stadiums, hotels and major transport routes.

Officials point to South Africa's highly successful organisation of many events including a cricket and rugby world cup and the recent Indian Premier League (IPL) Twenty20 cricket--moved to South Africa because of security fears at home. Fans do not seem to be deterred. Ticket sales around the global are heavily oversubscribed so far.

The question is, will the giant police operation be enough to safeguard notoriously anarchic football fans, especially after they have a few drinks and decide to go for a wander? The European culture of aggressive supporters groups fighting each other is also totally foreign to the African way, so police will also have to handle that at the same time as deterring criminal gangs who may see the World Cup as a golden opportunity of their own, with many thousands of comparatively well-heeled tourists, not to mention journalists carrying expensive equipment, touring the country.

Insiders also say transport is still not adequate for the World Cup and cooperation will be needed between South Africa's traditional minibus operators and a fleet of special coaches planned by the government--the taxi drivers have already protested against the plan, believing it will rob them of revenue. Hotel capacity is another issue and South Africa is encouraging the use of guesthouses, national park lodges and even timeshare apartments to meet the shortfall.

Officials say whatever the problems, South Africans will pull together next year to ensure the tournament brings their country unrivalled kudos, with none of the whingeing seen in Western nations about the disruption caused by big events. President Zuma himself has emphasised the economic benefits of World Cup construction during South Africa's first recession in nearly two decades and promised a competition to remember.

So will this World Cup be the best and most joyful ever, boosting the image of Africa, or could it be a disastrous disappointment that reinforces the cynics?

PHOTO: A general view of Soccer City, also known as the FNB Stadium, in Johannesburg May 15, 2009. The stadium is earmarked to host both the opening and final soccer matches of the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko

We are now less than a week away from the start of the Confederations Cup and the first true test of South Africa's preparedness to host the 2010 World Cup.

It's hard for a lot of people to take the Confederations Cup seriously, although in Germany four years ago it did develop into a summer festival and in the end proved a tasty appetiser before the main meal 12 months later.

The field for South Africa is somewhat lob-sided: Brazil, Italy and the all-conquering Spanish are the strong favourites with the United States, Egypt and South Africa perhaps having the potential to create an upset. Iraq and New Zealand should pose few problems for the big teams.

Most importantly, though, this is a test of the organisational ability of the World Cup hosts, whose preparations for 2010 have been clouded by uncertainty.

That has been partly because of international scepticism over the ability of an African country to organise an event of the magnitude of the World Cup and partly because South Africa have failed dismally to spin the positives of their bid.

But the evidence of potential is now beginning to emerge from beneath the mountains of bricks and dramatic skyline of cranes.

The stadiums are all scheduled to be completed ahead of time and the country's infrastructure is already looking sleeker and smarter, although new road works and airport upgrades continue at pace.

Ultimately, though, it will be the people who make or break the event.

There is an underlying spirit of hospitality to South Africans but it is also a country with a dangerous crime rate that makes many visitors nervous. This month presents the chance for a good deal of positive marketing.

Whether South Africa snatches up the opportunity remains to be seen.

PHOTO: A fan smiles during South Africa's friendly against Poland at Orlando stadium in Soweto June 6, 2009, ahead of the Confederations Cup. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko

South Africa’s Brazilian coach Joel Santana has broken into English at news conferences on just a handful of occasions.

It's mostly after rare wins for the national side when the local media are in good humour and Santana seeks to charm them with his piecemeal vocabulary. Few notes are taken amid the mirth.

So it was after Saturday’s win over Poland in Soweto – a rare triumph for Bafana Bafana against European opposition which is a confidence booster for a side in desperate need of a lift.

As upcoming World Cup hosts, much is being made of the need for the home country to field a competent and competitive side at the 2010 tournament.

Santana has been tasked with achieving that goal but his first 12 months in charge has been mired in mediocrity.

A triumph over a holidaying Polish team, shorn of many of their first choice players, is in reality no indictor of whether Santana’s work will take the team to a better level.

South Africa now face the Confederations Cup, where Iraq and New Zealand are their first two opponents.

But success against this pair will also make us no wiser as to their true potential. But it may mean being subjected to a few more news conferences in English from Santana.

He has taken to heart recent critical comparisons with the way Fabio Capello has made an obvious effort at improving his English fluency since starting his tenure with England.

Capello is a veritable Stephen Fry in comparison with Santana, but the hacks will be happy if Santana keep trying because it means the team is winning.

PHOTO: South Africa soccer coach Joel Santana looks on during a news conference in Johannesburg June 4, 2009. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko