WORLD CUP FINAL: REVIEW:HAVING HELD Jacob Zuma at bay during the presentation ceremony in Soccer City the previous evening, Sepp Blatter was centre stage in Johannesburg again yesterday. The veteran soccercrat was flanked by a mixture of Fifa underlings and Local Organising Committee (LOC) bigwigs for the traditional "wrap-up" press conference, where he generously shared the credit for a successful World Cup with the continent of Africa.

It was masterful stuff from the 74-year-old who read a compliment into just about every question, including one about why he was booed prior to the start of the final on Sunday evening.

As is traditional on such occasions, representatives of media from around the world showed up with tailored agendas. So reporters from Uruguay and Ghana began making a case for extra places at the next World Cup for teams from their continents, while a South African reporter got a little shirty because Blatter had “only” given his country “nine to 10” for its staging of the tournament.

One English reporter, who may have been morosely asking everybody he has met for the last two weeks the same question, even inquired of the world game’s biggest blazer if he had any idea why England had been so disappointing.

The Irish weren’t immune from the parochialism. One journalist asked if, having apologised to the English and Mexicans for the refereeing errors that helped to put them out of the World Cup, Blatter would now consider doing the same to the people of Ireland.

Sadly, the moment lost a little of its impact when the Fifa president somehow mistook the questioner for a Mexican and smoothly complemented him on his interest in the world game.

When the question was repeated and the nationality of the reporter clarified, we were treated to some unintelligible stuff that did no more than reiterate that a move will be made next week at a meeting of the International Football Association Board (the game’s rule-making body) to put the issue of goal-line technology on the agenda for a meeting of the board scheduled for October.

Blatter as good as admitted, though, that this tournament will not be remembered for the quality of its matches, but expressed satisfaction that: “In the end, we had a winner playing good football.”

He credited the Spanish federation and manager Vicente del Bosque with their parts in the team’s success, observing: “In all big shows it is the director who decides whether their team plays to win or plays not to lose.”

The champions, he was pleased to say, had fallen into the former category even though they had scored fewer goals on the way to lifting the title (just eight) than any previous winner.

A bigger bone of contention for many from the British press was the issue of English referee Howard Webb’s handling of the final. Dutch coach Bert van Marwijk and a couple of his players had caused some bewilderment afterwards by suggesting they had come off on the wrong end of the official’s decision-making.

But most neutrals felt there might have been two or three fewer men in orange shirts on the field at the end had Webb been more concerned with administering the rules of the game and less with preserving some semblance of numerical balance, presumably so his name would not become forever associated with a fiasco.

“It’s not up to me to judge the performance of the officials and match control,” remarked Blatter. “I can only say it was a very hard task that the refereeing trio had on the field of play. It was really not easy. And they certainly were not helped in this task.

“Until the final we could say this tournament saw Fair Play. But yesterday’s match brought that level down. It was not what we expected to see as Fair Play on the pitch.”

He insisted, as he always does, that the human element, even when it gives rise to preventable injustices, is a crucial element of the game. As always, there will be those from recently wronged countries to beg to differ, but Blatter does not appear to be for budging on the issue of using video to review controversial decisions.

Crucially, though, he could argue without fear of contradiction that, regardless of the poor final, the refereeing howlers and any other lingering controversies, this World Cup will go down in history as a success because South Africa had defied the sceptics to provide terrific venues, a safe environment for visitors and a wonderfully welcoming host population.

The head of the LOC, Danny Jordaan, himself a former ANC MP, saw fit to compare the coming of the competition to the introduction of the universal franchise here a little over a decade and a half go or the release from prison of Nelson Mandela.

That may have been overstating things, but there is little question that, setting aside the thorny issue of the final cost, the last four-and-a-half weeks have indeed been a triumph for South Africa and its people.

Asked how Brazil was coming along with preparations for 2014, the Fifa general secretary admitted there were some issues still with the building of stadiums, roads and airports, the provision of accommodation and the establishment of a telecommunications system.

Beside him at the top table, the South African officials must barely have been able to contain their mirth now that stuff is somebody else’s problem.