There is frequently great competition between countries to host international sporting event, although many people argue that the cost of doing so outweighs any advantage. Both views have merit, but my view is that hosting is a genuine honor for the country and the government should pursue only when the resources are sufficient.
First of all, hosting sporting events bring significant benefits. First among these is the prestige it presents to the country as the country will be the center of the event for the whole duration it commences. This is more than any price. Another benefit is hosting opens doors for investments and tourisms creating significant economy activity. A good example is 2014 FIFA world cup in Brazil, where the event resulted in improved urban mobility through expanded transportation networks and created thousands of temporary job opportunities in various industries.
Not everyone, however, believes that the price involved in hosting such events is worthwhile. A major argument against hosting is mainly financial. Typically, it can cost millions to build the arenas and modern infrastructure to accommodate the athletes and spectators. This money, arguably, would be better spent on welfare and education programmes that provide direct support to population. Some governments have attained so much debt in order to fulfill requirements through hosting the Olympic Games that they had compromise budget for social programmes needing attention.
In conclusion, in my view, even with financial challenges, sporting events can not only be managed successfully but can also inspire communities- provided every decision is guided by a thoughtful and disciplined budget.