Some people think that it is a waste of money for countries to host big sporting events like the world cup, and that the money would be better spent on other things. However, others think that hosting large sporting events has a clear, positive impact on a country.
Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
Give reason for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
In recent years, becoming host nations for worldwide sporting events such as the World Cup has become a publicly recognized phenomenon. While some people are convinced that expenditure should be cut to prioritize other significant items, I would argue that hosting sporting events will bring both advertising and commercial benefits to countries.
On the one hand, placing too much emphasis on sports can lead to a waste of money. There is no denying that, compared to sporting events, education, healthcare services and transportation are higher on the agenda. Therefore allocating resources to construct stadiums, renovate infrastructure is unnecessary investments, especially when these improvements are only used on specific sporting occasions. In addition, enhancing sports facilities to fulfil the needs of sports teams can result in less money available for other categories which are worth prioritizing expenditure on. Therefore, national authorities should be careful when making decisions to host sporting events as they could have adverse effects on citizens who are in need of government subsidies.
On the other hand, becoming a host nation for a premiere sporting event certainly opens new opportunities in both advertising and commercial ways. In terms of advertising impact, hosting worldwide events definitely gives nations a chance to become the centre of attention on newspapers and other media which are good means of promoting their public image. Additionally, organizing sporting events definitely do wonders for host nations’ finance. For example, the World Cup 2018 held in Russia has been proven to generate huge profits in terms of accommodations and customer services. These activities are surely boosters for national economy and a source of foreign money.
In conclusion, although there are some drawbacks to host countries in worldwide sporting events, it seems to me that those countries can gain enormous benefits with regard to economy and their public image.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-05 | Nguyễn Tiến Vũ | 56 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Nguyễn Tiến Vũ | 78 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Nguyễn Tiến Vũ | 84 | view |
| 2023-06-25 | linhchihwg | 82 | view |
| 2023-04-01 | Charles Le | 84 | view |
- The chart below shows the percentage of female members of parliament in 5 European countries from 2000 to 2012. 67
- Some people think that it is a waste of money for countries to host big sporting events like the world cup and that the money would be better spent on other things However others think that hosting large sporting events has a clear positive impact on a co 94
- The chart below shows the percentage of female members of parliament in 5 European countries from 2000 to 2012. 67
- The chart below gives the information of cinema attendance by age group between 1984 and 2000. 78
- Some people think that it is a waste of money for countries to host big sporting events like the world cup, and that the money would be better spent on other things. However, others think that hosting large sporting events has a clear, positive impact on 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 215, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ransportation are higher on the agenda. Therefore allocating resources to construct stadi...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, therefore, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as, with regard to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1709.0 1615.20841683 106% => OK
No of words: 302.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.65894039735 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00777649471 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.599337748344 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 531.9 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.3319912003 49.4020404114 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.461538462 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2307692308 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.38461538462 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.380927512343 0.244688304435 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13319863118 0.084324248473 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0609221226187 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.228611766665 0.151304729494 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669281939125 0.056905535591 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.