Discussion in 'football' started by yardbird, May 27, 2015.
Dammit, been stuck in a committee meeting and only just heard the news
Fun times ahead...
Your just being contrary I presume
TBH if they are that far down the line of the investigation that they have arrested almost all of FIFA's top brass, what deals were being handed out have probably already been handed out some time ago.
It's very simple if there is evidence of bribery/corruption payments that facilitated votes towards either of these countries staging the competition then they are complicit and the competition should be taken away from them.
Only scanned it while looking for that photo, but his feed looks like it might be worth a read for more info and reaction.
Also: Ginola is going to stand again
I agree, no trial by fire, drowning or nuffing
Should be on you tube without any problems
US media is saying that Blatter is being investigated by FBI.
Yes...it was a technical problem sitting between my seat and my keyboard.
Blatter has just announced his replacement!
David Bernstein: "The only thing worse than tyranny is anarchy." In your world maybe.
Beeb now, too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32986950
Sorry is this has been mentioned before Qatar should never ever have got the world cup. Overlooking the heat and the rights of the poor sods building the stadia, not to mention human rights generally, I would imagine Qatar would not welcome women playing sport and nor would they admit an Israeli team.
Come someone tell me why one of the lesser developed footballing nations making all the running about the investigations? Silly me, it's all about money, innit!
Qatar is a dry country? They want to host a footie tournement Delia would not be happy (pissed)
Pfft, Brazil had laws against drinking alcohol in their stadiums until FIFA told them that wouldn't be acceptable to their sponsors (Budweiser), hey presto, law ignored / changed for the World Cup.
Qatar will bow to the sponsors, hmmm
There'll be drinking areas, bascially heavily sponsored fan zones like they have at every big sporting event, plus hotels for westerners which can sell alcohol anyway. Just don't expect to party with booze many other places. If it happens at all.
I'd be surprised if they allowed for someone to be on the street smelling of alcohol, let alone drunk
I'm sure it'll just be like Beijing they'll be mindful of the worlds media about so they'll just relax their laws for the WC period.
Undoubtedly that won't extend to not nicking people who are causing a scene but I can't imagine any place where you'd want to be roaming around pissed in Qatar in the summer except within an air conditioned hotel.
Are you talking about the US? Been to every World Cup since 1990, quarter finalists once, last 16 three times in that period? Women's world cup winners twice? Over 13 million players? Seventh best attended professional league in the world? Viewing audience for World Cup Finals of over 20 million?
Would Ginola be a bad thing? He seems like a decent-ish guy, non? Unesco/Red Cross ambassador etc.
Unless I've missed anything more controversial than his Head & Shoulders adverts?
His bid is (or at least, was) sponsored by Paddy Power, something that makes him automatically ineligible.
Oh.. yeah. Just reading about it.
Were it not for that, he'd seem like a decent choice. Young-ish, ex-international footballer, charity work, bi-ligual, lots of charisma, easy on the eye
But I'd also be the first to admit to not knowing much about the other candidates.
What I'm not getting is all the global support for Blatter outside of the obvious sources in the UK, Europe, Australia and the US. Surprisingly even France and Spain voted against most of the rest of UEFA for Blatter to remain in power so why was that?
Is the presumption that so many officials have been doing very nicely out of Blatter through current arrangements, and are happy to keep it all as is? That would be understandable. Or is part of it that Blatter is seen differently elsewhere - perhaps even a pioneer who has opened up football to the wider world and bought brought World Cups to the Far East, Africa, Brazil, Russia and Middle East?
I'm trying not to look through the spectrum of the UK/US media to get a wider perspective on it, but every way I look at it it just all looks dodgy.
The Times yesterday:
Blatter is gone but Blatterism is here to stay
The disgraced Fifa president, like US president Lyndon Johnson, personifies a way of doing business that’s hard to stamp out
To understand Fifa and the resignation of Sepp Blatter, let’s start in the Texas hill country.
If you lived there in the 1930s, you did the ironing with an iron. A six or seven pound wedge of iron. Washing was hard work, but nothing could ever be as hard as ironing. The effort of the pressing was one thing, but there was keeping the soot from the fire off the clothes, there was coping with the burns and the blisters. And worst of all, the heat. In summer the heat while ironing was insufferable.
Just collecting the water for this domestic task, for washing and for cooking, was backbreaking. Even in those houses lucky enough to have a well, and not requiring a long walk to a stream, hill farmers and their families might spend 63 working days a year walking 1,750 miles simply to ensure their household had enough water.
And in the evening, when the light failed and they were at last at rest, there was little to lighten the load. No films, no television, little light to read by. Life without entertainment, without plumbing, without a refrigerator, life without anything much but hard work for little reward. All because the hill country of Texas had no electricity.
When you start Robert Caro’s biography of Lyndon Baines Johnson, Texas congressman and senator, and 36th President of the United States, it is hard to understand why the author spends so much time describing wash day and the process of canning food so that it could be stored in homes without a fridge.
Yet as the books progress, you realise the biographer’s purpose. Johnson brought electricity to the hill country and nothing else about him mattered to the people who lived there.
Lyndon Johnson was a crook. This conclusion is inescapable. And his contemporaries knew he was a crook. He acquired the nickname “Landslide Lyndon” after winning his senate seat in 1948 with the help of the very late arrival of a few dubious ballots. He became rich with the help of some fairly rum wheeler-dealing with radio licences.
Yet to the people he helped his misdemeanours didn’t matter at all. Most of them, after all, hadn’t even heard of them, being as they were completely cut off from the world. And if they had an inkling, what did they care? The man who literally brought light to their lives deserved to have a seat in the Senate and live in comfort. He deserved their trust.
Johnson had used some of his unethical corner-cutting to enrich himself and some — through leaning on government officials and ingratiating himself with business and money men — he had used to electrify the hill country. And good luck to him, as far as the hill farmers were concerned.
Whenever I hear a tale of government or institutional corruption Caro’s story of LBJ and the hill country comes back to me. So it was yesterday when I learnt of Sepp Blatter’s resignation as Fifa president.
Because it is naive to think that Mr Blatter’s departure will lead easily to a clean Fifa.
Fifa is a very rich organisation and here’s how it works. It takes money from television and commercial sponsorship and gives a large amount of it away to small football associations in poor countries who can’t afford to build their own grounds or headquarters. The Zambians get, say, a half a million pound technical centre in the middle of nowhere and a large number of Zambian football administrators get jobs.
Yes, on the way, some of the money, ahem, ends up in the pockets of some people in Fifa and they use it to build swimming pools. But what’s that to the football association in, as it were, the Texan hill country? It’s nothing.
To the football associations getting this money, cleaning up Fifa is not a promise, it is a threat. How does it sound to them when it is declared by a load of rich democracies that the World Cup shouldn’t go to obscure dictatorships that are too hot to play football in? They are such places. They actively favour the location of the World Cup in such places.
How does it sound to them when it is suggested that the World Cup location shouldn’t be bought by some unaccountable leader for their own advantage? If it’s not done like that, how will they get the World Cup?
How does it sound to them when it is suggested that money shouldn’t be spent on football association staff holding jobs in countries with little football infrastructure? If Fifa doesn’t pay them, who will?
How confident are they that a new “clean” Fifa leadership that doesn’t rely on their votes will bring football money to the back of beyond?
I am as appalled and dismayed by what is happening in Fifa as any good western liberal. I am so boy scout, so strict about legal compliance, that growing up when cassettes existed I wouldn’t make mix tapes for friends because it was copyright theft.
Yet we would be naive to think that the way Fifa has operated has only served the personal interests of Mr Blatter and will go away because he is going away.
It is not simply because some individuals have a personal interest in “Carry on Fifa”. It is because whole countries and football associations do. They see the western liberal attack as favouring rules that help advanced nations and political democracies against them.
The Fifa way of doing business has power not just because people have been bought, but because there is real political support for it inside football. The Fifa leadership has used Fifa money to deliver facilities and competitions to countries who think they wouldn’t get these things if Fifa was run by the FBI.
Understanding this is essential to bringing it to an end. Grandstanding and protest was not enough to depose Sepp Blatter because his broad base of support was robust enough to withstand waves of such protest. That’s how strong their political interest in the status quo was.
Do we think that has now gone away? Blatter, yes. Blatterism, no.
Change requires an assault on the money — the sponsorship, the television cash, the tax status of Fifa — taking out of the hands of the present leadership their most potent weapon. And at the same time the poorer countries have to feel that they would gain in finance and power from change, not lose by it. Both of these things are easier to say than to do.
Corrupt, cynical, swaying under the assault of legal authorities, Fifa may be further from real change than we’d all like to think.
Until the 1980s/90s the number of places available at the World Cup Finals for countries outside of Europe and South America was absolutely pitiful. While European federations held sway in FIFA, they simply weren't interested in the development of the game outside of its traditional strongholds. That's changed in the last 20/30 years.
Why do the associations of the developing world support Blatter? Pretty obvious really.
This is why the UEFA backed candidate doesn't stand a chance in the future. UEFA has never been interested in supporting football in Africa, Asia, CONCACAF etc beyond siphoning off young players for the benefit of its' own clubs and associations.
Chuck Blazer's 2013 deposition has just been unsealed. It details bribes concerning the 1998 (from Morocco) and 2010 (from South Africa) WCs. Buzzfeed has the whole document here:
They are soooooooo fucked.
It'll be interesting to see how many FIFA executives go to the Women's Wold Cup which starts in Canada on Saturday. A bit close to the US for some of them I expect
If I was the Turkish FA, I'd be quietly putting a team together for a 2022 bid right about now.
Separate names with a comma.