FIFA scandal update.

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33005152So the government has decided in their wisdom to announce that England is ready to host the 2022 FIFA World Cup should it be moved from Qatar. Idiocy of the highest order, but I would expect nothing less from any people involved in the running of football in England.This statement is a lot like me announcing that I am ready to marry Victoria Beckham should she decide to divorce her husband. Firstly, she is still married and there are no signs that her and David are about to split. In much the same way, no one from FIFA (who decide where the World Cup will be played) has even hinted about an idea that Qatar may be stripped of the World Cup. Second, it would be wrong on so many levels and hardly likely to succeed, if I were announce to the world that I was planning to woo another man''s wife. And make no mistake the Qataris bought and paid for the World Cup so they see it as theirs and will be expecting it to be played in their Emirate. And they, and others within FIFA (most notably Honest Joe) will be just as annoyed with England and the FA at this statement as Becks would be were I to go public with any plan to steal his wife from him.Thirdly, I can say as much as I like that I am prepared to marry Mrs Beckham, but if she has no intention of marrying me there''s not a lot I will be able to do about it. This being the crux point, that even if Qatar is stripped of the the 2022 World Cup, the likelihood of it being played in England is about the same as me marrying Victoria Beckham. This is because the majority of the people in power in FIFA despise England and would be happy if we never had another thing to do with world football.I highly recommend that you read the whole transcript of Honest Joe''s "resignation" and read between the lines. He mentions "The executive committee includes representatives of confederations over whom we have no control".  Such as the English FA. He also refers to the fact that he wants to impose term limits on Exco members, which I believe is a not so veiled threat at the FA''s permanant representative on the committee. Something that he has attempted to do in the past but "my efforts have been blocked." He then goes on to say however that "''This time, I will succeed."Make no mistake, and do not be fooled, Honest Joe is a master at political manouvering and he still has a few tricks up his sleeve. You should not be surprised to find that after "the executive committee [has been asked] to organise an

extraordinary congress for the election of my successor at the earliest

opportunity. This will need to be done in line with FIFA''s statutes and

we must allow enough time for the best candidates to present themselves

and to campaign" that the best candidate is found to be Honest Joe himself and after being promised reform we actually get another 4-8 years of this crook at the helm of world football.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3107990/Sepp-Blatter-transcript-Read-FIFA-president-s-resignation-statement-full.html#ixzz3c6QANy3Z

[Tetteys Jig 851]

Agree with most of that. Australia 2022 would be a better bet anyway.

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

Oh and I neglected to mention that after his "resignation" he''s still the President of FIFA. I don''t know about you, but it seems like he hasn''t actually resigned from anything at all.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

We need to get away from the myth that the majority of FIFA ''despise'' England. That a massive over simplification of complex and fluid situation.

The main issue in FIFA (aside from the corruption) is the European/Non-European struggle (European also covers the US, Australia and NZ as well as Japan to a lessor extent). It isn''t simply they all hate England, they all hate each other as well.

Blatter''s rise to power and ability to stay in power, was by given nations who had always felt under-represented a voice. (It''s also worth pointing out many in Europe also felt he was ''okay'' France and Spain both voted for him, along with 8 other UEFA memebers). Blatter''s reign has also seen FIFA raise it''s income massively through sponsorship and TV revenue - this money is spent through out the world to build pitches and infrastructure to develop football. Whilst money has been lost to corruption, it is still small compared to the money that has been raised.

Obviously Blatter should have gone, but in-fighting amongst UEFA has meant a strong candidate has never been put up against him - he won the last election uncontested.

No term limits on the Exco is ridiculous, as it is ridiculous there is no term limit on the president. It''s is easy to see why many countries are suspicious of UEFA and it''s members and Gregg Dykes comments regarding being ready to host the 2022 World Cup, for which they never even submitted a bid, is confirmation enough for many members. Also the fact Blatter didn''t vote for Qatar and Platini isn''t lost on many members who see his as hypocrisy of the highest order - as is the English FA''s attempt to bribe FIFA members to gain votes for their rubbish World Cup bid.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

The final paragraph should say;

''the fact that Blatter didn''t vote for Qatar and Platini DID isn''t lost...''

Blatter said he was stepping down and would leave the job when the next conference could be arranged to hold a vote, sometime between December and March.

As for Australia 2022 - whilst they have been publicly saying they still want a world cup in 2022 (whilst they knew there was no actual chance of it happening) they were sounding less and less confident in their bid during the bidding process. Afterwards key members of the team admitted that there was little political support for it, and it would be too expensive for Australia to hold.

The other bidders of Japan and South Korea (separate bids this time) have both said they no longer want to host it. Japan has the 2020 Olympics to pay for.

The only viable contender out of the original bidders would be the USA. Although I expect it would go for a whole new vote - India and China would both consider bids. Beating China, if they really commit to it, would be a tough call for anyone.

[Tetteys Jig 851]

China would be great! There''s enough stadiums in either Shanghai or Bejing alone to host the tournament! THe domestic leagues as a bit of a joke like FIFA though with corruption and match fixing rife.

I''d worry any potential tournament there might encounter similar problems to Qatar with workers rights etc. I suppose these things are inevitable when trying to integrate cultures though, we don''t always agree on how things should be.

If you look at the job they did for the 2010 world Expo, a World Cup wouldn''t be beyond their capabilities though. At least the football team has a grain of ability in it (they did go to world cup 2002 and have had a couple of players forge successful careers) and the Women''s team is good. Qatar seem to just buy their talent in as if they were a club side!

[Canary Jedi 610]

Putting all that aside though it would be fantastic if it came home to England.

And wow Iwan are you really sha88ing Victoria Beckham or did I misread your opening post? Good on you mate!

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]We need to get away from the myth that the majority of FIFA ''despise'' England. That a massive over simplification of complex and fluid situation.The main issue in FIFA (aside from the corruption) is the European/Non-European struggle (European also covers the US, Australia and NZ as well as Japan to a lessor extent). It isn''t simply they all hate England, they all hate each other as well.Blatter''s rise to power and ability to stay in power, was by given nations who had always felt under-represented a voice. (It''s also worth pointing out many in Europe also felt he was ''okay'' France and Spain both voted for him, along with 8 other UEFA memebers). Blatter''s reign has also seen FIFA raise it''s income massively through sponsorship and TV revenue - this money is spent through out the world to build pitches and infrastructure to develop football. Whilst money has been lost to corruption, it is still small compared to the money that has been raised.Obviously Blatter should have gone, but in-fighting amongst UEFA has meant a strong candidate has never been put up against him - he won the last election uncontested.No term limits on the Exco is ridiculous, as it is ridiculous there is no term limit on the president. It''s is easy to see why many countries are suspicious of UEFA and it''s members and Gregg Dykes comments regarding being ready to host the 2022 World Cup, for which they never even submitted a bid, is confirmation enough for many members. Also the fact Blatter didn''t vote for Qatar and Platini isn''t lost on many members who see his as hypocrisy of the highest order - as is the English FA''s attempt to bribe FIFA members to gain votes for their rubbish World Cup bid.[/quote]Any fool can make something complicated. It takes a genius to make it simple - Woody GuthrieThe truth is that many people at FIFA resent England. I would say that if we are going to continue to come out with statements like "we''re ready to host the 2022 World Cup, when it already has a host (which imo is not going to change even if Honest Joe does the decent thing and falls on his sword) we''re not exactly going to be winning friends and influencing people at District 7. [quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]The final paragraph should say;

''the fact that Blatter didn''t vote for Qatar and Platini DID isn''t lost...''

Blatter said he was stepping down and would leave the job when the next conference could be arranged to hold a vote, sometime between December and March.

As for Australia 2022 - whilst they have been publicly saying they still want a world cup in 2022 (whilst they knew there was no actual chance of it happening) they were sounding less and less confident in their bid during the bidding process. Afterwards key members of the team admitted that there was little political support for it, and it would be too expensive for Australia to hold.

The other bidders of Japan and South Korea (separate bids this time) have both said they no longer want to host it. Japan has the 2020 Olympics to pay for.

The only viable contender out of the original bidders would be the USA. Although I expect it would go for a whole new vote - India and China would both consider bids. Beating China, if they really commit to it, would be a tough call for anyone.[/quote]Honest Joe said he was stepping down four years ago, yet here we are with him still as president of FIFA. Don''t get your hopes up that he''s going to keep to his loosely worded "resignation". The man hasn''t got the nickname "teflon" because he makes good bacon butties. The one thing he has demonstrated over the course of his tenure is that he can''t be trusted to keep his word. Don''t expect him to change his tactics now, he is stalling for time."The populace (Rome) considered this option (delaying engagining Hanibal and his armies) cowardly, and did not see the value hidden behind it." Machiavelli - The Prince

[chicken 0]

The original analogy is a tad iffy at best. Considering the relationship between FIFA and the wrold cup involves more than two people.

As for resentment towards England within FIFA, I''m sure there may well be some but clearly not as much as some would like to have you believe. Especially when you consider how many nations were happy to disclose that they had joined with England''s stance re Blatter.

Also, what needs to be highlighted is that the investigators have indicated they believe they have evidence to prove that bungs were thrown about for South Africa to get it and they are investigating leads on Qatar and Russia for the same thing.

Coulple that with the fact that most of Europe''s top footballing nations and medical warnings in regards to players health - I think it is fair to say that there is plenty of threat to Qatar''s world cub bid, not least of which the amount of time between now and then.

If it is evidenced that Qatar did not win the bid for the 2022 world cup legitamately, I very much doubt it would go ahead and I suspect that they will then look for bost countries who already have the majority of the infrastructure in place to do it with minimal preperation time.

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

[quote user="Canary Jedi"]Putting all that aside though it would be fantastic if it came home to England.

And wow Iwan are you really sha88ing Victoria Beckham or did I misread your opening post? Good on you mate![/quote]No dear boy, I''m not. It''s just an analogy.

[droundi 0]

I can,t see what is wrong with England saying they are ready in 2022 if need be. If it is found that bribary played a sig part in securing it for Quatar, then they shouldn,t be hosting it. In my opinion Englands bid was the best one and we were due getting it here. Germany has hosted it twice and England is very much a traditional football nation with all the infrastructure in place. We simply played it straight and didn,t cheat. What worth fair play on the pitch if football is rotten at the highest level. Add to that all the health issues of playing in Quatar for players and fans, and the appaling working conditions for the practically slave workforce building the stadia, and i think England would be wrong not to offer a solution should the powers that be reject Quatar.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

I was told the other day that FIFA was a charity? Can anyone clarify that, and please explain how that is (if true) Also that nobody knows how much Blatter and his cronies actually get paid?

With all this corruption going on, and this isn''t meant to sound dramatic, but I genuinely fear for some of these people, not in a ''Mafia'' type way, but they will ''disappear'' and of their own making.

If the likes of Warner is coming out saying he is going to spill the beans, then he must have been culpable in taking unofficial money to stay scthum before

[Herman 11,136]

This may help on the charity status. And yes, it stinks"1. It is a registered charity. Fifa pays little tax in

its home country of Switzerland. It also requires tax exemption in

countries wishing to host a World Cup competition. "Any host country

requires a comprehensive tax exemption to be given to Fifa and further

parties involved in the hosting and staging of an event," a Fifa spokesman told the BBC last year.

The 2010 tournament - the most expensive yet - cost South Africa 33bn

rand (£3bn; $4.86bn). But a "tax-free bubble" was established around the

event at Fifa''s request, relieving Fifa, its subsidiaries, and foreign

football associations of any obligation to pay income tax, customs

duties or VAT."Te charitable status dates from its early days as a small voluntary organisation.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Wow

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

[quote user="Crabbycanary3"]Wow[/quote]Wow indeed.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Newest headlines are that the Football Association of Ireland received a payment so they wouldn''t take further legal action over the Thierry Henry handball that dumped Eire out of the World Cup qualifying.

Call me a cynic, but aren''t the FAI as guilty as FIFA for taking the payment?

For the good of the game, and potentially their own players, they should have carried on the process for the long term benefits of the game, even if their own quest may not have succeeded?

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

The FIFA payment to the FAI is being blown out of proportion a little bit, firstly it was a loan and there is nothing uncommon for out-of-court settlements to stop legal action.

The money wasn''t hidden, it was fully documented in the FAI accounts and no one questioned it at the time. FIFA often lend or give money to Football Associations to help redevelop stadiums or training grounds.

From 2011 to 2014 FIFA gave $800m to football development programms across the world, many in the poorest places imaginable. On top of this they gave $100m to charities in South Africa after the conclusion of the 2010 World Cup. This money is full audited in FIFA''s accounts and the Swiss have said there is no suggestion that this money has been lost to corruption.

In my mind, as someone who has written about FIFA for over 7 years now, been to the conferences, been present at the World Cup voting, spoken to delegates from across the world and worked on a freelance basis for a couple of times, there are two sides to FIFA - the corrupt members at the top (who I would estimate reflex about 30 to 40 at most) and the 100s of staff who work to unseen to provide developmental grants and support charities globally.

It''s great Blatter has gone, and the corruption has been left unchecked for far to long. Many of the corrupt members come from countries were corruption in Government is far too common and they paid for their position in FIFA knowing they could earn it back in kick-backs.

As for England''s World Cup bid being the best bid - ha! It was an average bid at best, which no one, not even the FA felt had any chance of winning - they suddenly started making a song and dance about it a couple of months before the voting was happening. I also repeat THEY DIDN''T BID FOR 2022!

There shouldn''t be a time issue if reallocating the 2022 World Cup if deemed necessary. Russia were given 8 years to prepare, Brazil had 7 years, South Africa had 6 years, by the middle of next year, we''ll be 6 years away from 2022. Plenty enough time for a country to prepare (as long as it doesn''t have to build every stadium like Qatar is doing).

[Crabbycanary3 994]

So are BOTH the FAI and FIFA saying it was a loan?

Why is it being lumped all over the back pages, with the legal action piece?

Agreed about the minority at FIFA tarnishing the good work of the majority anywhere

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]The FIFA payment to the FAI is being blown out of proportion a little bit, firstly it was a loan and there is nothing uncommon for out-of-court settlements to stop legal action.

The money wasn''t hidden, it was fully documented in the FAI accounts and no one questioned it at the time. FIFA often lend or give money to Football Associations to help redevelop stadiums or training grounds.

From 2011 to 2014 FIFA gave $800m to football development programms across the world, many in the poorest places imaginable. On top of this they gave $100m to charities in South Africa after the conclusion of the 2010 World Cup. This money is full audited in FIFA''s accounts and the Swiss have said there is no suggestion that this money has been lost to corruption.

In my mind, as someone who has written about FIFA for over 7 years now, been to the conferences, been present at the World Cup voting, spoken to delegates from across the world and worked on a freelance basis for a couple of times, there are two sides to FIFA - the corrupt members at the top (who I would estimate reflex about 30 to 40 at most) and the 100s of staff who work to unseen to provide developmental grants and support charities globally.

It''s great Blatter has gone, and the corruption has been left unchecked for far to long. Many of the corrupt members come from countries were corruption in Government is far too common and they paid for their position in FIFA knowing they could earn it back in kick-backs.

As for England''s World Cup bid being the best bid - ha! It was an average bid at best, which no one, not even the FA felt had any chance of winning - they suddenly started making a song and dance about it a couple of months before the voting was happening. I also repeat THEY DIDN''T BID FOR 2022!

There shouldn''t be a time issue if reallocating the 2022 World Cup if deemed necessary. Russia were given 8 years to prepare, Brazil had 7 years, South Africa had 6 years, by the middle of next year, we''ll be 6 years away from 2022. Plenty enough time for a country to prepare (as long as it doesn''t have to build every stadium like Qatar is doing).[/quote]I agree with the payment to the FAI being blown out of proportion. In fact I would go as far as saying it''s a red herring, or a bait and switch. Which begs the question, what are we missing? We expect to hear stories like this about a corrupt FIFA.Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to

discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable

patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the

extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate. Sun Tzu - The Art of War

What I would contest from this post is your statement that it is great that Blatter has gone. Has he gone? I thought he tweeted a picture of himself yesterday, after this alleged "resignation" of his, continuing in his role as President of FIFA? How many times can you think of a president of a global organisation or government resigning their post and continuing to fulfill their duties? Did Nixon continue as US President until an election could be organised? Did Thatcher stay on as Prime Minister for 9 months after resigning so the Conservative party "allow(ed) enough time for the best candidates to present themselves

and to campaign"? Like I said in an earlier post, Honest Joe is stalling for time, making people think that he is weak, that he is on his way out. You can''t trust the man.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

Blatter will be gone when the next vote can be arranged. He can''t just go as there isn''t actually anyone to hand power to as the rest are on the run or in jail.

He''s actually correct to stay in office until there is someone to take over from him, otherwise there would be a massive power vacuum at the top of FIFA and a ridiculous amount of fighting to see who takes over temporarily.

Be patient and he''ll be off. Saying you''ll arrange a special extra conference to have a vote on someone to replace you (the wheels are very much in motion for this already) and saying you won''t stand for election again in 4 years time are very different things.

Is he going to use his remaining few months to dig the knife into his enemies? Possibly, but if that means breaking the ExCo''s uncontested power structure then great - dig away Blatter.

[Mr Angry 2,014]

Not sure exactly what legal action the FAI could have taken? Goals that shouldn''t have stood have never been successfully challenged before, have they? Or vice versa? Even the ''ghost'' goal at Watford a few seasons ago, or Roy Carroll''s ''save'' for Man Utd against Portsmouth? Both obvious refereeing mistakes, but both decisions went unchanged.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

My point was meant to highlight that the whole story coming out, is that the payment and the legal action were linked.

If there is absolutely zero in it, why has it made such massive headlines?

My thinking was that the FAI should have carried through with the legal stuff, to highlight this payment, and in some minds a silencer, because it might have unearthed a can of worms. In my mind it was never going to overturn a decision by the Ref

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

Ireland would have probably lost any court action - but they could have dragged the process through the courts for years. They might have also found a judge who felt the mistake by a FIFA employee (the ref) had cost the FAI a considerable sum of money - creating a horrible president.

£3.6m was a cheap way to avoid a costly legal battle for both sides - it appears the money was a loan (although probably interest free) and was used in the redevelopment of a stadium. It''s hardly a hard decision for FIFA to make.

John Delaney is just trying to look a big man - almost desperate to be seen as corrupt as the rest of FIFA. Interestingly he earns £360,000 a year, the winner of the Irish League gets £100,000 - apply the same ration to the Premier League and Scudamore would earn £347m.

At the moment any story involving FIFA and money will make the back pages - it''s easy copy for football writers who have very little to do at the moment. If Man U were playing Liverpool this weekend I doubt this would have been a big story at all.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

"creating a horrible president"

Was that deliberate Bethnal?

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Perhaps the timing of the ''loan'' was a huge coincidence, and how has that money been spent? Stadium improvement? Which one, Croke Park?

Wasn''t that already done and dusted? (that is a question and not through definite knowledge) If not Croke Park, where else?

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

The money was to stop the legal challenge, that''s pretty clear. But that isn''t massively unusual.

It was spent on the redevelopment of the Aviva stadium - as is set-out in the FAI''s books. If it was used inappropriately it would be pretty stupid for the head of the FAI to bring it up on the radio.

The loan had no interest and was only repayable if Ireland reached the 2014 World Cup - they didn''t so FIFA wrote the money off. Again, not unusual FIFA practise when providing developmental grants

As I said before, this money was clearly marked in the FAI''s public accounts, and in FIFA annual accounts which they submit in Switzerland.

It is an interesting insight into how FIFA were worried enough about Ireland''s case when Henry handballed that they felt they needed to block Ireland''s court case - but for an organisation with $1.5bn in the bank, £3.6m isn''t a huge sum to stop court case against a ref''s decision.

[Mr Angry 2,014]

According to the BBC, Delaney said he had an argument with Blatter after he appeared to make fun of the FAI when they asked FIFA to add them to the other 32 teams at the World Cup in 2010. Delaney said he swore at Blatter, after which the loan agreement was made. This was in December 2009 though, and the stadium was opened in June 2010 I think, so it would have been almost completed by then?

[ZLF 334]

money to redevelop an un yet completed stadium already being built does not sound shady at all.   If it was a payment to prevent legal action (sounds very truthful) why the need for both organisation to collude & launder  it through books under a false guise?   While it may be normal practice I am not sure that makes it right.

Got an interest free loan / gift by shouting at the president?   Thats where becks, wills and cameron went wrong - they should have abused Honest Joe instead of shaking his hand - we would be looking forward to hosting a world cup by now.  Who knew.

[morty 0]

I wonder if this will spread to our own FA?

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="morty"]I wonder if this will spread to our own FA?
[/quote]

 

Remember the Burberry Handbags?

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/world-cup-2018-fa-braced-for-fifa-criticism-over-failed-bid-to-host-tournament-9857416.html

It is not clear what element of the report is likely to be critical of the English bid, although it has been suggested it could relate to a set of £239 Burberry handbags which were given in October 2009 to the then 22 voting ExCo members – at the time the governing body’s only decision-makers on tournament hosts – as a gift for their wives.