Greg Dyke has just dropped a reet clanger on newsnight. Was questioned about a £16k watch that was given to him by Brazil FA. He said Oh its lying around the office somewhere. Then said he didn't know it was worth that much. Then he was asked why he didn't send it back to Brazil. He said what he has actually done is donate it to a cancer charity. After further questioning he says 'Well thats what I intend to do'. Ooh dear
None of the home countries will ever boycott anything. Too risky for them to lose any of the 4 out of 8 seats they have on the 'rules' board. FIFA are just waiting for a chance to take any of those seats away.
England should host a World Cup soon. All the other great footballing nations have had at least one since we last did. We have fantastic stadia and experience running big events. However, it will never happen with these goons in charge.
FIFA have some serious questions to ask but I don't believe that the problem solely rests with Sepp Blatter. There are some quite difficult answers as to how the football federations representing America and the Caribbean countries as organised as well as in Africa. I think that these are the areas where you find that things have not exactly been done correctly. Unfortunately, the way that FIFA has spent money to develop the game in the far flung corners of the world means that Blatter's stock is far higher in those parts of the globe than would sound credible. This has been chronicled in journals like "When Saturday comes" for years and it is possible to argue that the merits of this plan are admirable. FIFA want to ensure that football is dealt with equally throughout the world and this means that those areas which have always had a "football heritage" will get over-looked in favour of countries that are emerging both economically and from a football perspective. This explains why South Africa was chosen to host 2010. In my opinion, the problem this creates raises significant questions. Many of these countries are not capable of hosting World Cups and are not desirable destination for fans. (There was an interesting article of line about the number of French supporters who went to Brazil in comparison to South Africa which was deemed a "high risk.") I can't imagine either Qatar or Russia being popular destinations for fans. There are also huge political problems as the question needs to be asked as to whether these countries are morally worthy of being a World Cup host. In trying to embrace a more equitable, global approach to the game, I think Blatter has been naïve and has not really acted in the interests of the sport nor the spectators. As far as England is concerned, I felt that our bid was greedy. We have already hosted one World Cup and have been hosts to both the European competition and an Olympics in the last 18 years. Granted we have the infra-structure, but the bid seem to be extremely arrogant even though I have no doubt that we would have produced an excellent tournament. If we did try to broker deals with jack Warner, we deserve to be castigated by this report. My guess is that the FA's bid was probably less "politically" promoted amongst the other FIFA members but still not whiter than white. A better option would have been to have supposed a "Celtic bid" where Scotland, Ireland and Wales hosted the competition. The money needs to be distributed equitably throughout the game and in this respect I feel Blatter is in the right. In doing this, it is necessary to ensure that the money does go in to the game and not in to the pockets of officials and I feel that Blatter should have concentrated in addressing the disparities in the game in those countries where the game is strongest. In my opinion, the World Cup has become such a cash cow that they have made a rod for their own back and that corruption is inevitable. We are a million miles away from the Corinthian ideals of football and I don't know what the answer is. Football should be promoted evenly throughout the world but hosting the competition has special significance and I would like to see efforts made whereby politically unacceptable countries like Russia are barred or impractical / ill-thought out bids like Qatar strangled at birth. The Qatar bid is extremely disappointing given human rights abuses in the middle East, the poor political situation in the area which raises massive security questions and the fact that money from this region is having a distorting effect on the European game. (Man City, French football TV rights / ownership of PSG not being transparent, etc, etc. ) Blatter must go and at the same time those countries with a football culture must be allowed greater influence in ensuring that perverse situations like Qatar do not have detrimental implications across the football season for a full continent.
Ian, I read all those words (I may have missed some) and I think you miss the point of most people's angst with FIFA. It is corrupt and people are lining their pockets. That is what is wrong, not Blatter's politics or desires with the game.
Gary Lineker, as usual, has said something rather pithy, which hits a particular nail on the head. He wrote: ‘The FA being slammed for its ethics by FIFA is like being chastised by Gordon Ramsay for bad language after uttering the word bloody.’
We could keep the Chef analogies going and say that the FA must be feeling like a top Chef who has given FIFA an award winning recipe book (our game of football) and they have completely ruined it by over cooking everything in it!
Just listening to 5 live sport from last night. Very very damning on FIFA. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04nvd38
Ian This is so far off the mark I can only assume through naivety. The reason that FIFA concentrate their efforts on areas of the world that are not 'footballing giants' is nothing to do with FIFA wanting to ensure that football is dealt with equally throughout the world. That is an honourable and romantic notion but the truth is quite simply that FIFA is trying to spread their net further afield to increase exposure to those markets which will benefit them financially. They hope to spark life into these countries / regions to increase football's global appeal and increase FIFA's coffers by way of TV revenues and all other income streams. Qatar was chosen quite simply because: A-It had the money and B-It is probably the most secure of the middle east/southern Asia countries including India.
Fifa say Hell will host 2026 World Cup http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ve-new-Fifa-report-go-and-give-them-hell.html
