RBSC

**Paul Marin** · December 16, 2010, 05:39 PM

SPOT ON!!! This is what I have been trying to tell you. The quote:

"By all accounts, the bids for the United States and England were clean, fair and by the book, which sadly may have meant that they were, by the nature of the process, doomed from the start." says it all, dyam tief dem.

**Brush** · December 16, 2010, 06:08 PM

Why is everyone panties still in such a bunch about the FIFA's decision. They were true to form. I wish the USA had gotten the nod but the final decision wasn't a shock.

These American commentators need to remember what the sound bites were when they were given the 94 tournament.

**Sir X** · December 16, 2010, 06:11 PM

Someone threw it back and more..lol

Comments (14) RSS

Sort Oldest to Newest Newest to Oldest
Showing 1-14 of 14
Add a comment
There are a couple of things I'm confused about--

1) You provided numbers of attendance for the South Africa event (350,000). You then used that number in the rest of the article as average attendance per day rather than a total number. So which is it? Were there an average of 350,000 extra people in South Africa every day of the World Cup? Or was that the total number of people who visited the country? If it is the latter then all the comments about how Qatar will be able to keep up with that many tourists are a bit off-base, since the tourists will be recycled. Obviously, it will be harder for a smaller nation to pull it off, but it would be nice to have some clarity here instead of FUD.

2) Are there any guidelines that FIFA uses to determine what the host nation is? I am honestly curious about this. If there aren't any guidelines, then sadly FIFA, being a private organization, are allowed to use whatever logic (or lack thereof) they wish to determine which bid will be successful. Consider the analogy of a consumer having the option of buying a Big Mac versus getting a healthy meal of boiled vegetables. While the veggies are obviously a better meal, Micky D's is throwing in a free toy to sweeten the deal. What is the consumer more likely to purchase? And who am I, the guy behind the consumer in line, to decide that he shouldn't have chosen the hamburger?

Yes, the US/England would probably have held a better World Cup than the nations that eventually won the bid. But unless the process for determining who wins the bid has stringent guidelines in place and is deterministic, any complaints are just going to be seen as whining.

Posted by sohum on December 13, 2010 at 5:01 PM | Report this comment

FIFA is a private organization, did they have to explain to anyone why they gave the 94 World Cup to USA ? NO.

2. The decision is subjective, how can you prove there is corruption ?

3. Your argument about the Stadiums already built is flimsy, for the Japan World Cup 10 stadiums were built.

4. Sponsorship is not a threat to FIFA, are you sure Budweiser or Adidas could tell FIFA they'll stop sponsoring them for not giving the World Cup to the US ? They'll make billions wherever the WOrld Cup takes place at.

Anyway you obviously dont know how Soccer works or FIFA.

Posted by Miki on December 12, 2010 at 9:42 PM | Report this comment

The deed has been done by FIFA. The world cup bid, from another perspective, could be regarded as a football match itself were players randomly kick until it gets into the goal. The only difference is that while bidding a ball is not needed. Just like in a match players fake fouls, some dive, some crafty and some brutal just to get the goal so also the bidding process. If we keep analyzing, shouting and screaming at FIFA it would change nothing. So also if we keep critically analyzing the facilities presently on ground in Qatar, we make no head way. 12 years is not 12months. Sometimes we should overlook somethings. The task has been awarded to them, we fold our arms and leave them to their plans. Whatever or however Qatar wishes to host the tournament is their own headache, Why should we break our heads over this? Football is a game where if you lose, you turn and shake your opponent saying congratulation. My appeal to fellow patriots who wish to roast me here, lets swallow pride injury honor that has been rubbished, and move on. America can not stand without the world. Dont think America should do away with fifa. America needs the world and not the world America.

Posted by hussein on December 12, 2010 at 6:50 AM | Report this comment

hussein: one of the most tired arguments is just to claim that racism is behind the outrage. nobody will take you seriously unless you can point to a single person that anyone said -the author or the commenters- that is racist. really, you are the only one dropping nationalistic or ethnic slurs ("americans are too dumb."). grown folks are trying to have a reasonable discussion so unless you have actual facts to point to, please sit quietly in the corner.

one the complicated aspects of globalization is that as non-Western nations want to join the community of nations created by Western institutions and technology, they do not want to subject themselves to Western standards of skeptical analysis. is the new rule of political or social intercourse with the middle east that criticism = racism? so, i point out that women are abused and subjugated in Qatar and that makes me a racist? in the words of the great ochocinco, "child please."

my work send me to qatar and dubai quite often, and i will tell you bluntly that they are complicated places. while i applaud their efforts to use (some of) their petrodollars on things other than yachts and playboying it up, the architectural and cultural critic in me still sees manufactured cities like dubai and doha as having a unique melange of sterility, gaucheness, pretention and soullessness. are we not allowed to criticize a city anymore? just because doha and qatar are gauche and ridiculous attempts to buy credibility speaks to nothing more than a certain kind of vanity of those emirates' rulers, and is not a condemnation of the entire region or of all arabs everywhere.

reading this article i thought that if austin, texas had bid for the world cup, i would have laughed at their bid, but because qatar did i'm supposed to just look the other way? no, if you want to play in the West, you need to grow a thick skin. qatar is not fit to host the world cup, and that's that. it doesn't make me racist to say it, it just makes me not an idiot.

gergana

Posted by gergana on December 11, 2010 at 3:17 PM | Report this comment

Fifa still demonstrated that football is a game of winners and losers. Dont be hard losers or crazy winners please. It maybe understandable the this generic hatred for Arabs is still embedded in you. Am sure if this where Pope selection, and an Arab is selected, most westerners would denounce Christianity. Just swallow the hard bone and lets move on together towards 2022. Happy qualification and if you go through, welcome to Dubai, we will make sure USA team got the best yacht. Cheers

Posted by hussein on December 11, 2010 at 4:39 AM | Report this comment

Congrats on a story that can stand up to any criticism. It's clear that the next time the World Cup is held it won't be about a myriad of nations competing for the honor of winning the world's most coveted soccer award, instead, it will be about a myriad of nations all giving in to a corrupt organization more interested in filling its own pockets than hosting said tournament. I only wish that the nations you mentioned would stand up against said corruption, and break away from FIFA, or at least threaten to do so and make FIFA change its policies. As for saying that the Middle East has never held a World Cup and that we should overlook corruption, size issues, and human rights violations, all because said region has failed to produce a suitable bid is absurd. And as for the comments by hussein, I haven't heard anything quite that ignorant for some time, and since I still have to put with students from the US' public school system, I hear more than my share of ignorant and stupid comments.
And really Brian, thanks for putting the size thing in perspective. I really can't believe that a place the size of Raleigh could ever host the World Cup, not without spending billions on hotels and other services for those who were planning on attending the event.

Posted by somethinglikelaw on December 10, 2010 at 9:08 PM | Report this comment

Pretty good article. I'm not really buying into the 'this will help bring the game of soccer to Arab nations' logic that I've heard. I'm not really sure how Qatar getting blown out 3 times on their home field will make kids in other Arab countries embrace soccer.

Posted by jtvols on December 10, 2010 at 8:00 PM | Report this comment

Dr. Said,

My point about the size of Qatar had to do with 1) its capacity to host 350,000 visitors, 2) the sensibleness of building 9 stadiums in a nation this small, 3) its ability to field a passably competitive team, and 4) the overall experience of fans. You are right that there are many nearby nations, but none of the concerns that I raised are addressed by your attempt at a counter-argument. I suppose that one could ask people to stay in Dubai, for example, and fly in for games. But, if a nation cannot even successfully house the fans who want to watch the games, that speaks volumes. (also, for what it's worth, "most" Arabs, as you claims CANNOT fly private jets or take yachts. the overwhelming number of folks there are in fact quite poor. even if that wasn't the case, "let them take yachts" would make for a rather odious travel plan catering to only the super-rich)

Moreover, I would urge you to consult a map. The only nation contiguous to Qatar is Saudi Arabia. Since you mention driving there, I would note that that inconvenient 51% of the population known as females could not in fact drive from the UAE or otherwise through Saudi Arabia because women aren't allowed to drive there. This is, of course, but one of the myriad indignities visited upon women in this part of the world. These problems, as I point out in the article, do not end once they cross the border.

Finally, for what it's worth, I would have preferred that China *not* have hosted the Olympics. And, since you brought it up, I'll make two points. First, pointing out that someone else is much worse than you (from my position, China is not, but that argument can be had another day) is no defense. This "tu quoque" argument fails on its face and is rightly rejected out of hand. Second, if the purpose of sending the game to Qatar is to open up the Middle East, then China offers ample proof that showcase events will do nothing but simply embolden and legitimize a nation on the international scene. As I note in the article, Qatar is not the worst nation in the Middle East when it comes to human rights, but that is an easy test to pass. If you want to send the games to this part of the world, send them to Turkey, an actual nation with a reasonable sized population, a decent soccer team, things that tourists might actually want to see, and a secular democratic government that respects the rights of women and has values more closely in line with those that FIFA should stand for.

~Brian Fobi

Posted by Brian Fobi on December 10, 2010 at 7:43 PM | Report this comment

Dr Said, it's nota case of sourgrapes; think about it. Was there one country bidding against Qatar that didn't have equal or better reason? The fact is that there wasn't. Every country has better infrastructure, more relaxed and open laws, and stadia. The biggest stadium in Qatar doesnt even come close to stadia in any other country. Furthermore, the stadia that Qatar has drawn up will be shipped off to developing states that do not havethe resources to maintain them! Doing the game a favor? I beg to differ.

The idea is brought up that FIFA will be spreading the game. Qatar bragged about being a football mad nation. How can the game be spread in a country that is already mad about it? If this were the reason that FIFA was using, then surely Australia is the better bid! At least they have stadia AND have qualified for the WC in the past!

And then you say that the US was simply to dumb to see it coming. You, sir, I hope you die in a freak yachting accident. You openly admit that FIFA and the whole qatar bid was corrupt, and then attempt to justify it. I, on the other hand, hold hope for fair play and equality.

Author, I thank you for writing exactly what I have been arguing. I'll buy you a drink one day, but obviously not at the 2022 WC. I'll be watching it with my kid at the bar. It'll be less crowded, and at least I can get a beer.

Posted by Kobentino on December 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM | Report this comment

err the author blatantly ignored the most crucial fact - that the games in Qatar are not host to the citizens of Qatar only. Perhaps a better analysis would've been to include the population of surrounding Emirate states and other Arab countries who can literally travel via cars or considering the lavish life style of most arabs in that region, by private jets or yachts. The worldcup will also attract Saudi citizens as well as people from SouthAsian countries, including India & China. Comparing Qatar to a place like Connecticut etc serves no basis of any judgement with regards to its ability to successfully host the worldcup.
Personally, I can care less if Israel is found excluded from this worldcup or not. Frankly, if you can raise concerns regarding human rights violations before China hosted the Olympics, there is a legitimate concern with regards to Israel's occupation and continued settlement buildings in Palestine, and ofcourse the long standing history of human rights abuse in the region.
Your article wreaks of the obvious bias thats in your every word. Please give it a rest. Qatar will give the world the best worldcup to date. Hope to see you there -

Posted by drsaid on December 10, 2010 at 6:45 PM | Report this comment

You Americans bury your pride and swallow your ego. Hard losers. Why hit at Qatar? Is it now you know fifa is unclean? When the Executive members demanded for bribe, you failed to get your brains thinking fast as to smell what was cooking. my advise is go to sleep and happy qualification. You thought it was because he is Nigerian. He definitely must have seen what was to come, gave u a signal, but u were too dumb to note. Sorry.

Posted by hussein on December 10, 2010 at 5:02 PM | Report this comment

@ DG Rollins,
I would say that there is a qualitative difference between America's potential improve as a soccer power and Qatar's. There are 400,000 Qatari citizens--- Slovenia, the smallest nation at the 2010 WC, is 5x larger than that. Moreover, Qatar has no real youth system, has never until now shown much interest in producing quality club or national teams. They are utterly inept at soccer. Twelve years is a long time, but not that long. The core of its 2022 national team will be entering their teen years right now, and there is no evidence to suggest that they have done anything to develop talent. The United States had, in the 1980s, an enormous immigrant population, lots of people who played youth soccer, and some sporadic successes in terms of club (NASL) and national team (1930 WC). Qatar has nothing, and it's difficult to imagine that a population the size of Raleigh, North Carolina could field an internationally competitive squad.

Posted by Brian Fobi on December 10, 2010 at 4:37 PM | Report this comment

RE: competitive comments -

The USA did get to Italia 90 on its own, but you are comparing apples to oranges. We are 12 years out from 2022. The better comparison would be the USA's attempt to get to Spain '82.

The US had one win in four games as it was eliminated in the qualifying round to get to the final round of the 1981 CONCACAF championship. The win came against Mexico in the final game of the tournament after both Mexico and Canada had clinched advancement.

12 years is a long time in international football. I suspect Qatar will be just fine.

The USA (and England) both deserve to feel aggrieved by the decision. But the over the top reaction is doing neither counter any favours. Going to the Middle East isn't that absurd. You can question FIFA corruption while at the same time not attacking the decision to go to a region that has never hosted before. It *is* the world's game you know...

Posted by dgrollins on December 10, 2010 at 1:30 PM | Report this comment

Here in Ireland, being a minnow we experienced at first hand the levels that FIFA are willing to go to keep the sponsors happy. Nearing the end of qualifying for the last World Cup they changed the rules and stated that teams reaching the play off would be seeded, thus avoiding the nightmare scenario of France or Portugal being drawn against each other.

This destroyed the notion of an open draw, with the weaker teams playing their home game first. And to rub salt into the wounds, the world witnessed Thierry Henri play some basketball in Paris, yet the match officals missed the handball (s). And we all know how "fantastic" France were in South Africa.

The Irish travel in huge numbers to support their team, just think back to the Giants Stadium in 1994. We were sold out, we have no say in the corridors of power.

In our country FIFA is viewed as nothing more than a corrupt organisation that is driving people away from the game. We need to the example of Rugby Union which set up a professional and fair organisation back in the 90's. The Rugby World Cup is now the fourth biggest global event and the Henieken European Cup is a fast becoming a serious rival to UEFA.

A World Cup in Qatar, why not play it on the Moon?

The US,England, Australia,Gemany, Italy and Spain should form their own organisation. To use a movie quote "build it and they will come"

**Paul Marin** · December 16, 2010, 06:44 PM

Brush, the reason is that these countries spend a ton of money on their World Cup bids and also have a deep emotional investment in bringing the world cup to their respective countries. FIFA however, paints a picture that they are all considered equally, which is NOT TRUE. So as the article points out, the countries that contribute the most are the ones that are punted to the back of the line. Putting money aside, the problem is still with the lack of selection criteria and lack of transparency in the process. Nothing more, nothing less. For me personally - I think the lack of transparency and open criteria is simply a way to allow the members of the EXCO to line their own pockets. Blaater, Warner and at least 3 others are criminals.

**Sir X** · December 16, 2010, 07:22 PM

I agree with you up to the point where you say countries that contribute the most ? Its not a fair process we all know that but how do you measure contributing the most to football, if its infrastructure then the WC should never leave europe , if its raw talent , then it should never leave S.America and Africa , if its money , then western europe and America has to deal with a global booming corporate market of football where Africa , Asia,S.AmericaCentral America ,Eastern Europe and the middle east has the money and corporate and governmental sponsors to throw a WC by themselves.

The alternatve that the elitist propose is Ameria and Western Europe secede from Fifa and start their own world cup because they have the corporate dollars and infrastructure!

Do we really trust Western Europe and America to do a better Job than FIFA? Football has grown where S.America , Africa & Asia are not taken for granted as it pertains to talent , political power and corporate money.

It will continue to grow.China hasnt thrown its hat in the ring yet and Nigeria and Ghana has yet to reach its economic potential.

One fact europe cannot survive without african and s.american talent .Fifa would win that battle by drawing lines in the sand as it pertains to how Europe uses that talent if the mumbling is ever put into to action by a legal suit.

**Paul Marin** · December 16, 2010, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by X View Post

Someone threw it back and more..lol

There are a couple of things I'm confused about--

1) You provided numbers of attendance for the South Africa event (350,000). You then used that number in the rest of the article as average attendance per day rather than a total number. So which is it? Were there an average of 350,000 extra people in South Africa every day of the World Cup? Or was that the total number of people who visited the country? If it is the latter then all the comments about how Qatar will be able to keep up with that many tourists are a bit off-base, since the tourists will be recycled. Obviously, it will be harder for a smaller nation to pull it off, but it would be nice to have some clarity here instead of FUD.

THIS FELLOW NEEDS TO READ MORE CAREFULLY. THE WRITER SAID A TOTAL OF 350,000 VISITORS ATTENDED THE WORLD CUP, NOT 350,000 PER DAY. THIS IS EQUIVALENT TO 20% OF THEIR CURRENT 1.7M POPULATION, WHICH WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT AS HE SAID, OF THE ENTIRE NATION OF FRANCE SHOWING UP IN THE USA FOR A MONTH. THERE IS NO CHANCE THAT THE USA WITH 300M PEOPLE COULD HANDLE ALL OF FRANCE (~60M PEOPLE) SHOWING UP HERE FOR A MONTH.

2) Are there any guidelines that FIFA uses to determine what the host nation is? I am honestly curious about this. If there aren't any guidelines, then sadly FIFA, being a private organization, are allowed to use whatever logic (or lack thereof) they wish to determine which bid will be successful. Consider the analogy of a consumer having the option of buying a Big Mac versus getting a healthy meal of boiled vegetables. While the veggies are obviously a better meal, Micky D's is throwing in a free toy to sweeten the deal. What is the consumer more likely to purchase? And who am I, the guy behind the consumer in line, to decide that he shouldn't have chosen the hamburger?

THERE ARE NO GUIDELINES THAT FIFA WILL PUBLISH, BUT THEY GIVE EVERYONE THE BELIEF THAT THE PLAYING FIELD IS LEVEL, WHICH IS WHY THE WHOLE THING IS A SHAM.

Yes, the US/England would probably have held a better World Cup than the nations that eventually won the bid. But unless the process for determining who wins the bid has stringent guidelines in place and is deterministic, any complaints are just going to be seen as whining.

SO THIS FELLOW BELIEVES THAT USA AND EUROPE, WHO FUND THE VAST MAJORITY OF FIFA'S MONEY LAUNDERING EXPLOITS, SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE SUPPORTIVE. CRAZY.

Posted by sohum on December 13, 2010 at 5:01 PM | Report this comment

FIFA is a private organization, did they have to explain to anyone why they gave the 94 World Cup to USA ? NO.

2. The decision is subjective, how can you prove there is corruption ?
THERE IS AMPLE PROOF THAT THERE ARE CORRUPT MEMBERS OF FIFA. WARNER PLUS THREE OTHERS ARE ALL PROVEN CRIMINALS. THIS FELLOW NEEDS TO DO SOME HOMEWORK.

3. Your argument about the Stadiums already built is flimsy, for the Japan World Cup 10 stadiums were built.
THIS IS NOT THE POINT - NO STADIUM (WITH A CARBON NEUTRAL FOOTPRINT TO KEEP TEMPERATURES AT NORMAL PLAYING LEVELS WHILE THE OUTSIDE IS 110 DEGREES) HAVE BEEN BUILT. JAPAN HAD A CONVENTIONAL STADIUM BUILDING EFFORT.

4. Sponsorship is not a threat to FIFA, are you sure Budweiser or Adidas could tell FIFA they'll stop sponsoring them for not giving the World Cup to the US ? They'll make billions wherever the WOrld Cup takes place at.
IF THE US GOVERNMENT SAYS THAT FIFA IS GUILTY OF RACKETEERING, NONE OF THESE COMPANIES WOULD TOUCH FIFA WITH A FIVE MILLION FOOT POLE. THEY WOULD ALL BE SUBJECT TO USA ANTI RACKETEERING LAWS SO FIFA COULD KISS ANY REVENUES FROM THEM GOODBYE.

Anyway you obviously dont know how Soccer works or FIFA.
SORRY - YOU DON'T KNOW HOW USA LAW WORKS...NOR DO YOU REALISE THAT FIFA GETS THE VAST MAJORITY OF BIG MONEY FROM BIG MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES THAT NEED USA BUSINESS. AND AS FOR FIFA - THEY DON'T WORK - THEY STEAL.

See my comments above.

**Paul Marin** · December 17, 2010, 12:56 AM

Originally posted by X View Post

I agree with you up to the point where you say countries that contribute the most ? Its not a fair process we all know that but how do you measure contributing the most to football, if its infrastructure then the WC should never leave europe , if its raw talent , then it should never leave S.America and Africa , if its money , then western europe and America has to deal with a global booming corporate market of football where Africa , Asia,S.AmericaCentral America ,Eastern Europe and the middle east has the money and corporate and governmental sponsors to throw a WC by themselves.

The alternatve that the elitist propose is Ameria and Western Europe secede from Fifa and start their own world cup because they have the corporate dollars and infrastructure!

Do we really trust Western Europe and America to do a better Job than FIFA? Football has grown where S.America , Africa & Asia are not taken for granted as it pertains to talent , political power and corporate money.

It will continue to grow.China hasnt thrown its hat in the ring yet and Nigeria and Ghana has yet to reach its economic potential.

One fact europe cannot survive without african and s.american talent .Fifa would win that battle by drawing lines in the sand as it pertains to how Europe uses that talent if the mumbling is ever put into to action by a legal suit.

Let's be clear. The issue is not "FIFA" as a private organization. It is that the current members of the executive committee have hi-jacked the organization to be self-serving. To the extent that their corruption is endemic, then FIFA is by extension a corrupt organization.

If Italy, England, France, Germany and Spain were to secede from FIFA (today) it would fail as these countries supply the vast majority of opportunities for top talent development and are the economic engine that drives FIFA. African and S. American talent would still end up going to Europe as $ talk.

To your other point about measuring fair contribution. This is a very delicate subject and of course, small countries should have a say. I don't know the best way of dealing with that, but that brings me back to corruption. If there was transparency in the organization, corruption would cease and the one-country-one-vote approach would probably be the best way to continue.

Jus' fimi tuppance.

**Sir X** · December 17, 2010, 09:18 AM

Disagree , i think the move would backfire on western europe, easily, all Fifa has to do is hold the WC in the middle of the winter in Southern China to disrupt all european competitions and ban all member nations who stay with fifa not to participate in the western european wc not leagues .

it would be a war with the european leagues and games suffering, i see no unity in western europe to fight fifa , the 1st thief to cut a deal would be italy and then spain.

yuh tink fifa nuh ave card fi play, corporate and government money isnt resinged soley in europe, ask china , japan,korea,brazil and s.africa...i will give you a better one cuba..50 years of a failed us embargo and it trades with the world, corporate world too.

**Peter R** · December 17, 2010, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by X View Post

Disagree , i think the move would backfire on western europe, easily, all Fifa has to do is hold the WC in the middle of the winter in Southern China to disrupt all european competitions and ban all member nations who stay with fifa not to participate in the western european wc not leagues .

it would be a war with the european leagues and games suffering, i see no unity in western europe to fight fifa , the 1st thief to cut a deal would be italy and then spain.

yuh tink fifa nuh ave card fi play, corporate and government money isnt resinged soley in europe, ask china , japan,korea,brazil and s.africa...i will give you a better one cuba..50 years of a failed us embargo and it trades with the world, corporate world too.

You really think they would/could do that?.e. hold the WC when you say? Nobody would go IMO...that could be them putting themselves in a coffin.

A WC without western european powerhouses would not be worthwhile attending... and who going to then pour money into FIFA? China? and who else?

What FIFA needs is THIS threat of secession, and if not then an actual breakaway group. Eventually like most breakaway leagues, the two are individually weaker than the whole... there might then be a cleanup with a more transparent equitable governing body emerging.

**Gamma** · December 17, 2010, 10:14 AM

remember seh england only came to FIFA in 1958 ...just in time to host the 66 WC, which they won under dubious cricumstances.

england to bad mind and arrogant and are smarting from the rather PUBLIC embarassment. america and australia not mekking half as much noise as dem and they lost too.

other than the premier league and scones with clotted cream and jam!

**Sir X** · December 17, 2010, 10:21 AM

No and i dont think western europe will do a thing either , its all wild speculation about possible options and outcomes that are on the table , what should be done and needs to be done is the big debate.

lets not fool ourselves fifa has cards , and dont think for a minute that the world is going to run behind a western european wc , they already have a european cup, a western european cup with ole powers isnt mouth watering , it would be a third tier competition behind the fifa designated wc and european cup.

btw blatter said he is thinking of moving the wc in the winter season in qatar.

like i keep saying fifa has cards and the world isnt polar,like you are suggesting, someone will blink,more than likely western europe.

**Sir X** · December 17, 2010, 10:31 AM

tek it back , the football world is polar in the direction of fifa ...lol

**Gamma** · December 17, 2010, 11:11 AM

that was quick!

**Paul Marin** · December 17, 2010, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by X View Post

No and i dont think western europe will do a thing either , its all wild speculation about possible options and outcomes that are on the table , what should be done and needs to be done is the big debate.

lets not fool ourselves fifa has cards , and dont think for a minute that the world is going to run behind a western european wc , they already have a european cup, a western european cup with ole powers isnt mouth watering , it would be a third tier competition behind the fifa designated wc and european cup.

btw blatter said he is thinking of moving the wc in the winter season in qatar.

like i keep saying fifa has cards and the world isnt polar,like you are suggesting, someone will blink,more than likely western europe.

X - remember that the issue is FIFA's corruption and the challenge for member nations is to influence FIFA in such a way that the corrupt practices are summarily dealt with. The threat of a breakaway is one way, but unfortunately, the likelihood of Italy, Spain, Germany, France and England forming a break away group is beyond slim. They won't come together.

Still, whether it is the threat of a breakaway group, the long arm of international law, assassination, accident, drought, famine, pestilence...it matters not - the current status quo has to go - they cannot continue without the game suffering. The sooner the average fan realises that, the more pressure will come to bear on them cleaning up their act. Their practices are putting the future credibility of the game in jeopardy. There is no question about that.

RBSC

Announcement

Zeppo comes out swinging....kitchen sink and more !

Zeppo comes out swinging....kitchen sink and more !

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment