|
|
Post by lostinspace on Feb 25, 2015 22:34:58 GMT
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372 
|
Post by irishrover on Feb 26, 2015 11:30:39 GMT
Given what Chris Waddle is primarily remembered for now he probably regrets going to the World Cup full stop!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 19:08:37 GMT
Waddle is right, it's a total farce.
This is a perfect opportunity to stand up to the corrupt Blatter and his cronies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 2, 2015 20:11:05 GMT
Quite looking forward to it myself, it'll beat watching "I'm a celebrity" on the box at this time of the year, and it won't effect watching Rovers as most games won't clash with our fixtures.
If it messes up Premiership fixtures do any of us really care? Anyway why don't they just do what rugby does keep playing and use reserve players instead?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 22:16:04 GMT
Anyway why don't they just do what rugby does keep playing and use reserve players instead? Because TV broadcasters have paid the PL a fortune for the rights to show matches involving some of the best players in the world? Then of course you would have clubs paying the likes of Rooney £1,300,000 a month (and set to increase as players demand more as the TV money increases) and not seeing the player for a month. Then clubs like Chelsea and Man City will cry their eyes out and say that FFP rules aren't fair as they will lose all of their best players, then when they do get back the ones who have progressed to the later stages of the competition will be knackered. Wouldn't it be better just to stand up to Blatter and get rid of the bloke? |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Mar 3, 2015 1:20:59 GMT
Anyway why don't they just do what rugby does keep playing and use reserve players instead? Because TV broadcasters have paid the PL a fortune for the rights to show matches involving some of the best players in the world? Then of course you would have clubs paying the likes of Rooney £1,300,000 a month (and set to increase as players demand more as the TV money increases) and not seeing the player for a month. Then clubs like Chelsea and Man City will cry their eyes out and say that FFP rules aren't fair as they will lose all of their best players, then when they do get back the ones who have progressed to the later stages of the competition will be knackered. Wouldn't it be better just to stand up to Blatter and get rid of the bloke? Not going to make a difference here. This is not about one man. It's not that you get rid of Blatter and suddenly everything is better. In some ways Blatter is just a very useful idiot these days because he can take all the flak and he's old and doesn't really care. The issue is far more institutional than that - it is to do with how power is distributed within FIFA. Until Europe and South America wake up to the fact that they are essentially outvoted by what used to be referred to as the 'emerging' nations and need to build bridges with them rather than run roughshod over their interests while throwing a paddy that they don't run the game anymore then nothing will change. Blatter was clever enough to see which way the wind was blowing and create the necessary alliances. What the football administrators in Europe and South America have failed to recognise is that it's not just politically that they're outmaneuvered it's also financially. Once you factor in far East and middle East financial interests and the money to be made building stadiums rather than renovating then it's easy to see why a lot of interests are satisfied in this way. Until we gain a smarter appreciation of this we will simply be reduced to ineffective carping on the sidelines. Blatter could go tomorrow and it would do nothing to stop a Qatar World Cup. I see no really great momentum moving against this - think about how many of the big leagues (and thus big wages for players) are reliant on middle east oil money now in one shape or form. No one is going to be rocking the boat here. This failure rests squarely on the desk of unimaginative and complacent thinking in the traditional power bases of Europe and South America who thought control of football was their birthright and are only belatedly waking up to the reality that they don't have the power anymore and therefore need to build links and interests beyond. Blatter is corrupt but he has a better grasp on football politics than anyone else which is why the mud doesn't stick; UEFA and their South American equivalents are utterly clueless in comparison. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2015 12:32:16 GMT
Which is why I said, get rid of Blatter and his cronies.
Middle east money is convenient for makeweight clubs like Man City, but anyone who argues that what's happening there is good for the game is bonkers.
Without the relationship with FIFA, of course, nobody would be building stadiums in the middle of the desert.
It isn't difficult, no European clubs go to that World Cup, what are you left with? Brazil and Argentina duff up USA and Chile, Japan and Russia try hard but will never win. The tournemant would be a total farce.
Blatter is a large part of the problem. It was him who made that statement about us 'giving' football to the world wasn't it? The bloke won't even allow the findings of investigations into corruption within FIFA to be published.
It really is time to move on from the likes of Blatter and Platini. And they can take sly snakes like Jerome Valcke with them as they leave.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Mar 3, 2015 18:48:48 GMT
Which is why I said, get rid of Blatter and his cronies. Middle east money is convenient for makeweight clubs like Man City, but anyone who argues that what's happening there is good for the game is bonkers. Without the relationship with FIFA, of course, nobody would be building stadiums in the middle of the desert. It isn't difficult, no European clubs go to that World Cup, what are you left with? Brazil and Argentina duff up USA and Chile, Japan and Russia try hard but will never win. The tournemant would be a total farce. Blatter is a large part of the problem. It was him who made that statement about us 'giving' football to the world wasn't it? The bloke won't even allow the findings of investigations into corruption within FIFA to be published. It really is time to move on from the likes of Blatter and Platini. And they can take sly snakes like Jerome Valcke with them as they leave. But it's not even a group of people, it's a structural issue. Get rid of those people and the incentives that created them will still exist. They are a political reality of modern football. UEFA and South America come across as trying to put a genie back in the bottle and return football to where it was 40 years ago where the World Cup passed between them every 4 years with everyone else offered crumbs off the table. The thing is it that didn't really deliver for a huge number of FIFA member and held back football's global commerical potential so no one is going to let them do that. It's that deep resentment which created Blatter and his like in the first place. I find it bizarre that Platini and Blatter are lumped together in the same breath by English analysis of FIFA. This shows that we haven't got a clue what's really going on. Blatter and Platini are natural archenemies not allies! The only way they are allies is in a very English 'down with Johnny Foreigner' kind of way. Platini represents the desperation of the pre-Blatter old guard. Blatter saps Platini's power and the power of anyone who would run UEFA. I'd ask what viable alternatives people think are actually out there - we're not going back to the days when FIFA was simply a subsidiary of the FA based in a back office at Lancaster Gate! I can't see any sustained movement that is going to get that World Cup stopped. You are dealing with people for whom massive sums of money is chicken feed which will just allow them to pay off opponents. Last time I checked Chelsea are fully owned by a Russian, Arsenal are half owned by a Russian, Man United and Liverpool by Americans and most other Premier League clubs owned by interests that generally come from outside the traditional spheres of power in world football. On an individual level they may have a different set of incentives to FIFA but there's no reason to assume that means they're collective interests are aligned with Europe against Blatter on this. If anything Blatter's world of football has been pretty good to them too - it's opened up a whole world of new football markets which the old guard were blind to. Think about what Asian TV exposure is worth to the Premier League, La Liga etc. They're not about to risk upsetting powerful commercial interests there by starting a co-ordinated anti-Qatar campaign. The analysis in the British football press says that Blatter is corrupt and he is successful because he is corrupt. That is just the wrong way round to to me. Blatter is corrupt but it's his success which has allowed him to be corrupt with impunity. These people are a disaster for the game but they've been allowed to exist because of stupid, arrogant, parochial thinking on behalf of the traditional football powers. We can't have our cake and eat it; you can't put the game up for sale and then cry that you can't control it anymore. The two things are linked. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2015 14:04:05 GMT
Which is why I said, get rid of Blatter and his cronies. Middle east money is convenient for makeweight clubs like Man City, but anyone who argues that what's happening there is good for the game is bonkers. Without the relationship with FIFA, of course, nobody would be building stadiums in the middle of the desert. It isn't difficult, no European clubs go to that World Cup, what are you left with? Brazil and Argentina duff up USA and Chile, Japan and Russia try hard but will never win. The tournemant would be a total farce. Blatter is a large part of the problem. It was him who made that statement about us 'giving' football to the world wasn't it? The bloke won't even allow the findings of investigations into corruption within FIFA to be published. It really is time to move on from the likes of Blatter and Platini. And they can take sly snakes like Jerome Valcke with them as they leave. But it's not even a group of people, it's a structural issue. Get rid of those people and the incentives that created them will still exist. They are a political reality of modern football. UEFA and South America come across as trying to put a genie back in the bottle and return football to where it was 40 years ago where the World Cup passed between them every 4 years with everyone else offered crumbs off the table. The thing is it that didn't really deliver for a huge number of FIFA member and held back football's global commerical potential so no one is going to let them do that. It's that deep resentment which created Blatter and his like in the first place. I find it bizarre that Platini and Blatter are lumped together in the same breath by English analysis of FIFA. This shows that we haven't got a clue what's really going on. Blatter and Platini are natural archenemies not allies! The only way they are allies is in a very English 'down with Johnny Foreigner' kind of way. Platini represents the desperation of the pre-Blatter old guard. Blatter saps Platini's power and the power of anyone who would run UEFA. I'd ask what viable alternatives people think are actually out there - we're not going back to the days when FIFA was simply a subsidiary of the FA based in a back office at Lancaster Gate! I can't see any sustained movement that is going to get that World Cup stopped. You are dealing with people for whom massive sums of money is chicken feed which will just allow them to pay off opponents. Last time I checked Chelsea are fully owned by a Russian, Arsenal are half owned by a Russian, Man United and Liverpool by Americans and most other Premier League clubs owned by interests that generally come from outside the traditional spheres of power in world football. On an individual level they may have a different set of incentives to FIFA but there's no reason to assume that means they're collective interests are aligned with Europe against Blatter on this. If anything Blatter's world of football has been pretty good to them too - it's opened up a whole world of new football markets which the old guard were blind to. Think about what Asian TV exposure is worth to the Premier League, La Liga etc. They're not about to risk upsetting powerful commercial interests there by starting a co-ordinated anti-Qatar campaign. The analysis in the British football press says that Blatter is corrupt and he is successful because he is corrupt. That is just the wrong way round to to me. Blatter is corrupt but it's his success which has allowed him to be corrupt with impunity. These people are a disaster for the game but they've been allowed to exist because of stupid, arrogant, parochial thinking on behalf of the traditional football powers. We can't have our cake and eat it; you can't put the game up for sale and then cry that you can't control it anymore. The two things are linked. The FA put the game up for sale to TV money, and they seem happy with the results. I didn't suggest that it was possible to remove Blatter and retain FIFA. I didn't suggest that Blatter would, under any circumstances, ''stop'' the desert World Cup, in fact, I've not heard or read that suggested anywhere. I have no idea what your point is about foreign owners of PL clubs. As in all walks of life, the owners come in a variety of colours, some want power, some want success, others, like Kronke, want to make money. |
|
dagnogo
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 872
|
Post by dagnogo on Mar 4, 2015 17:21:18 GMT
Blatter isn't even the creator of this. Joao Havelange, having wrestled control of FIFA from Sir Stanley Rous in the 70s, largely by offering associations vast amounts of TV/sponsorship cash, did that.
This has been going on for yonks. Allowimg Argentina to keep the 1978 tournament despite the military Junta was the start. Mexico being given the 1986 World Cup after Colombia pulled out, when USA should have won it, was another low. Mexico had a World Cup 16 years previously!
Blatter's turned it into an art form though. He presided over 2006, which he was furious about as he thought he'd fixed it for South Africa only for his own committee to disobey him. He sorted that in 2010 by limiting entry to Africa under the guise of "broadening the game's appeal", knowing South Africa couldn't fail.
Likewise, Brazil was always going to be the only South American nation that could afford the World Cup.
What do South Africa, Brazil, Russia and Qatar have in common? Widespread corruption and a cheery disdain for human rights. Under Sepp and Valcke, who inherited the system and have done nothing to change it, we should all look forward to Somalia 2026.
Don't forget that Blatter is Havelange's political son and heir (as opposed to his son in law who has been corrupting Brazilian football for decades). Havelange campaigned tirelessly for Blatter to defeat the honourable Lennart Johanneson.
As for Platini, he's not the same as Blatter at all, but boy, does he hate the English. Criticising the English clubs for their debts while cheerfully ignoring the Spanish clubs and, er PSG, whose Qatari owners count his son as an employee. There was even rumour that he thought of this laughable Euro 2020 host sharing idea because there was talk that we would bid to host the whole thing. Maybe his ideas are shaped by his harrowing expeience at Heysel but if he can't separare that from the issues then perhaps President of UEFA isn't the job for him.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Mar 4, 2015 18:27:40 GMT
But it's not even a group of people, it's a structural issue. Get rid of those people and the incentives that created them will still exist. They are a political reality of modern football. UEFA and South America come across as trying to put a genie back in the bottle and return football to where it was 40 years ago where the World Cup passed between them every 4 years with everyone else offered crumbs off the table. The thing is it that didn't really deliver for a huge number of FIFA member and held back football's global commerical potential so no one is going to let them do that. It's that deep resentment which created Blatter and his like in the first place. I find it bizarre that Platini and Blatter are lumped together in the same breath by English analysis of FIFA. This shows that we haven't got a clue what's really going on. Blatter and Platini are natural archenemies not allies! The only way they are allies is in a very English 'down with Johnny Foreigner' kind of way. Platini represents the desperation of the pre-Blatter old guard. Blatter saps Platini's power and the power of anyone who would run UEFA. I'd ask what viable alternatives people think are actually out there - we're not going back to the days when FIFA was simply a subsidiary of the FA based in a back office at Lancaster Gate! I can't see any sustained movement that is going to get that World Cup stopped. You are dealing with people for whom massive sums of money is chicken feed which will just allow them to pay off opponents. Last time I checked Chelsea are fully owned by a Russian, Arsenal are half owned by a Russian, Man United and Liverpool by Americans and most other Premier League clubs owned by interests that generally come from outside the traditional spheres of power in world football. On an individual level they may have a different set of incentives to FIFA but there's no reason to assume that means they're collective interests are aligned with Europe against Blatter on this. If anything Blatter's world of football has been pretty good to them too - it's opened up a whole world of new football markets which the old guard were blind to. Think about what Asian TV exposure is worth to the Premier League, La Liga etc. They're not about to risk upsetting powerful commercial interests there by starting a co-ordinated anti-Qatar campaign. The analysis in the British football press says that Blatter is corrupt and he is successful because he is corrupt. That is just the wrong way round to to me. Blatter is corrupt but it's his success which has allowed him to be corrupt with impunity. These people are a disaster for the game but they've been allowed to exist because of stupid, arrogant, parochial thinking on behalf of the traditional football powers. We can't have our cake and eat it; you can't put the game up for sale and then cry that you can't control it anymore. The two things are linked. The FA put the game up for sale to TV money, and they seem happy with the results. I didn't suggest that it was possible to remove Blatter and retain FIFA. I didn't suggest that Blatter would, under any circumstances, ''stop'' the desert World Cup, in fact, I've not heard or read that suggested anywhere. I have no idea what your point is about foreign owners of PL clubs. As in all walks of life, the owners come in a variety of colours, some want power, some want success, others, like Kronke, want to make money. In that case I don't really know what your point is. I thought you were suggesting that this was an opportunity to get rid of Blatter and his cronies. By that did you actually mean it was an opportunity for European Associations to leave FIFA? To reform FIFA? What is the goal here for you? I was not defending the FA so I don't really know what you mean by that either - I see the FA's failure as one of the primary problems here. My point was that the FA (and other associations) put the game up for sale in multiple different ways. One consequence of that is that the game became a global financial powerhouse and no longer the sole preserve of a small group of associations and interest groups in Europe and South America. It is therefore a bit rich to think you can do that and still assume that the global game will always operate in your interests as it used to. The point about the people who own football clubs is that the assumption seems to be that the main threat to the Qatar World Cup would be from the big European Leagues refusing to release their players as it would damage TV rights deals, the players as their assets etc. Ignoring the fact that presumably TV rights deals have yet to be negotiated anywhere up to 2022 all these leagues are nothing more than the collective interests of the individuals who own the clubs. I just don't think there's any reason to think they would see their interests as threatened by Blatter sufficiently to massively rock the boat that ultimately keeps them afloat too. I've read this assumption in a number of places and I think it's deeply flawed - I thought that's what you were getting at with the comment about European clubs refusing the World Cup. If not then what is it you are getting at here? You said this is the perfect opportunity to stand up to Blatter and then to get rid of him and others around him. What I want to know is what you think the mechanism is to do that and who/what do you replace them with? Because I really can't see anything much more than increased carping on the sidelines really. The problem is that in this country we tend to see FIFA as an issue of personality and money and it isn't really; it's an issue of politics and money and we're hypocritical when it comes to the money and utterly clueless when it comes to the politics. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2015 20:15:47 GMT
The FA put the game up for sale to TV money, and they seem happy with the results. I didn't suggest that it was possible to remove Blatter and retain FIFA. I didn't suggest that Blatter would, under any circumstances, ''stop'' the desert World Cup, in fact, I've not heard or read that suggested anywhere. I have no idea what your point is about foreign owners of PL clubs. As in all walks of life, the owners come in a variety of colours, some want power, some want success, others, like Kronke, want to make money. In that case I don't really know what your point is. I thought you were suggesting that this was an opportunity to get rid of Blatter and his cronies. By that did you actually mean it was an opportunity for European Associations to leave FIFA? To reform FIFA? What is the goal here for you? I was not defending the FA so I don't really know what you mean by that either - I see the FA's failure as one of the primary problems here. My point was that the FA (and other associations) put the game up for sale in multiple different ways. One consequence of that is that the game became a global financial powerhouse and no longer the sole preserve of a small group of associations and interest groups in Europe and South America. It is therefore a bit rich to think you can do that and still assume that the global game will always operate in your interests as it used to. The point about the people who own football clubs is that the assumption seems to be that the main threat to the Qatar World Cup would be from the big European Leagues refusing to release their players as it would damage TV rights deals, the players as their assets etc. Ignoring the fact that presumably TV rights deals have yet to be negotiated anywhere up to 2022 all these leagues are nothing more than the collective interests of the individuals who own the clubs. I just don't think there's any reason to think they would see their interests as threatened by Blatter sufficiently to massively rock the boat that ultimately keeps them afloat too. I've read this assumption in a number of places and I think it's deeply flawed - I thought that's what you were getting at with the comment about European clubs refusing the World Cup. If not then what is it you are getting at here? You said this is the perfect opportunity to stand up to Blatter and then to get rid of him and others around him. What I want to know is what you think the mechanism is to do that and who/what do you replace them with? Because I really can't see anything much more than increased carping on the sidelines really. The problem is that in this country we tend to see FIFA as an issue of personality and money and it isn't really; it's an issue of politics and money and we're hypocritical when it comes to the money and utterly clueless when it comes to the politics. FIFA is just a title, nothing more or less. Those letters alone mean nothing, so it matters not if the governing body is restructured or a new one formed. The players are indeed assets, and very expensive ones. Clubs don't want them leaving half way through a season and returning knackered or injured. Glad you are happy with the world governing body despite them being as corrupt as the EU, for me that's an issue, but I guess we all have different standards. |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Mar 10, 2015 12:55:01 GMT
In that case I don't really know what your point is. I thought you were suggesting that this was an opportunity to get rid of Blatter and his cronies. By that did you actually mean it was an opportunity for European Associations to leave FIFA? To reform FIFA? What is the goal here for you? I was not defending the FA so I don't really know what you mean by that either - I see the FA's failure as one of the primary problems here. My point was that the FA (and other associations) put the game up for sale in multiple different ways. One consequence of that is that the game became a global financial powerhouse and no longer the sole preserve of a small group of associations and interest groups in Europe and South America. It is therefore a bit rich to think you can do that and still assume that the global game will always operate in your interests as it used to. The point about the people who own football clubs is that the assumption seems to be that the main threat to the Qatar World Cup would be from the big European Leagues refusing to release their players as it would damage TV rights deals, the players as their assets etc. Ignoring the fact that presumably TV rights deals have yet to be negotiated anywhere up to 2022 all these leagues are nothing more than the collective interests of the individuals who own the clubs. I just don't think there's any reason to think they would see their interests as threatened by Blatter sufficiently to massively rock the boat that ultimately keeps them afloat too. I've read this assumption in a number of places and I think it's deeply flawed - I thought that's what you were getting at with the comment about European clubs refusing the World Cup. If not then what is it you are getting at here? You said this is the perfect opportunity to stand up to Blatter and then to get rid of him and others around him. What I want to know is what you think the mechanism is to do that and who/what do you replace them with? Because I really can't see anything much more than increased carping on the sidelines really. The problem is that in this country we tend to see FIFA as an issue of personality and money and it isn't really; it's an issue of politics and money and we're hypocritical when it comes to the money and utterly clueless when it comes to the politics. FIFA is just a title, nothing more or less. Those letters alone mean nothing, so it matters not if the governing body is restructured or a new one formed. The players are indeed assets, and very expensive ones. Clubs don't want them leaving half way through a season and returning knackered or injured. Glad you are happy with the world governing body despite them being as corrupt as the EU, for me that's an issue, but I guess we all have different standards. Ah come on, that's just willfully ignoring my point. In fact all the way through I have consistently called FIFA corrupt and damaging to the game. That is quite clearly not what I'm saying in any way. What I am asking you to clarify is the how and the what? What is the mechanism for change? And how would a new system operate? You need incentives for things to change and you also need people to wake up to where power actually resides in world football rather than where they wish does. You want change - how does that change happen? You said this was a great opportunity to get rid of Blatter/cronies/FIFA etc but you haven't provided any argument for why that is the case. I can't see what that optimism is based on other than a vague hope. It's two simple questions really. What do you want change to look like and how does that change happen? Simply saying FIFA are bad and I want rid of them doesn't really do anything; you'd struggle to find anyone who thinks differently. I see absolutely no plan from the people that might be in a position to change things - simply a load of pointless hypocritical carping. The rest of the world gave up taking lectures from Europeans on corruption many, many years ago. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 13:49:50 GMT
FIFA is just a title, nothing more or less. Those letters alone mean nothing, so it matters not if the governing body is restructured or a new one formed. The players are indeed assets, and very expensive ones. Clubs don't want them leaving half way through a season and returning knackered or injured. Glad you are happy with the world governing body despite them being as corrupt as the EU, for me that's an issue, but I guess we all have different standards. Ah come on, that's just willfully ignoring my point. In fact all the way through I have consistently called FIFA corrupt and damaging to the game. That is quite clearly not what I'm saying in any way. What I am asking you to clarify is the how and the what? What is the mechanism for change? And how would a new system operate? You need incentives for things to change and you also need people to wake up to where power actually resides in world football rather than where they wish does. You want change - how does that change happen? You said this was a great opportunity to get rid of Blatter/cronies/FIFA etc but you haven't provided any argument for why that is the case. I can't see what that optimism is based on other than a vague hope. It's two simple questions really. What do you want change to look like and how does that change happen? Simply saying FIFA are bad and I want rid of them doesn't really do anything; you'd struggle to find anyone who thinks differently. I see absolutely no plan from the people that might be in a position to change things - simply a load of pointless hypocritical carping. The rest of the world gave up taking lectures from Europeans on corruption many, many years ago. I didn't say that I was optimistic that anything would change, just that this is a perfect window of opportunity. That's based on FIFA's credibility being at al all time low, the whole world is aware of the corruption and of the farce of sanctioning a World Cup in conditions that aren't safe for players or spectators. Sorry if that's not enough for you, but it doesn't read too well in my eyes. I have to do some shopping and then wash the car, so I don't have the spare 45 mins today to draft a new global constitution for world football, I'll see how my diary looks tomorrow. |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Mar 10, 2015 18:26:50 GMT
Ah come on, that's just willfully ignoring my point. In fact all the way through I have consistently called FIFA corrupt and damaging to the game. That is quite clearly not what I'm saying in any way. What I am asking you to clarify is the how and the what? What is the mechanism for change? And how would a new system operate? You need incentives for things to change and you also need people to wake up to where power actually resides in world football rather than where they wish does. You want change - how does that change happen? You said this was a great opportunity to get rid of Blatter/cronies/FIFA etc but you haven't provided any argument for why that is the case. I can't see what that optimism is based on other than a vague hope. It's two simple questions really. What do you want change to look like and how does that change happen? Simply saying FIFA are bad and I want rid of them doesn't really do anything; you'd struggle to find anyone who thinks differently. I see absolutely no plan from the people that might be in a position to change things - simply a load of pointless hypocritical carping. The rest of the world gave up taking lectures from Europeans on corruption many, many years ago. I didn't say that I was optimistic that anything would change, just that this is a perfect window of opportunity. That's based on FIFA's credibility being at al all time low, the whole world is aware of the corruption and of the farce of sanctioning a World Cup in conditions that aren't safe for players or spectators. Sorry if that's not enough for you, but it doesn't read too well in my eyes. I have to do some shopping and then wash the car, so I don't have the spare 45 mins today to draft a new global constitution for world football, I'll see how my diary looks tomorrow. OK, that's fair enough but I think it underestimates the power of Blatter and the people around him. FIFA didn't build an empire on sand - it's built on making a lot of very important people a lot of money. If anything, ridiculously, I think the Qatar World Cup is in a stronger position now than it had been before. There's a bit of griping but I don't hear the major leagues making a fuss, I don't here any of the associations really seriously objecting, key sponsors have kept their traps pretty firmly shut. There's a bit of light moaning but nothing that would scare FIFA I think and they have 7 years now to embed this idea as normal. FIFA has shown itself completely immune to any form of people power; they have one of the desired products in the World after all, it's not likely there'll be a mass boycott of the World Cup. So unless pressure comes from those other places I think Blatter looks pretty secure and there's not much sign of anything coherent emerging. Obviously, you don't need a complete blueprint for how an alternative system works but FIFA fills a role and if you want an alternative surely it's neccesary to have an idea of what that alternative look like. It's a bit like saying 'I want the manager sacked' but not having any idea who you might want to replace them. It's fine to say I don't like FIFA but it begs the question of what viable alternative there is and who would create one? I don't mean you personally, I mean when I read this in the press or some English football mandarin sounding off. There's no weight behind it - it's just howling at the moon. I get fed up with an English narrative that sounds bitter and resentful that we're no longer in charge of a game we created and shows no awareness of the current political realities of power in world football. It's as if we think that if we bounce up and down shouting about it long enough change will happen but the last 20 years show that our views are pretty irrelevant in world football. We don't like Platini, who for all his obvious faults is one of the few people who could force some sort of change in the system, we don't show any willingness to build alliances of the scale that made Blatter's lot successful and we have no awareness that most of the rest of the world considers us to be a bunch of bitter whining hypocrits (because when we had FIFA in our pocket it was just as skewed towards our interests as it currently is towards others). Yet at the same time there's an expectation that we have the right to play a key role in promoting change and lecture the world without having a coherent alternative. It just seems fantasy land stuff to me; it's engaging with a world we wish existed rather than the one that actually does. |
|
