FIFA Bureaucrats Arrested, to be extradited to US

In Switzerland but no such guarantee from U.S.

 

Me too. I seriously doubt it now though. He will say he is too busy in Zurich sorting out the handover of power etc etc etc

 

Blatter under investigation by U.S. officials now according to BBC

 

Blatter investigation:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32986950

 

Looks like Season 6 of The Wire's set to be pretty good then... https://www.facebook.com/kieran.callanan/videos/vb.573445001/10155707405755002/

(I got bored.)

 

Anyone surprised? No? K.

 

Wouldn't be surprised if he intended to resign anyway, but the election was purely one last ego trip for Blatter.

 

And, it seems, the Sunday Times's lies have been believed not only by the FBI and the Swiss authorities, but even by Sepp himself. Disgraceful!

 

Better head for the hills now, Sepp. You may be the best man to reform FIFA, and as you've said, you've been desperately but unsuccessfully trying to limit the power of the President and the number of times he can be re-elected, but I wouldn't hang around if I were you.

 

Get it in your head ... the ST weren't reporting, they created the scandal. They did not have a shred of evidence that any federation had bought any WC votes, only that it was possible. And that's regardless of any speculation now ... In fact any likely rigging on Russia's bid probably came after their report as an enraged Blatter flexed his muscles. That's in my opinion of course.

 

5 Live reporter:

:doh:

 

Why would the Sunday Times bother? They had no motive to make up a story about FIFA.

 

Exactly. Hardly the Mirror or Sport.

 

The Panorama programme was broadcast three days before the vote. Why are you only critical of the ST (Murdoch press) and not the BBC too?

What does it matter if the ST article was only an accusation if it is now being backed up by emerging evidence?

 

If Blatter is now under investigation as reported then presumably he is required to stay in Switzerland and there is no indication of how long the process will take. It would be quite hard to justify being the President of a major international organisation if, in affect, you don't hold a passport. That may have played a part at least in Blatter's decision.

The one positive that Blatter's reign delivered was an increase in the profile of the game in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean (even if it was delivered with brown paper envelopes changing hands like confetti). It would be good (probably essential) that that process continues (without the bungs) while at the same time bringing Europe and the Americas back into the fold (particularly the former where the majority of TV revenues derive from).

But the voting numbers, with the emerging nations holding a majority, aren't going to change which is why Blatter got re-elected. It's a bit like the Eurovision song contest with all the new eastern european nations. So it would be best if a new president came from the emerging part of the football world to satisfy them and also be somebody who would appease the old football world. In addition, it would be helpful if he understood the way corruption and bribery works outside the western world, especially in Africa where it's rife.

I propose a candidate with a magnificent record as a footballer in Europe and internationally, well versed in politics, respected as a humanitarian on the world stage and, as far I'm aware, without a hint of corruption against his name.

George Weah.

 

If you'd read last Sunday's ST, you would have seen that having dug around they found a whistle-blower who gave them an enormous cache of documents. Two reporters were holed up in an attic away from the paper so the story didn't leak until they'd gone through and verified the material, and that took three months before they reported.

I don't think you've got a shred of evidence that they didn't have a shred of evidence, God.

 

WTF? ... the ST set up a sting operation. Got knows what you're on about?

 

Again, why would they bother to make up a story?

 

I can't remember whether it was you who was ranting about "the Murdoch press" when you were referring to the Daily Mail and it took several posts before I finally got it through that Murdoch doesn't have any connection with the Daily Mail?

I just don't understand your agenda. People have been arrested, Sepp has resigned, and you still believe that the ST made it all up and that England would have won the World Cup vote if they hand't spilt the beans?

There's a long way to go. FIFA rules have to be changed to ensure that everyone has a vote on World Cup location, not just the Executive Committee, and that they all have to take note of the technical report. Then the third world countries need to be persuaded that they won't lose out from the changes. Easier said than done, but at least a start has been made on reforming this corrupt organisation.

 

To sell newspapers

And no they didn't make it up ... they set it up to report on.

 

You called it a 'total fabrication by the British press'.

 

Fabricate = to construct

And this was constructed.

 

So based on that view, do you stand by your claim that there wasn't a 'shred of evidence' showing possible bribery for 2018/2022?

Because the whole admission that South Africa paid out a hefty chunk to garner support for 2010, it appears that this sort of thing was around a long time before the Times article.

 

I was in Germany at the time when the news broke, hat no idea the ST was a Murdoch paper or that it was they that broke the "story". But I was enraged that from being firm favourites we went to no hopers in an instant. My German mates were shocked that our newspapers would even attempt to influence the Fifa vote. And that's being mild, the South American press and others were accusing the English FA themselves of cheating.

Of course you didn't get wind of this over here at all, the British media were too busy patting themselves on the back for exercising their right to publish. They suppressed the criticism and shouted down the dissenters and good fools that they are, the general British public shrugged their shoulders and said "oh well we probably had no chance anyway"... Wrong! we had put together a great bid and Russia were getting some quite bad press worldwide for their internal affairs. We were right to feel confident.

 

No I said there wasn't a shred of actual evidence, not possible evidence. There's always possibilities but you can't arrest someone for possible bribery.

 

Firm favourites? The technical report said we had the best bid, but that wasn't even shown to the folk who made the decision. If quality of the bids was an issue, than Qatar would have got nul points. Russia is a proper football country which has never held the World Cup, but poor infrastructure, huge distances and fan racism should have counted against them - except that a vote-swapping deal was done which was only possible because FIFA appointed hosts for two World Cups at the same time.

Your German chums were just being nice to you.

 

The FBI have, apparently!

 

I imagine they have a little thing called evidence, without it they could be done for wrongful arrest.

 

I wonder who wrote the 'technical report'? I wonder what it says about the Sunday Times article?

In my eyes it comes down to Blatter himself as he was basically directing the way they should vote. Yes it's sh!t, unfair and immoral but then we all knew that anyway.

One thing is clear though; after the ST sting we would be fighting the bloody lot of them! I wonder which idiot it was that voted for us?

 

Surely all arrests are for a "possible breaking" of the law? Innocent until proven guilty and all that?

Maybe this is a possible/probable thing.


Possibly.

 

Which is more important? That England win a World Cup bid or that corruption in world football gets exposed and stopped? The ST and the BBC (remember them?) may very well have been instrumental in encouraging the FBI to pick up the scent in the first place.

 

Maybe they could have waited until after the vote? ... you know, common sense!

Yes the beeb too (and I'm no fan of theirs btw) ... but it was the Sunday Times that instigated it and had first dibs at publication. They are the rightful targets of my wrath.

 

Maybe. Say they'd waited until after the vote and Russia (and Qatar) won anyway? Would look a lot like sour grapes wouldn't it? Of course, if England had won anyway, maybe there would have been no case to answer. But the ST and the Beeb took a punt on being right and now it's beginning to look, beyond reasonable doubt, that they were. So they got it right and published at the best time and that's it really.

I hope, and think it very likely, that Qatar will lose their World Cup and they're left with a lot of half-built stadia, rusting unused in the middle of the desert. Simply because of their treatment of the migrant construction workers alone but also because they're a bunch of evil despots anyway. And I hope Putin loses his too because it's time he got a really hefty boot in the b.llocks for continuing to strut about like he's still a bigshot or something.

 

No, that's what an investigation is for. Which the ST did and changed the possible evidence into actual evidence. It's what the media do, like with John Higgins, the Pakistani cricketers or any dodgy deal investigation.

But you've made your point and I think we've debated this enough. I disagree with you that the investigation cost us the WC due to recent events but that doesn't have to end in name calling as is the norm around here.