Fiddly FIFA
deptfordmarmoset
Posts: 3,118
Has anyone apart from me found it difficult to understand how Panorama exposing FIFA (tonight at 8:30, BBC1) corruption can be seen as being ''unpatriotic?'' We all knew they were bent and unaccountable, anyway. Keeping quiet so that England's bid has a better chance of success would simply be censorship designed to protect corruption and to get a share of the dirty money - well, that's how it seems to me. If we wanted to be patriotic and ethical, we wouldn't even work within the FIFA structure.
0
Comments
-
+1
The patriotic thing to do is show these crooks for what they are.
Kowtowing to a bunch of (alleged) criminals is not how things are done around here.0 -
I think the argument is that they could have showed it a while ago and given the Bid Team a chance to <cough> smooth things over
with FIFA before the decision was made, rather than showing it 3 days before.
But f**k it who wants their bent footy tournament here anyway. The likes of Jack Warner can take his bent holiday business and stick it up his crooked ar*e. Allegedly.0 -
FleshTuxedo wrote:I think the argument is that they could have showed it a while ago and given the Bid Team a chance to <cough> smooth things over with FIFA before the decision was made, rather than showing it 3 days before.
But f**k it who wants their bent footy tournament here anyway. The likes of Jack Warner can take his bent holiday business and stick it up his crooked ar*e. Allegedly.
Yes I understand the logic but it still reminds me of that Randy Newman song:
''Everybody's crying 'Justice'
Just as soon as there's business first''
In the event, it looks like the BBC's leaked the programme evidence to the Süddeutsche Zeitung (there's no German bid, of course) who've published 3 more names in advance of tonight's exposé.0 -
Did you watch the program today - what crock of sh1t. I am all for independence of journalists and IF the BBC had something to show us then great expose FIFA or any other fat cats with their noses in the trough then do it. Despite Blatters entrapment claims I whole heartedly back the Times for the expose of the 2 guys willing to take cash for votes but lets look at the "documentary" that the BBC have just put out.
1 - Why have they got some old geezer who looks like a train spotter as some arbiter of justice to FIFA, he looked like he had spent his life beavering around going through FIFA's bins like a disgruntled kid who hadnt been invited to the party. I think he even said he had spent over 20 years investigating FIFA.
2 - Old reports which the media have dealt with before (google for reports going back 14 years) with the only "new" evidence of wrong doing some crap printout from a "source" listing some payments which we never saw apart from under some half cocked lighting on a desk like some old Marlow film.
3 - So little did they have that we had to watch the old giffer standing on pavement shouting at the FIFA members as they got in a car for about 5 minutes of show lasting about 23 minutes.
4 - The evidence was flimsy at best - some money has gone to a company "connected" to a FIFA member - how is it connected, what does this mean, do we have a trail from the company to the man - erm NO - lazy journalism. Next one guy apparently got 100,000 French Francs - by my maths thats £10K, now you could argue that any money/bribe is bad enough but this is hardly some earth shattering amount.
All in all had this been something revelatory then fine great lets go after the fat cats - bid or no bid. However this was rehashed rubbish which we learnt nothing, that FIFA have already brushed under the carpet. And possibly cost England a chance of hosting a world class sporting event with all the extra tourism and feelgood it will bring.0 -
Agreed, what a chance, and Panorama blew it. It was poorly made, and that was more disappointing than the fact that FIFA was exposed as corrupt, as if that wasn't obvious. or predictbale. Football stinks, but frankly who cares, and should we..? Kepp paying the ticket price and turn a blind eye.
Apart from the jobs it would create, then let someone else host it, not welcome here.0 -
If the BBC is lying here, and I doubt they are, then FIFA will rebut all the claims in court.
£50 says they do not sue.0 -
No one is saying they are lying but the evidence they suggested was weak and presented in a this links to this and would anyone like to comment way avoiding direct libel but enough that our brains make the implied assumptions.
Also FIFA will not want the publicity so will ignore - the BBC know this so can afford to throw a bit of mud around.
And finally if FIFA go on the offensive then reporters will protect their own - it will be like a feeding frenzy. FIFA know that most reporters would be happy to part of the FIFA family to get the snippets of news and access to games and draws etc so would rather keep them onside.
Therefore will nothing will happen.0 -
Well I wonder how England cannot fail to win the bid after that....any other decision implies guilt. You would have thought that Andrew Jennings would have bought a new coat from the backhander from the English FA....0
-
From VizTopTips on Twitter -
FIFA OFFICIALS. Reduce the chances of getting caught taking a bribe by doing it in front of a premiership referee.0 -
guinea wrote:If the BBC is lying here, and I doubt they are, then FIFA will rebut all the claims in court.
£50 says they do not sue.
Your £50 looks safe to me....0 -
SteveR_100Milers wrote:Well I wonder how England cannot fail to win the bid after that....any other decision implies guilt. You would have thought that Andrew Jennings would have bought a new coat from the backhander from the English FA....
LOL - a new coat - thats why he was banned from the FIFA building as they thought he was a tramp.
However according to the USA via Wikileaks the Russian's are run by organised crime - so I am guessing FIFA dont want to wake up with a horses head in their beds come Friday morning.0 -
NapoleonD wrote:From VizTopTips on Twitter -
FIFA OFFICIALS. Reduce the chances of getting caught taking a bribe by doing it in front of a premiership referee.
Yes!! Now I know the real purpose of t*atter!0 -
guinea wrote:+1
The patriotic thing to do is show these crooks for what they are.
Kowtowing to a bunch of (alleged) criminals is not how things are done around here.
By patriotism they mean vested interests. There's a lot of money at stake and they are deciding the venue of not one but two World Cups, so it's perhaps now or never for those directly involved in the England bid. That said the England official didn't exactly come out of it well, his position being that whatever the story is you shouldn't upset the FIFA committee. Corruption thrives on people like him, turning a blind eye.0 -
Personally I think this is precisely the kind of journalism that the BBC should be doing. Call me old-fashioned but I for one would like to know if the UK government is doing secret deals with an endemically corrupt organisation. Apart from the Fifa execs who have now been proven to have had their fingers in the till but kept their jobs, it's interesting to discover that, thanks to secretive contracts previously hidden from the public, far from generating income for the UK as is repeatedly claimed, a successful 2018 bid is likely to COST the taxpayer many millions.mr_poll wrote:1 - Why have they got some old geezer who looks like a train spotter as some arbiter of justice to FIFA, he looked like he had spent his life beavering around going through FIFA's bins like a disgruntled kid who hadnt been invited to the party.
WTF has that got to do with anything? I suppose you think only "pretty" presenters are worthy of being on our screens? Grow up.
a serious case of small cogs0 -
Im all for free speach, but this was just stupid.
Days from possibly winning the bid to have the world cup here for the first time in half a century and probably the opportunity to host it for another 20 years, the Beeb and their rubbish journalism puts it in jeapardy. Fat Blatter doesn't really need any excuses to avoid England winning the bid, hes proven he hates English football along with his little bitch, Platini. All the BBC have done is try to ruin it for the countless millions that would have loved to have it here. Does anyone watch Panorama anyway?
Why not wait until after the decision, what difference would it have made? Work the ‘we didn't win because its corrupt’ angle.
Anyway, well done. Im sure on Thursday at 3pm you’ll say it was justified, mumbling something about public interest, when Russia is partying away in the small hours, laughing at you (and us).0 -
-
Ok, I'm against pointless opportunism with no real point but to score a few extra viewing figures, wasting tax payers money, my money, on a story that didn't really tell us anything new.
Apart from that, free speech for all.0 -
And the X factor.0
-
Rouge Penguin wrote:Ok, I'm against pointless opportunism with no real point but to score a few extra viewing figures, wasting tax payers money, my money, on a story that didn't really tell us anything new.
Apart from that, free speech for all.
As opposed to tax money given to corrupt Fifa officials?
Fifa get an easy ride with this stuff because they are in charge of the world's most popular sport. They shouldn't.
Some of the stuff in South Africa was stunningly bad.0 -
I agree fully with Rick! :shock:0
-
Rick Chasey wrote:Rouge Penguin wrote:Ok, I'm against pointless opportunism with no real point but to score a few extra viewing figures, wasting tax payers money, my money, on a story that didn't really tell us anything new.
Apart from that, free speech for all.
As opposed to tax money given to corrupt Fifa officials?
Fifa get an easy ride with this stuff because they are in charge of the world's most popular sport. They shouldn't.
Some of the stuff in South Africa was stunningly bad.
Im not arguing that FIFA are innocent. Everyone knows they are corrupt and even worse, that Blatter has his own agenda of single handedly saving the 3rd world through football (whilst making $10bn to the SA $2bn). If the BBC had any new information, it would have been justified, in this case it was an easy story.0 -
Because of the dirt thrown up by elements of the English media (now the Beeb), and in the unlikley event that the English bid actually wins Friday's ballot, the other countries will challenge the result on the basis that the voters were under undue pressure to be seen to be fair.
If the English bid doesn't win then the vitriolic media we have in this country will claim that the vote was fixed and will try to undermine the management of either FIFA or the FA of the country of the winning bid.
To avoid this, I am firmly of the opinion that FIFA should eliminate the English bid from Friday's vote.
However, it's pretty irrelevant as the Russian bid looks to be nailed on favorite.
As an aside, I am getting more and more 'hacked off' with the Beeb's attempt to make news rather than report it.
Bob0 -
beverick wrote:As an aside, I am getting more and more 'hacked off' with the Beeb's attempt to make news rather than report it.
Bob
Thats 24hr news in general, not just the BBC. Wendy the herpes infested cat stuck on a balcony is breaking news these days.0 -
toontra wrote:Personally I think this is precisely the kind of journalism that the BBC should be doing. Call me old-fashioned but I for one would like to know if the UK government is doing secret deals with an endemically corrupt organisation. Apart from the Fifa execs who have now been proven to have had their fingers in the till but kept their jobs, it's interesting to discover that, thanks to secretive contracts previously hidden from the public, far from generating income for the UK as is repeatedly claimed, a successful 2018 bid is likely to COST the taxpayer many millions.mr_poll wrote:1 - Why have they got some old geezer who looks like a train spotter as some arbiter of justice to FIFA, he looked like he had spent his life beavering around going through FIFA's bins like a disgruntled kid who hadnt been invited to the party.
WTF has that got to do with anything? I suppose you think only "pretty" presenters are worthy of being on our screens? Grow up.
Toonstra - I agree that this is the kind of journalism they should be doing and had they had something earth shattering to reveal then I would be backing them and the journalist to the hilt - see my other points regarding the fact this has been reported before and the lazy journalism about following the audit trail (or follow the money as they say on The Wire) - either they didnt bother to rush it out before the vote or there was nothing to follow and insinuating a connection was all they had.
As for employing pretty journalists I never said that, the point I was making in a light hearted way was that part of the show involved some dishelved guy shouting things from a pavement whilst FIFA members got in cars - hardly hard hitting journalism. This guy came across as someone with an axe to grind and the fact FIFA have banned him shows they have "history" - therefore why the Beeb couldnt have had this guy doing the spadework and then getting another jounalist to interview the members then fire some allegations at them whilst they were sat face to face is beyond me.
Overall I wanted this to be something better something that really exposed FIFA, something like the Times - but it wasnt. I see the IOC are looking into claims hopefully they will investigate fully and perhaps heads will role with a more thorough look at things.0 -
So a game played out at the highest level every weekend by 22 cheats has equally dishonest administrators...is that the 'revelation'? Non-story then, fans will still turn up regardless because if they can swallow someone faking injury to get a guy sent off right in front of their eyes then someone taking a few quid here and there is nothing.0
-
verylonglegs wrote:So a game played out at the highest level every weekend by 22 cheats has equally dishonest administrators...is that the 'revelation'? Non-story then, fans will still turn up regardless because if they can swallow someone faking injury to get a guy sent off right in front of their eyes then someone taking a few quid here and there is nothing.
+1 and that's the problem, no one cares about the principle do they? It's anything goes in football so long as the game takes place and we win right?
Frankly the BC or whoever is fully justified in showing the programme, and at whatever time they choose, as cheating and corruption are just that at any time of the day. I'm appalled that the BBC made it look such an amateurish investigation, given the incredibly amateurish way that football is run0
