FIFA in the news

Sad world we live in , there are more countries affiliated to FIFA than there are member sof the UN...... Blatter is the king of an empire that we are forced to pay for, even if we do not like Football.

This starts with Tv tax, compulsory sport programs on cable TV , building stadiums , oh yes I forgot the millions of bribing money used by governments..... Give them bread and circus.

 

FIFA is showing itself to be a criminal organization. It should be outlawed from operating in the US (and other countries too).

 

You mean : an organisation as Lockheed ?

In the old days,Lockheed sold flying machines to a lot of countries,using extra-legal fees.Everything was going good,till some wise guy from Boise decided that he could use some publicity and made everything publicly . The result was not good for the US .

20 year later, Atlanta decided that it was its turn to get the Olympic Games ,and got it,using some extra-legal fees .This time,no comment from Boise .

Now, Putin decided that Russia needed the world championships,and got it,using some extra-legal fees.As one can expect, the blame brigade has started the witch hunt : Russia has paid extra-legal fees to the Fifa and got the world championship,and the US may whistle for it : the Fifa is a criminal organisation . :lol:

 

If no one would look at the sport programs,it would be very quickly over .If people would not vote for governments that are wasting their money for sport events, it would not happen .

People have only themselves to blame .

 

Sports is a product of mankind. It is a major part of our lives regardless of national origin. It is the one thing we all can share. Just because greedy $$$holes decide to taint a game, it's not the fans fault and it it doesn't tarnish the spirit of soccer, or any sport for that matter. The myriad of issues surrounding amateur and professional sports is disheartening and it unjustly reflects poorly on the sport. Bottom line, the rich get richer, they just keep finding ways to skim off the top. Bad apples don't make the bunch.

 

NO. The point is FIFA officials vioulate lawas and regulations. FIFA and the IOC are indeed buisnesses and as such are expected to make money but they are suppose to do so while following the rules.

It is by no means obvious. Care to support your position with sources? In any case it's pretty clear that some people did indeed care.

They weren't trying to get "their share" they were trying to get more than their share and doing so illegally. That some politicians maybe hypocritical is irrelevant. If they were benefiting from the illegal operations then they also may be subject to investigation and indictment.

Do you have anything to support a "Clinton adminstration hush up" as yo seem to suggest. The justice department cannot prevent corruption by the IOC they can only prosecute actions which are contrary to US law and which have a decent chance of being proven in a court of law. If you have evidence to the contrary PLS present it. Probably should be in it's own thread though as the old saying goes "two wrongs don't make a right". So it's not clear it's even relevant here.

Wrong again.

Are they? Or were officials breaking laws to use the money in that way? Even if they were they were breaking laws governing the operation of FIFA.

Whether or not it was corruption depends on whether or not the individuals were violating their responsibilities to their employers and/or their country or violating laws.

 

Wrong. By illegally rigging things like distribution right FIFA was being hurt as they weren't getting the income to which they were entitetled. It's also quite likely people weren't able to see games they might otherwise have been able to see. Game venues may also have been rigged in ways that had similar effect to the above as well as impacting the chances of various teams to win. Note that there was also wide spread speculation about corruption in FIFA which means that effectivly it was already out. As for FIFA being the only thing that counts, I find that a rather warped position and one that cannot be ethically supported.

1)BS. Highlighting the corruption and prosecuting it will in the long run be beneficial to the sport and of course it was going to come out at some point ... arguably it already had.

2)Your speculation is both irrelevant and off base. It is the old attack the messanger who bring bad news philospy. By the way didn't you earlier say something about Lynch being a nobody and now you are expecting to see her in the news every few weeks, a bit of a contradiction there. Claiming it is allo about her ego and political career is also rather reprehensable but expected as you desperatly try to deflect the light from the real issue.

???? Thou art waxing inchoherent. Nothing new about that though.

You mean you are subjecting us to your opinions in post almost devoid of fact or logic. If that's the case I agree.

Lynch is not a politician nor was she unknonw prior to this issue. Your speculation as to her motiviation appears to be both baseless and wrong.

Either of these may or may not be correct but it's not clear they are relevant.

1) Not particularly shocking and clearly not an accident but your hinted at conspiracy is also rather questionable.

2) Not only does "everyone" not know this it is as close a certainty that it is wrong as one is likely to find.

Will it? How? Cerainly there are other areas where she could have stepped in that would be more likely to influence her career or provide her with opertunities to change careers. I.e. your position looks to be seriously flawed. Nothing new in that though.

That he might benefit from it doesn't make much of a case that it played any role in the issue.

Except of course that the US charges had nothing to do with Russia at all. Indeed it was Putin that connected Russian activities and corruption in FIFA with regards to this. Although the Swiss did mention that they were investigating corruption issues related to the Russian and Quatar games.

 

I'm shocked that you even asked that question, even for you that's really pushing it.

??? Of course Lynch's appearance was no coincidence she was there to comment on the arrests and charges. Which aren't at all related to the Russian or Quatar games. So you're facts are correct they simply don't address your statement.

Rather a warped way of looking at it. Of course if they hadn't committed the crimes or at least behaved in ways that lead to the charges it wouldn't have come out would it? Your attempts to blame the victim and/or the one who reprots a crime rather than the criminal indicate an attitude that I find reprehensable. I suspect the vast majority agree with me on that.

Sorry, your off base again; or perhaps I should say still. It wasn't Lynch's fault that some chose to embrace corruption. Blaming her is rather like blameing a doctor for diagnosing a medical condition. You are right that FIFA was hurt but the taint will spread to soccer at least to some extent.

 

From the NYT (3 days ago)

"Ms Lynch, only one month into her job as attorney general,captured the world's attention this week when she vowed to rdf Fifa,soccer's global governing body,of corruption ."


Every one (even in Michigan) sees the pattern : a politician (an attorney general is a politician) ,fresh of one month, is capturing the world's attention,by vowing (every one knows the value of the vow of a politician) to rid the Fifa (a non American organisation) of corruption.

Translation : after one month in office,Lynch,the usual publicity seaker,is saying that she will put her nose in things that are not her business .

Why is she doing this ? The reward is 5 minutes on CNN,Fox, etc:something every politician is dreaming of .

I remember her saying : this department (at least,she was wise enough not to say :my department) will not suffer corruption of the Fifa (a non American organisation) .But,this is unwise from Lynch (attenuating circumstances : she is a neophyt) ,some one will tell her : you have forgotten to say : in the past,this department has turned a blind eye to the corruption of the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City and Atlanta (2 American cities) ,wher no one was put in jail .

Salt Lake City spent 10 million $ to get the Winter Games (Source : how to buy the Olympic Games)

Atlanta had files about a lot of IOC delegates :

X: gifts are OK;gift of female Ok

Y :will sell his vote and will do it openly

Z :did accept 2 ladies from Barcelona .
Useful information fot the Atlanta Olympic Committee ,with as co-chairman ... the Democrat Andrew Young ;

(Source =Journal of Olympic History may 2000)

And ,what was saying the chairman of the House subcommittee who was investigating the scandal ? Chairman : Fred Upton from ...Michigan :

"We were hoping that Salt Lake City was an aberration (= an exception) ,but,as the Atlanta report so graphically confirms,Salt Lake City was not an aberration ."

Translation : it was the general custom (Nagano and Sydney were on the same level).

Not only has Lynch no legal grounds to attack the Fifa, but,as a Democratic politican, she also lacks all moral authority .

 

1) I am shocked that you are shocked,better I expected that you would : it only proves your lack of realism,and your parochial refusal to look at and acknowledge ,the world as it is.It is not because the Fifa has anti corruption rules that she would be forced to follow them . Every one knows that such rules are window-dressing and that the real business is done in small smoky back-rooms .

2) The appearance of Lynch was timed and what she said also : if it was only about some foreigners violating some American laws,there was no need for her to appear in public : laws are violated continuously,but she does not appear continuously on TV.As the whole thing was only secundary, she decided to make a mountain of a molehill by attacking the Fifa and involving also Russia and Qatar in the whole thing,knowing very well that these countries were not very popular at the moment in the US .

3)There is no victim : the Fifa is not filing a complaint,for obvious reasons, and I am shocked that you are talking about criminals,condemning people before they are judged.

4) Football is not a victim : nobody in Europe and Latin America (the football countries) is interested about a football corruption story : such things happen every day .And in the US,no one is interested in European football : no one understands the rules .

BTW: I see that you are not aware of it ,but,FYI, there is an enormous difference between football and soccer .

 

1)ethically supported : as usual an irrelevant sentence : Sport and the Fifa are not about ethics . It is about money .

2)supporters do not want hear stories about corruption from their club : if you want, you can always go to Rome,Liverpool,Manchester,Glasgow and tell people about corruption in the history of Liverpool,Lazio, United (there is an other club in Manchester,but wise people keep their mouth silent about it),Celtic, the Rangers, but only some one with suicidal inclinations would do it .

The beginning of corruption in football started with the beginning of football .

There was a lot of speculation about corruption in the Fifa (since decennia) but every one was wise enough to remain silent about it ,because there would be no benefit to disclose it ;one was waiting on a naive soul (not that naive) to mix in the dunghill.

 

Wrong. Some people recognize for instance that while some attorneys general are politicians others aren't. US attorneys general are in the latter catagory as they are appointed rather than elected. This alone rather undermines most of the rest of your post(s).

Since she isn't a politican this statement is irrellevant but it's also true that we have a fair number of politicians that actually try to live up to their vows so universal condemnation is hardly warrented. Futhermore the fact that FIFA is not an American organization is irrelevant.

I'm mildly curious why you think this shows wisdom or lack there of.

???? She has been an attourney general for some considerable period of time. Why do you consider her a neophyt?

If someone would be stoopid enough to say that she could easily point out that it was factually wrong. Rather than turn a blind eye the department did indeed prosecute people for corruption. That the jury found them not guilty indicates either a lack of evidence or that no crime was committed. In any case people were punished for activities related to the corruption in the bidding process and new rules and I think laws enacted to cover at least some of the issues. PLS note that the Salt Lake City case was the first one where charges were brought and sanctions were envoked in regards to corruption in the bidding process.

That your term for drawing unwarrented conclusions from shaky evidence? Given your usage todate it seams so but it's not consistent with standard English but nothing new there either.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.
1) She most definely does have legal grounds to charge individuals in FIFA.
2) She is not a "Democratic politician)
3) You assumption as to a lack of moral authority is remiss. Indeed based on her carreer to date she has a fair amount of it.

 

It's unfortunate that it is indeed the case that such happens some of the time. That doesn't mean that it is desireable or should be encouraged. Just the opposite. Furthermore it's also pretty clear that it doesn't happen all the time. That you want to ignore it I find reprensable, indeed it is almost criminal way to look at things. As the saying goes "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men refuse to act". I could see how you wouldn't consider that applicable though.

Indeed it was timed as it was clear that there would be considerable interest in this case, your protestations to the side. Of course it isn't just "some foreigners violating some American laws" either. Americans have been indicted in related cases. She apparently thought there was enough interest and there would be enough questions related to this to justify a press conference. IMO she was and is correct. I will also point out it is hardly a case of making a "mountain of a molehill" nor did she involve Russia or Qatar. The later is hardly a house hold name in the US so contrary to your assumptions they are not particuarly unpopular here. Russia on the other hand is but then Putin was the one that tied them into this issue.

Another assumption in contradiction ot the facts. FIFA was clearly a victim but as you suggest the officials involved weren't going to complain. That doesn't mean that the organization isn't a victim though. Furhermore governments, corporte entities, and individuals have been victims due to unfair practices induced by the corruption. It's interesting that you claim shock at my condeming criminal acts while you impunge people with little or no evidence or logic to support your condemantions yet in some of the cases related to these charges people have already pleaded guilty and enough evidence has been presented to make it pretty clear they are guilty (although they may still be found not guilty).

Amazing that you still use superlatives so much when they invalidate your claims almost by defintion. The reactions from taround the world indiate however that there is indeed interest even inthe "football countries" in this and related stories. Furthermore there is considerable interest in the US in soccer thse days and some even have a very good understanding of the rules. Indeed I think there are even some here who understand the rules of crickett.

Do you have a point? If so could you state it a bit clearer? In all likelyhood you are wrong again but I wouldn't mind being sure.

 

FIFA may be mostly about money but if it wasn't for the sport there would be no money and there is no sport without enforceable rules. So yes ethics are important. Without at least some level of respect FIFA would loose it's control of soccer and its reason to exist which would result in the money going away.

They may not want to here them but they are interested in them. Further more they may want to here them about other clubs or overarching organizations. But how is this of import?

Sources please. Of course we know this just another exageration on your part with absolutly nothing to back it up.

Or not. Silence in this case certainly doesn't imply any wisdom that I can see. It's rather like ignoring a cancer and hopeing it will just go away.

 

Rules and ethics are two different things .

Why would corruption in the sport be a cancer , Corruption is not threatening the survival of football,of cyclism ,etc : Eddy Merckx was caught two times in the Giro using prohibited means,and,the Giro did not lose anything of its popularity,the same for the Tour de France when Armstrong was disqualified : people don't care .The same for football : someone said : football is war,no one protested:if football is war,this means that football is not a sport,unless one would argue that war also is a sport.

 

I see : still not able to use some logic :corruption in football could not exist without football,thus ....football results in corruption .

 

I know what you are saying here. However, the game of football (along with all other sports) is corrupt due to the success it has had as a business. So, in actuality, money/football leads to corruption, not the sport.

 

I'm hardly the one who is logically challenged here. The fact that there is corruption in any sport does not imply that sport leads to corruption nor does it indicate that said sport was corrupt from the beginning. Indeed it rather implies is wasn't. KJ is correct corruption tends to follow money rather than sport. So you have again proven you have no idea how to frame a logical argument nor seperate your opions and/or assumptions from facts.

 

The manipulation of games and sport is not a phenomenon limited to modern times only :corruption was also an issue in ancient sports:in the Ancient Olympic Games .

Sport and corruption are one and inseparable:corruption is caused by the popularity of sport and the popularity is caused by money = by corruption .You can't separate money and football : without money,there is no football .Money leads to corruption and sport can not exist without money .

The Fifa can not exist without money, a lot of money : 2 $ billions.How do you think the Fifa will get this money ? The Fifa could fix matches,but this markt is already occupied by the Chinese . It could ask subsides from governments= from the tax payers .But I doubt that the tax payers would accept this . Thus the Fifa has to use its imagination and to interprete the rules creatively (you can't use a big organisation using the rules):if the candidates would give the Fifa money to get the WC, the problems would we resolved . And of course, if the Fifa get extra legal fees,why not the board of administration:if the members of the board of administration could not get extra legal fees,there would be no candidates for this board :they earn only 1 million $ a year .The more you have,the more you want .

Who,of all the indignated ones, who,of all the moral crusaders, would declare,in full honesty, that,if they would have the opportunity to earn (taxfree) 2 million $,by promising (not by keeping their promises) to vote for Qatar for the WC,knowing that Qatar would obtain the WC anyhow,they would refuse to promise to vote for Qatar ?

I like to see that anyone on this forum would refuse to do it . I would not refuse . But, I know someone who would vote for Qatar: a politician : Lynch . Even the pope would probably vote for Qatar .