(05-27-2015 03:35 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:24 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:20 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:16 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  Clinton was on the committee trying to get the WC to the US.

Qatar cut the clinton foundation a nice check after it was awarded to them
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...lions.html

oh wow. That is interesting....

yeah.

clinton is on the board to help bring the WC to the USA. Fifa donates to the CF. Qatar gets the WC, and gives millions to the CF......

The sad thing is, these sorts of people and foundations at this level are inherently incestuous like this. Makes it hard to prove any sort of influence.

On the FIFA note, good. It's taken too damn long for this to happen, and I certainly hope it's because they were making sure they had an ironclad case before they went forward with this. It's almost as if a small desert country, whose temperatures reach 110 degrees during the period of the World Cup, whose laws are extremely archaic and anti-western (no drinking/public affection is iffy/etc), winning a supposedly objective World Cup bid should have signaled those involved in FIFA who aren't complete morons that they were going to get busted. Seriously, just stick to countries who are willing to bribe but aren't pimples on the @ss of Saudi Arabia and this racket goes on for another few decades. But no one wants to travel to Qatar, the sponsors are all mad because of the slave labor type work conditions, and therefore it's easy to get the political impetus to crack down on them.

If you watch the E:60 report on FIFA you can see why Qatar was awarded. A high ranking prince from that country was going to run against Sepp in the 90's for the head of FIFA and had a credible shot of winning. A couple of bribes later, Sepp remains at the helm, but the Prince knows where the bodies are buried. Thus, the Qatar WC is essentially a massive bribe from Sepp to retain stewardship of FIFA.

(05-28-2015 09:00 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:35 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:24 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:20 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:16 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  Clinton was on the committee trying to get the WC to the US.

Qatar cut the clinton foundation a nice check after it was awarded to them
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...lions.html

oh wow. That is interesting....

yeah.

clinton is on the board to help bring the WC to the USA. Fifa donates to the CF. Qatar gets the WC, and gives millions to the CF......

The sad thing is, these sorts of people and foundations at this level are inherently incestuous like this. Makes it hard to prove any sort of influence.

On the FIFA note, good. It's taken too damn long for this to happen, and I certainly hope it's because they were making sure they had an ironclad case before they went forward with this. It's almost as if a small desert country, whose temperatures reach 110 degrees during the period of the World Cup, whose laws are extremely archaic and anti-western (no drinking/public affection is iffy/etc), winning a supposedly objective World Cup bid should have signaled those involved in FIFA who aren't complete morons that they were going to get busted. Seriously, just stick to countries who are willing to bribe but aren't pimples on the @ss of Saudi Arabia and this racket goes on for another few decades. But no one wants to travel to Qatar, the sponsors are all mad because of the slave labor type work conditions, and therefore it's easy to get the political impetus to crack down on them.

If you watch the E:60 report on FIFA you can see why Qatar was awarded. A high ranking prince from that country was going to run against Sepp in the 90's for the head of FIFA and had a credible shot of winning. A couple of bribes later, Sepp remains at the helm, but the Prince knows where the bodies are buried. Thus, the Qatar WC is essentially a massive bribe from Sepp to retain stewardship of FIFA.

He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Nike is being looked into as possibly being involved as well.

(05-27-2015 04:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 04:20 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 04:03 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:08 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 07:48 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  well, the US got screwed out of hosting the WC in 2022, which obviously would have made this country billions of dollars (LA made approx $600M during the final in 1994). Figure that with the fact that we wouldn't need to build any stadiums to make this happen, and we have the infrastructure to support it, we wouldn't have to spend a lot of money to prepare. I have a feeling that is why this is suddenly coming to light.

Yeah, the US came in second in the voting. Not that big of a stretch to think the reasons for that were the bribes offered by the winner to FIFA. Only way for anything to happen is for major sponsors such as Coke, Visa, etc to boycot the games. Don't seeing that happening due to all the $$ involved though.

The only way you'll get change at FIFA is if the US government adds a line to the FCPA (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act) that disallows expense treatment for sponsorship of organizations held to be corrupt by the US government. So the 10 Billion or so coming from the US to FIFA will go away.

$10 Billion? Where'd that figure come from? Anyway, the size of the country doesn't mean anything to Sepp Blatter. He can just pay off all the smaller member nations to keep him elected as President. There are more FIFA members than UN members.

All the TV revenue plus sponsorship income etc. For the last couple of games.

Without American, Canadian, European, and ANZUS money....there'd be a lot LESS for him to pay African, Caribbean, and Asian 'yes men'.

Ok, thanks. However, he isn't paying those small nations much, in the whole scheme of things. He just plays the numbers and keeps enough of them happy to secure their votes.

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 09:00 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:35 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:24 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:20 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  oh wow. That is interesting....

yeah.

clinton is on the board to help bring the WC to the USA. Fifa donates to the CF. Qatar gets the WC, and gives millions to the CF......

The sad thing is, these sorts of people and foundations at this level are inherently incestuous like this. Makes it hard to prove any sort of influence.

On the FIFA note, good. It's taken too damn long for this to happen, and I certainly hope it's because they were making sure they had an ironclad case before they went forward with this. It's almost as if a small desert country, whose temperatures reach 110 degrees during the period of the World Cup, whose laws are extremely archaic and anti-western (no drinking/public affection is iffy/etc), winning a supposedly objective World Cup bid should have signaled those involved in FIFA who aren't complete morons that they were going to get busted. Seriously, just stick to countries who are willing to bribe but aren't pimples on the @ss of Saudi Arabia and this racket goes on for another few decades. But no one wants to travel to Qatar, the sponsors are all mad because of the slave labor type work conditions, and therefore it's easy to get the political impetus to crack down on them.

If you watch the E:60 report on FIFA you can see why Qatar was awarded. A high ranking prince from that country was going to run against Sepp in the 90's for the head of FIFA and had a credible shot of winning. A couple of bribes later, Sepp remains at the helm, but the Prince knows where the bodies are buried. Thus, the Qatar WC is essentially a massive bribe from Sepp to retain stewardship of FIFA.

He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Yep, he doesn't really care what the big nations think as long as the many more small ones vote for him.

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Oh I get that. This might be one of those times where a P5-like breakaway would actually generate real change. If the member nations of CONCACAF and EUFA left FIFA and hosted their own tourney, which would dominate over time? The threat alone has to be worthy of some internal change.

how they can have an election is beyond me.

(05-28-2015 11:28 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Oh I get that. This might be one of those times where a P5-like breakaway would actually generate real change. If the member nations of CONCACAF and EUFA left FIFA and hosted their own tourney, which would dominate over time? The threat alone has to be worthy of some internal change.

I want to agree, but I just hate the P5 bullsh*t too much. Let's use 'UN' or 'NATO' or something else, please.

(05-28-2015 11:28 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Oh I get that. This might be one of those times where a P5-like breakaway would actually generate real change. If the member nations of CONCACAF and EUFA left FIFA and hosted their own tourney, which would dominate over time? The threat alone has to be worthy of some internal change.

It's UEFA, not EUFA, but otherwise spot on. I would add South America.

Heck the UEFA tournament that runs in the even years when there is no World Cup is probably a better tournament now. CONCACAF doesn't really add a whole lot to that mix, except the obvious US TV dollars, which are more than enough to buy a seat at the table for something like this. Of course, one problem is that a lot of the corruption appears to be centered in CONCACAF.

Put the voting on some sort of proportional basis, population or success in prior cups or something like that. Monserrat gets a vote, but Germany gets 100.

Off to see Dynamo get killed by Man City tonight, unless there's another flood.

(05-28-2015 11:41 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 11:28 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Oh I get that. This might be one of those times where a P5-like breakaway would actually generate real change. If the member nations of CONCACAF and EUFA left FIFA and hosted their own tourney, which would dominate over time? The threat alone has to be worthy of some internal change.

It's UEFA, not EUFA, but otherwise spot on. I would add South America.

Heck the UEFA tournament that runs in the even years when there is no World Cup is probably a better tournament now. CONCACAF doesn't really add a whole lot to that mix, except the obvious US TV dollars, which are more than enough to buy a seat at the table for something like this. Of course, one problem is that a lot of the corruption appears to be centered in CONCACAF.

Put the voting on some sort of proportional basis, population or success in prior cups or something like that. Monserrat gets a vote, but Germany gets 100.

Off to see Dynamo get killed by Man City tonight, unless there's another flood.

Maybe have the nations themselves vote for far fewer representatives? I think that alone might be enough to clean it up, especially if there were rules regarding ethics and a nations ability to hold that position. You'd have motivations for nations who wish to join the decision making group making sure bribery didn't exist and things were on the up-and-up.

It would also be interesting to tie International Aid dollars to membership in a similar group, but that's just a pipe dream.

(05-28-2015 11:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 11:28 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Oh I get that. This might be one of those times where a P5-like breakaway would actually generate real change. If the member nations of CONCACAF and EUFA left FIFA and hosted their own tourney, which would dominate over time? The threat alone has to be worthy of some internal change.

I want to agree, but I just hate the P5 bullsh*t too much. Let's use 'UN' or 'NATO' or something else, please.

Sorry about that but it was the only parallel I could think of. I try to leave the realignment stuff on the appropriate board when I'm over here.

(05-28-2015 11:57 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 11:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 11:28 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  He doesn't have to do anything to get reelected. There are 207 Federations. Monserrat gets the same vote as the US or Germany.

Oh I get that. This might be one of those times where a P5-like breakaway would actually generate real change. If the member nations of CONCACAF and EUFA left FIFA and hosted their own tourney, which would dominate over time? The threat alone has to be worthy of some internal change.

I want to agree, but I just hate the P5 bullsh*t too much. Let's use 'UN' or 'NATO' or something else, please.

Sorry about that but it was the only parallel I could think of. I try to leave the realignment stuff on the appropriate board when I'm over here.

Haha it was meant to be more tongue-in-cheek than legitimate, I just thought since this is a college sports messageboard and all.