Here's the explanation as given by Guinea-Bissau and the Cook Islands: namely, 'Blatter recognizes that we exist. Bribes? Whatever. The rest of you basically think we don't deserve to even be here.'
And it's not entirely an argument without merit, to be honest.
Well, these nations should be acknowledged and money (through official channels, not bribes) should go towards improving their infrastructure and whatnot, but they absolutely shouldn't have as much voting power as Germany, England, France, Brazil etc.
How would you determine voting power? Population? Because AFC and CAF have between them 85% of the world's population. Unless you're going for something based on soccer rankings, and that's a non-starter.
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
There's been some talk about taking away European places from the EPL because the league has been kind of under-performing. There's probably some merit to doing so, but...
That's nothing to do with any of this. though.
No, it isn't. However, would you put it past Blatter or those around him to close the bridge yank some spots just out of spite? People are already suggesting that the US advocating against him may hurt future chances at getting another WC. England could be in the same position because they've been so vocal since Russia got '18.
WC places, sure, because that process is intentionally opaque, the way CL places are decided is A) transparent, not FIFA's doing.
And that's exactly the kind of mindset that drives these countries to keep voting Blatter in. You can't expect to win people over by telling them that you're going to bend them over and fuck em, then not call them anymore.
Regarding someone else's comment about the EPL losing European places... FIFA has nothing to do with that, it's UEFAs game. And quite simply, it's a pretty clear coefficient formula, and if the EPL wants to avoid losing places it need to perform better in both European comps. Italy has managed to improve, and is wholly deserving of extra spots if it performs better.
As an MLS fan, one of the things that used to bug me about the league was their continuing to schedule league matches during FIFA international dates. I don't care about that anymore.
So now, how do we turn up pressure on our FAs to start following through with their statements about FIFA? I know Sunil Gulati seems pretty content to try to work behind the scenes, he hasn't exactly called for US based sponsors to bail on FIFA or for the USSF to boycott anything yet.
Here's the explanation as given by Guinea-Bissau and the Cook Islands: namely, 'Blatter recognizes that we exist. Bribes? Whatever. The rest of you basically think we don't deserve to even be here.'
And it's not entirely an argument without merit, to be honest.
Well, these nations should be acknowledged and money (through official channels, not bribes) should go towards improving their infrastructure and whatnot, but they absolutely shouldn't have as much voting power as Germany, England, France, Brazil etc.
How would you determine voting power? Population? Because AFC and CAF have between them 85% of the world's population. Unless you're going for something based on soccer rankings, and that's a non-starter.
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
Yeah, I'd be gravitating towards the rankings too: I'd go with 'add together the men's and women's rankings, and your combined point total is how many votes you have'. (With everyone guaranteed at least one vote.) Germany leads in both rankings, with a combined total of 1687+2168=3855 votes. The US has 825+2158=2983 votes. The Cook Islands doesn't get bent over quite as much as they think they'd be, because their men's team has 4 points, but their women's team has 1,177, so they get 1,181 votes. (Anguilla has 2 men's points and no women's team, so. Yeah.)
Case in point, it's a very good idea under this system to get that women's program shored up.
PS: Qatar has 337 men's points and no women's team.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
Here's the explanation as given by Guinea-Bissau and the Cook Islands: namely, 'Blatter recognizes that we exist. Bribes? Whatever. The rest of you basically think we don't deserve to even be here.'
And it's not entirely an argument without merit, to be honest.
Well, these nations should be acknowledged and money (through official channels, not bribes) should go towards improving their infrastructure and whatnot, but they absolutely shouldn't have as much voting power as Germany, England, France, Brazil etc.
How would you determine voting power? Population? Because AFC and CAF have between them 85% of the world's population. Unless you're going for something based on soccer rankings, and that's a non-starter.
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
And the old system got us 0 Cups in Africa and 10 in Europe. Even soccer mad USA got to host. FIFA needs to be reformed, and cleaned, but I have no interest in a European run 'world' football organization.
Here's the explanation as given by Guinea-Bissau and the Cook Islands: namely, 'Blatter recognizes that we exist. Bribes? Whatever. The rest of you basically think we don't deserve to even be here.'
And it's not entirely an argument without merit, to be honest.
Well, these nations should be acknowledged and money (through official channels, not bribes) should go towards improving their infrastructure and whatnot, but they absolutely shouldn't have as much voting power as Germany, England, France, Brazil etc.
How would you determine voting power? Population? Because AFC and CAF have between them 85% of the world's population. Unless you're going for something based on soccer rankings, and that's a non-starter.
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
And the old system got us 0 Cups in Africa and 10 in Europe. Even soccer mad USA got to host. FIFA needs to be reformed, and cleaned, but I have no interest in a European run 'world' football organization.
Would you rather have a WC held in Qatar or in England?
Besides, the locations have been rotating between continents for a while now. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon no what the power structure in FIFA. Still, the fact remains that relatively few countries are able to host a World Cup because of the required infrastructure. Awarding a WC to Angola or whatever just for the sake of having an African country host it wouldn't be a great idea. South Africa is gonna suffer from the cost of hosting the World Cup for years, and they're one of the richest African countries.
And that European system was no less corrupt. Blatter is corrupt, but the narrative that FIFA's problems are all because Blatter can court small nations is amazingly ahistoric. European dominated FIFA was rife with episodes of corruption and blunders that would make Blatter blush. There are no saints in Europe.
+2
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited May 2015
This is true. Remember who Joao Havelange beat out for the job and why. Stanley Rous was so comically Pax Britannia, making Africa, Asia and Oceania fight each other for a single World Cup slot, saying that Africa ought to be split off into a non-voting role, that he didn't even really bother campaigning for votes outside the UK until it was too late and Havelange had already added enough new countries to FIFA to smother him in the election.
They remember that shit.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
And that European system was no less corrupt. Blatter is corrupt, but the narrative that FIFA's problems are all because Blatter can court small nations is amazingly ahistoric. European dominated FIFA was rife with episodes of corruption and blunders that would make Blatter blush. There are no saints in Europe.
True, but European votes can't be bought nearly as easily as African and Asian ones. See: nearly every African & Asian country voting for Blatter and nearly every European country voting against him.
Here's the explanation as given by Guinea-Bissau and the Cook Islands: namely, 'Blatter recognizes that we exist. Bribes? Whatever. The rest of you basically think we don't deserve to even be here.'
And it's not entirely an argument without merit, to be honest.
Well, these nations should be acknowledged and money (through official channels, not bribes) should go towards improving their infrastructure and whatnot, but they absolutely shouldn't have as much voting power as Germany, England, France, Brazil etc.
How would you determine voting power? Population? Because AFC and CAF have between them 85% of the world's population. Unless you're going for something based on soccer rankings, and that's a non-starter.
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
And the old system got us 0 Cups in Africa and 10 in Europe. Even soccer mad USA got to host. FIFA needs to be reformed, and cleaned, but I have no interest in a European run 'world' football organization.
Would you rather have a WC held in Qatar or in England?
Besides, the locations have been rotating between continents for a while now. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon no what the power structure in FIFA. Still, the fact remains that relatively few countries are able to host a World Cup because of the required infrastructure. Awarding a WC to Angola or whatever just for the sake of having an African country host it wouldn't be a great idea. South Africa is gonna suffer from the cost of hosting the World Cup for years, and they're one of the richest African countries.
A continental rotation policy that no doubt would've been implemented under Rous, right? Eventually, I'm sure.
World Cup woes are mostly FIFA's fault. Its parasitic nature saddles host developing countries with burden, while is sucks pure profits and jets the fuck out of town. I don't think that's the issue most English papers have when they complain about the hosting. They just want to host it more than they do want to fix it. Which is understandable, but also rather uninspiring.
Here's the explanation as given by Guinea-Bissau and the Cook Islands: namely, 'Blatter recognizes that we exist. Bribes? Whatever. The rest of you basically think we don't deserve to even be here.'
And it's not entirely an argument without merit, to be honest.
Well, these nations should be acknowledged and money (through official channels, not bribes) should go towards improving their infrastructure and whatnot, but they absolutely shouldn't have as much voting power as Germany, England, France, Brazil etc.
How would you determine voting power? Population? Because AFC and CAF have between them 85% of the world's population. Unless you're going for something based on soccer rankings, and that's a non-starter.
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
And the old system got us 0 Cups in Africa and 10 in Europe. Even soccer mad USA got to host. FIFA needs to be reformed, and cleaned, but I have no interest in a European run 'world' football organization.
Would you rather have a WC held in Qatar or in England?
Besides, the locations have been rotating between continents for a while now. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon no what the power structure in FIFA. Still, the fact remains that relatively few countries are able to host a World Cup because of the required infrastructure. Awarding a WC to Angola or whatever just for the sake of having an African country host it wouldn't be a great idea. South Africa is gonna suffer from the cost of hosting the World Cup for years, and they're one of the richest African countries.
A continental rotation policy that no doubt would've been implemented under Rous, right? Eventually, I'm sure.
World Cup woes are mostly FIFA's fault. Its parasitic nature saddles host developing countries with burden, while is sucks pure profits and jets the fuck out of town. I don't think that's the issue most English papers have when they complain about the hosting. They just want to host it more than they do want to fix it. Which is understandable, but also rather uninspiring.
Yeah, that's definitely a problem, but even without policies like that, holding a World Cup in smaller / poorer countries simply isn't possible. That's just the way it is.
And of course England would love to host a World Cup again - and for good reason. They have the best domestic league in the world, a fantastic infrastructure that basically enables them to hold a World Cup at a moment's notice without years of expensive preparation, they are passionate about football and it's been 50 years since they hosted one. I'd give the WC to England in a heartbeat over nearly every other country.
So, in the context of discussing possible relocations of the russia or quatar wc, I hear things like even most UK Stadiums would not meet FIFA standards for hosting a WC, which just seems crazy to me, why are the standards so high? Is this part of why the stadiums in Brazil seem to becoming white elephant a so quickly?
Women's rankings being more worth as much as the men's would be kinda ridiculous.
Why?
Because women's football isn't nearly as prolific as men's football and it doesn't really have anything to do with it either, so why should women's rankings influence important decisions in men's football to such a large degree?
Basically women's football should have its own association that is totally separate from FIFA, because in the same vein, most people in FIFA likely don't care or know much about women's football, so they shouldn't be able to make decisions about it either.
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
Meanwhile, Blatter, having won re-election, is deciding that now is a good time to just straight-up antagonize the US. Among his arguments:
*Loretta Lynch has no idea what she's talking about. How irresponsible of her.
*The US and England are just jealous they lost.
*The US is in bed with Jordan. Coincidence? I THINK NOT.
*If the US wants to arrest people, they should be arresting people in the US. Coming over to Zurich to arrest people is just... uch. How rude.
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
Meanwhile, Blatter, having won re-election, is deciding that now is a good time to just straight-up antagonize the US. Among his arguments:
*Loretta Lynch has no idea what she's talking about. How irresponsible of her.
*The US and England are just jealous they lost.
*The US is in bed with Jordan. Coincidence? I THINK NOT.
*If the US wants to arrest people, they should be arresting people in the US. Coming over to Zurich to arrest people is just... uch. How rude.
If the FBI gets to slap cuffs on him, I doubt they will care about any comments he has been making.
Women's rankings being more worth as much as the men's would be kinda ridiculous.
Why?
Because women's football isn't nearly as prolific as men's football and it doesn't really have anything to do with it either, so why should women's rankings influence important decisions in men's football to such a large degree?
Basically women's football should have its own association that is totally separate from FIFA, because in the same vein, most people in FIFA likely don't care or know much about women's football, so they shouldn't be able to make decisions about it either.
So, in the context of discussing possible relocations of the russia or quatar wc, I hear things like even most UK Stadiums would not meet FIFA standards for hosting a WC, which just seems crazy to me, why are the standards so high? Is this part of why the stadiums in Brazil seem to becoming white elephant a so quickly?
I don't think it is so much high standards as it is weird/stupid standards like special seating for FIFA officials or something like that.
I feel like we need a modern Machiavelli to explain Blatter to us. To win an election mere hours after so many corruption arrests... it's impressive, I have to admit.
It's because Blatter's platform of support is built out of places that don't care.
It's not like Africa is a shining pillar of ethics.
So, in the context of discussing possible relocations of the russia or quatar wc, I hear things like even most UK Stadiums would not meet FIFA standards for hosting a WC, which just seems crazy to me, why are the standards so high? Is this part of why the stadiums in Brazil seem to becoming white elephant a so quickly?
I don't think it is so much high standards as it is weird/stupid standards like special seating for FIFA officials or something like that.
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited May 2015
This presumes that England and the US don't just look at each other and go 'okay, seriously, does Blatter think we're so stupid that we can't work this out amongst each other before any vote takes place, presuming we even bother bidding because honestly he'll just give it to the Caymans or something?'
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
This presumes that England and the US don't just look at each other and go 'okay, seriously, does Blatter think we're so stupid that we can't work this out amongst each other before any vote takes place, presuming we even bother bidding because honestly he'll just give it to the Caymans or something?'
I don't think it was retaliation, but there would be other European countries besides England would definitely want to host. And in 2018 voting, England's bid was eliminated in round 1. I don't see why Spain/Portugal wouldn't make another bid.
Posts
FIFA ranking at least being factor is something I'd consider, yes. Nearly all European and South American countries (i.e. the reason most people watch football and events like the World Cup) didn't vote for Blatter. Countries who have never and will never qualify for the World Cup having the majority of the votes is what got us Qatar 2022 and Blatter being president for the rest of his life.
WC places, sure, because that process is intentionally opaque, the way CL places are decided is A) transparent,
Regarding someone else's comment about the EPL losing European places... FIFA has nothing to do with that, it's UEFAs game. And quite simply, it's a pretty clear coefficient formula, and if the EPL wants to avoid losing places it need to perform better in both European comps. Italy has managed to improve, and is wholly deserving of extra spots if it performs better.
So now, how do we turn up pressure on our FAs to start following through with their statements about FIFA? I know Sunil Gulati seems pretty content to try to work behind the scenes, he hasn't exactly called for US based sponsors to bail on FIFA or for the USSF to boycott anything yet.
Yeah, I'd be gravitating towards the rankings too: I'd go with 'add together the men's and women's rankings, and your combined point total is how many votes you have'. (With everyone guaranteed at least one vote.) Germany leads in both rankings, with a combined total of 1687+2168=3855 votes. The US has 825+2158=2983 votes. The Cook Islands doesn't get bent over quite as much as they think they'd be, because their men's team has 4 points, but their women's team has 1,177, so they get 1,181 votes. (Anguilla has 2 men's points and no women's team, so. Yeah.)
Case in point, it's a very good idea under this system to get that women's program shored up.
PS: Qatar has 337 men's points and no women's team.
And the old system got us 0 Cups in Africa and 10 in Europe. Even soccer mad USA got to host. FIFA needs to be reformed, and cleaned, but I have no interest in a European run 'world' football organization.
Would you rather have a WC held in Qatar or in England?
Besides, the locations have been rotating between continents for a while now. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon no what the power structure in FIFA. Still, the fact remains that relatively few countries are able to host a World Cup because of the required infrastructure. Awarding a WC to Angola or whatever just for the sake of having an African country host it wouldn't be a great idea. South Africa is gonna suffer from the cost of hosting the World Cup for years, and they're one of the richest African countries.
They remember that shit.
True, but European votes can't be bought nearly as easily as African and Asian ones. See: nearly every African & Asian country voting for Blatter and nearly every European country voting against him.
A continental rotation policy that no doubt would've been implemented under Rous, right? Eventually, I'm sure.
World Cup woes are mostly FIFA's fault. Its parasitic nature saddles host developing countries with burden, while is sucks pure profits and jets the fuck out of town. I don't think that's the issue most English papers have when they complain about the hosting. They just want to host it more than they do want to fix it. Which is understandable, but also rather uninspiring.
Yeah, that's definitely a problem, but even without policies like that, holding a World Cup in smaller / poorer countries simply isn't possible. That's just the way it is.
And of course England would love to host a World Cup again - and for good reason. They have the best domestic league in the world, a fantastic infrastructure that basically enables them to hold a World Cup at a moment's notice without years of expensive preparation, they are passionate about football and it's been 50 years since they hosted one. I'd give the WC to England in a heartbeat over nearly every other country.
Why?
Because women's football isn't nearly as prolific as men's football and it doesn't really have anything to do with it either, so why should women's rankings influence important decisions in men's football to such a large degree?
Basically women's football should have its own association that is totally separate from FIFA, because in the same vein, most people in FIFA likely don't care or know much about women's football, so they shouldn't be able to make decisions about it either.
Separate-but-equal!
*Loretta Lynch has no idea what she's talking about. How irresponsible of her.
*The US and England are just jealous they lost.
*The US is in bed with Jordan. Coincidence? I THINK NOT.
*If the US wants to arrest people, they should be arresting people in the US. Coming over to Zurich to arrest people is just... uch. How rude.
If the FBI gets to slap cuffs on him, I doubt they will care about any comments he has been making.
That is certainly an opinion you have there.
I don't think it is so much high standards as it is weird/stupid standards like special seating for FIFA officials or something like that.
It's not like Africa is a shining pillar of ethics.
Not enough caviar troughs, etc, gotcha.
Only because FIFA doesn't allow the host countries to really profit from it in any way. If they did, the investment would be far more manageable.
And the retaliation starts.
Chucking out the "have to sit out 2 world Cup" rule so Europe and North America bid against one another in 2026.
2026 in the US for our 250th anniversary would be kinda nuts. Especially if the final was on July 4th, which is a Saturday.
Also, yay for our 5ft2 guy scoring.
I don't think it was retaliation, but there would be other European countries besides England would definitely want to host. And in 2018 voting, England's bid was eliminated in round 1. I don't see why Spain/Portugal wouldn't make another bid.
Is this the first time he's handled one subject twice?
FIFA brings out the Englishman in John.