Skip to main content

Today, FIFA, the governing body of world football (soccer) awarded the 2018 World Cup to Russia and the 2022 World Cup to Qatar. This comes after allegations in the British Press of corruption and bribery.

The finalists for the World Cup in 2018 were Russia, England (for soccer purposes, the UK is four different countries), Spain-Portugal, and Belgium-Netherlands.   A few days ago, the BBC's Panorama program did a report accusing FIFA officials of bribery, which FIFA officials denied.

The U.S. was a finalist for 2022, against Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Qatar.  Japan and South Korea jointly hosted in 2002; the U.S. hosted in 1994 and has since emerged as a respectable soccer power, outside the upper echelon of Spain, Brazil, and Argentina, but competitive, as its entry to the second round of the most recent world cup shows.

Needless to say, England's bid was probably shot by the bribery allegations, although given British libel laws and the reputation of the BBC, I have no doubt the facts are on the side of the press on this one.  Spain and Portugal struck me as strong contenders, but the 2014 Cup is hosted by a Portugese-speaking country in Brazil.  Russia was a bit of a surprise, because even though it's large, it has never excelled in football other than during the days of Lev Yashin and reaching the semi-finals of Euro 2008.  (Russia did not qualify for the 2010 World Cup, though.)  Still, it's always a bit of a crapshoot to see who wins and who doesn't.  

I thought Australia would be the U.S.'s main competition for 2022, but Qatar struck me as odd, given that it's so tiny.  World Cups usually spread the venues out around a few different cities, but that's just not possible in Qatar.  It's also even more authoritarian than Russia and not, in my view, entirely safe.  (The threat of terrorism is always present at the World Cup, but placing the event in the Persian Gulf is a different matter altogether.)

More importantly, the recent trend has been to award the Cup to countries who were emerging as democracies or economic powers, as with South Africa and Brazil.  Russia/Qatar represents an unfortunate reversal of that trend.

And, yes, I wanted to go see a match in the U.S.  I'm still upset my chance to see Holland-Saudia Arabia at RFK Stadium back in 1994 fell through, and not just because I had to take an algebra final a day early to see it!

Originally posted to Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 09:29 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (23+ / 0-)

    "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

    by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 09:29:48 AM PST

  •  a mockery of a sham (6+ / 0-)

    Hope Sepp enjoys his retirement money.

    The World Cup in Qatar is going to be a disaster.  

    Nickel, dime, and quarter. Change we can believe in.

    by RickD on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 09:40:30 AM PST

    •  On the contrary, it will (0+ / 0-)

      likely be seen as hugely successful. In a totalitarian society (especially with unimaginable wealth), an impressive face can be applied to anything. The activities not allowed 10 feet outside the venues will be openly embraced inside. Enough money will shield viewers and visitors from the costs of their good time.

      The Beijing Olympics were widely viewed as successful. There were no apparent money shortages or unfinished venues. No annoying protests or strikes by a disobedient populace. No stories on the nightly news or in the daily newspapers identifying corrupt officials or budget overruns.

  •  Russia's victory is great news for the US..... (20+ / 0-)
    US citizens will be able to watch from Sarah Palin's house!
  •  Sepp Blatter is a shameless crook. (5+ / 0-)

    Republicans secret dream = the impeachment of Bo the Dog LOL

    by LaurenMonica on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 09:41:38 AM PST

    •  We knew the deal was done when Spain/Portugal (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DruidQueen, LaurenMonica

      and Qatar cross endorsed. The problem I have with Qater is that there are not really enough people there to have placed it there in order to spread the sport, and the rest of the states there are always only on marginal speaking terms with one another and have cultural divisions of a permanent nature and cultural animosities that make those of Europe look like pikers, those whose individual terrorists don't express their views as some in Iraq did by killing off the national soccer team. But maybe it is in a cynical way FIFA looking to see where it can expand its markets and TV fees, at the cost of almost any other factor.

  •  The real winners are the companies (9+ / 0-)

    that will receive billions of dollars in public funds to build entirely new stadium infrastructures in both Russia and Qatar.

    As usual, it comes down to corporate profits and nothing else.

  •  In the case of FIFA it also comes down to (6+ / 0-)

    personal greed by the governors according to the BBC.  

  •  I think the word is "Totalitiarian" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rb608, DWG, davidseth

    It is indeed a shame that they will host an international event like this. The vicious thugs in control of the country are celebrating their heavy-handed ways right now.

    And Qatar is also a problem.


  •  Putting on my "Fox News Spin Machine" hat..... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RaulVB, CaliSista, LaurenMonica

    So wait... using GOP logic.... doesnt this now mean the world has rejected the GOP and November's election results? I mean, losing the Chicago Olympics bid was supposed to mean the world rejected Obama... should I be jumping up and down cheering right now, like they were?

  •  The US is NOT a soccer power... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RaulVB, davidseth

    unless you're talking within Concacaf (or Women's). Competitive, yes.

    I guess Qatar has about 10 brand new stadiums to build. Puzzling.

    •  Yes we are. (5+ / 0-)

      If you consider England, Italy, France soccer powers, then we have to be considered a "power" at least on the field.

      •  How many WCs does the US have again? (0+ / 0-)

        Don't be clueless. We're not a soccer power. England have the best league IMO in the world and have won a WC. France has won a WC and a Euro Championship.

        Italy have 4 WCs. Are you serious?

        •  How many WCs do Qatar & Russia (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          have put together? Is that more than what the US has?

          What's your point exactly?

          •  What's my point? Are you serious? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            So your definition of "soccer power" is how many WC's a country has hosted?

            The poster was calling the US a soccer power. Unless he specifically stated "in the stands", then it's obvious he meant "on the field". The US is not a soccer power. It has never won anything of relevance except in what could be the worst of all the Confederations= Concacaf. But I don't expect you to know that.

            Did you have anything else to contribute? What was your point exactly?

            •  Sorry. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              We were talking about different things. In reply to your original post, someone mentioned Qatar. Which sort of spun the whole conversation off into the hosting of the world cup, rather than your original assertion that the US is not a soccer power on the field.

              I wouldn't say we are anywhere near as serious on the field as some of the other teams you mentioned, although France was a freaking joke in South Africa.

              But to simply dismiss the US isn't fair either. We got far, and would have gotten farther if the referees weren't either taking bribes or just plain freaking blind, and if FIFA would join us in the 21st century with video replays and such.

              I would say the US is getting up there, is fairly competitive, and is building a bigger fan base as well.

            •  Reading Comprehension 101 (0+ / 0-)

              Part of original point: US should be awarded WC because they are a soccer/football power;

              xsal point: US is not fit to wipe the boots of Euro power;

              xsal point: US has won 0 WC while Europe sells their trophies at flea markets so US is undeserving of hosting WC;

              DQ point: How many WC have Qatar and Russia won since that is apparently your criteria for which country should be allowed to host?

              My question: Who should be punished for the 1994, 2010, 2002(?), etc. WC which went to "undeserving" countries?

              Clear things up?

              •  No...but it was funny how you (0+ / 0-)

                completely missed the point.

                Never implied the US is awful as you claim I did(the idiotic "wipe the boots" comment).

                Never said the US did not deserve to host a WC. From an economic standpoint few countries can match it.

                Don't know about your other idiotic comment about selling trophies "at flea markets".

                Your "spin" abilities could get you a nice paying job at Fox though "sista".

                However if you insist upon punishment, maybe reading some of your posts could do the trick. ;)

                •  Did you even read (0+ / 0-)

                  your own rude and judgemental response to DruidQueen before you hit "Post"? Since that appeared to be your level of discourse, I responded in the same manner. Unfortunately, I have no idea what your screen name means so I'm unable to mock it or challenge your authenticity as you did with mine. Would my comment be more acceptable if I were UtahSister or MontanaMom or IdahoMan? It's funny you mention Fox since you seem to borrow from their technique with your "sista" remark.

                  As far as the "idiotic" comments to which you took offense, may I introduce you a certain figure of speech?

                  As a reminder, here is what YOU have said regarding hosting WC or comments that were unnecessarily rude:

                  How many WCs does the US have again?
                  Don't be clueless.
                  It has never won anything of relevance except in what could be the worst of all the Confederations= Concacaf.
                  But I don't expect you to know that.
                  Did you have anything else to contribute?

                  That was just in this thread. This know-it-all mocking dismissive attitude just hit me the wrong way today and I responded in kind. In any case, I will try and refrain from letting it and "sista" air quotes push my buttons any more.

        •  France and Italy (0+ / 0-)

          had horrible showings at the last world cup.  France has the young players, but they don't play as a team.  Italy has young players at the club level, but the national team is a gerontocracy.

          Are you going to say that the Raiders are an NFL power, because by that reasoning they would be.

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:34:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Italy won the WC in 2006 in case you missed it... (0+ / 0-)

            and regardless of how they did in the last WC they are always considered contenders. Their league has the current CL champion and one of the 3 best in the world. The US has never been considered a contender. EVER.

            Please feel free to post your definition of "soccer power" and feel free to remind everyone what makes the US a bonafide soccer power. Some on here seem to think attendance or number of tournaments hosted does it. L.M.A.O

            •  Yes, beating France (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              both countries are in decline on the pitch though.  We're probably a little behind them but could take either one if the stars alighted.

              Inter Milan, champions of Europe, are having a terrible time since Jose Mourinho left.  And how Italian was Wesley Sneijder, Diego Milito, or Javier Zanetti?  Their only Italian international is Marco Materazzi.  Gareth Bale recently ate their lunch.  (Come On You Spurs!!!)

              "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

              by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:05:11 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Terrible time since Mourinho left.... (0+ / 0-)

                any coach in the world would have a tough time with the number of injuries Inter have had to deal with early on.

                Not sure having a bad world cup or having it's top team have a bad start disqualifies a country from being called a "soccer power" and having a decent WC doesn't make anyone one either.

                Last I checked all Italian teams are in great position to go on to the next round and Inter ("horrible start") are even tied in points at the top of group A.

                Yeah, and if the stars "alighted" I could start for Brazil too. ;)

              •  Forgot to add that "declining" France.... (0+ / 0-)

                just won the European U-19 championship over Spain, so I'd say they're more on the up than the decline.

          •  Some of the Italian Sratistical dominance (0+ / 0-)

            Is based on their participation in the pre ww2 world cups. Like Uruguay.  They are a grim defensive minded team. I hate to watch them in internationals. Pre ww2 the Olympics are a better record of playing ability. Post war, it's all Brazil and Germany.

            A Catholic, Jew, Muslim and Buddhist walk into Al Aqsa Mosque. Buddhist immediately exclaims: "excuse me I appear to be in the wrong joke."

            by Salo on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:00:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Italy have won 2 WCs after WW2 (0+ / 0-)

              so I don't know about the "statistical" dominance comment.

              I agree about their playing style, although it's not as bad as people make it out to be. The catenaccio word gets thrown about too much.

              •  After provoking (0+ / 0-)

                Zidane to headbut. And 82 was a farce of a final.

                They always smell to high heaven at that level. They strangled the 1994 final to death too.

                At least the Germans are decent sports.

                A Catholic, Jew, Muslim and Buddhist walk into Al Aqsa Mosque. Buddhist immediately exclaims: "excuse me I appear to be in the wrong joke."

                by Salo on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 01:27:48 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  How was 82 a farce? (0+ / 0-)

                  They beat Germany 3-1 in the Final while even missing a penalty?

                  Zidane was an idiot to take the bait and it wasn't the first time he'd gone nuts. If all players were as thin skinned as him we'd end up with 7 on 7s.

                  •  They should not have been there (0+ / 0-)

                    There were betting scandals involving players in both 1982 and 2006. Italian football is foul. Both on the pitch and off.

                    A Catholic, Jew, Muslim and Buddhist walk into Al Aqsa Mosque. Buddhist immediately exclaims: "excuse me I appear to be in the wrong joke."

                    by Salo on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 03:32:15 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

        •  England and Scotland (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Invented it and dominated the sport for 70 years.  The Olympic were the real contest pre ww2.

          But the US is actually quite talented and consistent. I think they are going to bd in everh second round from now on. That's very impressive.

          A Catholic, Jew, Muslim and Buddhist walk into Al Aqsa Mosque. Buddhist immediately exclaims: "excuse me I appear to be in the wrong joke."

          by Salo on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:57:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Because Qatar is a soccer power? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DruidQueen, Loge

      The US team has higher ranking than Russia and Qatar in the FIFA Ranking

      Republicans secret dream = the impeachment of Bo the Dog LOL

      by LaurenMonica on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:07:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, it is, in a way (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vacantlook, DruidQueen, Loge

      Isn't it true that the 1994 World Cup in the US set attendance records that still stand?   That's a kind of power, but apparently not the kind they wanted this time.  Disappointing.

      •  let's not forget (0+ / 0-)

        that because the U.S. is a "nation of immigrants," all of the competing countries had a built-in fanbase.  That's one of the great things about American soccer culture, the diversity.

        "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

        by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:11:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Attendance in 94 was huge no doubt.... (0+ / 0-)

        the stadiums were bigger. Rose Bowl alone contributed 715826 fans in 8 games.

        The original comment was about the US being a soccer power on the field. It's not.

    •  FIFA fetishizes "new" markets (0+ / 0-)

      While I agree that both World Cup selections are horrible from a human rights standpoint, FIFA always does this according to its own fiefdom (pun intended). Choosing a WC both in Russia and Qatar means that FIFA will have selected three straight nations that previously have never hosted a World Cup. Moreover, it is also four of the last five tournaments and five of the last seven as well getting awarded to countries who have never hosted the World Cup.

    •  I keep thinking about the number of strange and (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      expensive sporting events which have championships in Qater, race cars, golf and the like, which save for the event and the cachet have no real base there, and wonder if this is how they think they can create a tourist business for themselves.

      •  It's all about the money. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I'm a tennis fan who has been increasingly disappointed with the WTA and ATP for holding events in the UAE. A couple of years ago, one of them denied a visa to an Israeli player and the WTA still let the tournament go forward. The country "relented" this year and "allowed" the player to attend but the fact that it happened at all in this day and age is frightening.

        The only explanation I've seen that makes any sense (I guess from the perspective of sporting organizations) is the vast wealth of UAE countries makes them able to fund everything. No worries about governments balancing stadium building with their pesky poor people. No politicians concerned about how such a huge redirection of money for a sporting event would affect their reelection. Appearance fees? No problem. Luxury suites? No problem. Hey, they'll even waive their draconian rules on the conduct of women (as long as you don't venture outside the approved areas).

        I guess those making the decisions care less about the treatment of their wives and daughters than the prospect of a never ending money tree.

    •  It's got a dogged style (0+ / 0-)

      Better than England these days too.

      The WC was awful to watch as an Englishman.


      A Catholic, Jew, Muslim and Buddhist walk into Al Aqsa Mosque. Buddhist immediately exclaims: "excuse me I appear to be in the wrong joke."

      by Salo on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:54:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It will be interesting (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      If the peak oil emergency drags Qatar into the stone age, perhaps the bid will be withdrawn...

      Now where did I put my shot glass?

      by aztecraingod on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:31:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The news report I heard (0+ / 0-)

      said that after the WC, they would dismantle the stadiums and give them to a less fortunate area. Moving a stadium seems pretty cost prohibitive to me but maybe their proposal included some new way of construction that would make this more feasible.

  •  I wonder how much Qatar "donated" to FIFA (n/t) (5+ / 0-)
  •  I wouldn't go so far as to describe (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the US as "outside of the upper echelon."

    Maybe "outside of outside the upper echelon." I like the fact that the US is an underdog at something. It's fun to watch.

    I watched the US - Algeria match live. The team was on the verge of being eliminated in extra minutes when Landon Donovan scored and won the group. After all the bad calls in the previous matches, the US deserved to win. One of the greatest moments in international competition for the US in any sport.

    •  If you just count since 1994 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      our record is pretty good.  We made the Quarters in 2002 and the finals of the Confederations Cup in 2009.  Not to mention that the Algeria team drew with England, against whom we earned a draw. The U.S. won a pretty tough group and was done in against Ghana by Bob Bradley's bad personnel decisions, and then only in extra time.

      You're right, though, that there's probably a tier of sides between the likes of Spain/Brazil/Argentina/Germany/Holland, probably consisting of England/Paraguay/France (when it gets its act together)/Italy, and a few others.  We're between the 10th and 20th best in the world, which on soccer terms puts us well ahead of every other country bidding for 2022.

      "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

      by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:01:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It is a shame (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DruidQueen, Loge

        that Qatar will be taking a slot away from a deserving team.  It's pretty safe to say that Spain and Portugal will be in the top 20 in 10 years, and they are nice places to visit, to boot.

        Honestly, I think going to Portugal or Spain and watching the games in a bar would be more fun than going to Qatar and not being able to have a drink or 5.

        Now where did I put my shot glass?

        by aztecraingod on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:35:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Both sides played so tough in (0+ / 0-)

        the Ghana match. The US fell apart at the end, but Ghana earned the win.

  •  Hmmm... the smell of oil money in the morning. (4+ / 0-)

    Either way, I'm moving back to Brazil in a few weeks and will begin preparations for the 2014 Cup, so I'm happy :D

    It's really a bummer the U.S. didn't get it, although I am constantly surprised at how many Americans never even knew about the 1994 Cup ...

  •  Qatar has free press - U.S. doesn't. nt (0+ / 0-)
  •  FIFA (0+ / 0-)

    An European can be bribed with 9.5M dollars.

    South American can be bribed with 600K dollars.

    An African can be bribed with 20K dollars.

    Authoritarian, hey, they do as they want.

  •  There are two state-run places to get beer (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RaulVB, Mariken, DruidQueen

    in Qatar, but you must have a consumption lisence.

    Better apply now. They are not easy to get.

    You can drink in the hotel bar, but you can't take the drink out of the building.

    "One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity nothing beats teamwork." - Mark Twain

    by greendem on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:13:42 AM PST

  •  Interesting choices (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Russia is going to have to build a lot of new arenas as I understand. And as they will also be hosting a winter olympics, this means Russia really will invest a lot in sport facilities the next years. Also the distances are going to be vast. (FIFA is said not to particularly like co-hostings nations, but the area of Netherlands/Belgium for instance is much smaller than Russia).

    Quatar is going to be HOT, but I have heard there will be advanced air-condition on the stadiums. There´s  also the question of alcohol. International hotels/restaurants already sell alcohol there, and they probably will have to allow alcohol to be sold even more places during the games. But soccer fans tend to like quite a lot of alcohol, and how will the Quatarians react to that ?

    Well, I hope it will be great games, anyway. South Africa did very well and much better than I feared, considered the general high crime rate there.

    Counting down to DKos4

    by Mariken on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:19:15 AM PST

  •  Any time you can have (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    davidseth, DruidQueen

    a major international event in a very tiny country with hostility to human rights and will be 100+ degrees outside for matches, you've gotta do it.  Seriously, how does a country like that even get considered with a straight face unless there's bribery involved?

    Show me a teabagger concerned about the deficit, and I'll show you the world's worst hypocrite.

    by farleftloon on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:22:54 AM PST

  •  meh (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    America isn't highly respected internationally, and its institutional resistance to soccer is well-known, despite whatever occasional success we have on the pitch... and as fucked as this country is these days, there's no guarantee we could pull this off any better than Qatar at this point. Whatever.

  •  FIFA is MLB for the rest of world. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angry marmot

    Corrupt as shit, greedy as shit, and always happy to spit on the fans if it means more money in their pockets.

    •  Having read your title (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      before expanding the comment, I have to say I was expecting something like "FIFA is MLB for the rest of the world... utterly foreign and boring." I myself love the beautiful game, and I don't really "get" baseball, but there ya' go...

      Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

      by angry marmot on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 10:38:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        angry marmot

        I'm not against baseball, the game itself.

        MLB as an organization is corrupt, and is fine with casually spitting on fans.

        Many cities in the US have been lied to by MLB and the folks who build stadiums, just to get taxpayers to eat the bill for yet more fancy new stadiums that aren't needed. The most recent victim that I know of was the city of Miami. The Florida Marlins can suck a big fat...

        You can read about it here. You can argue that it was the Marlins directly, the team owners, that screwed Miami-Dade county, but MLB has shrugged and said nothing. Nor is this the first time a baseball team has fucked a city out of tax money with blatant lies, so they can get a stadium.

        MLB has the power to stop this shit, and they don't. Why? Because they get a cut of it as well.

        Well someone over at FIFA got a big fat oily check to give some chicken shit desert country a world cup they don't deserve.

        I was just comparing the two organizations.

  •  Russia.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ..has a really severe hooligan problem. FIFA are fast to rank on England because of that, but Eastern Europe is just plain nasty when it comes to misbehaving fans.

  •  I hope that by the next cup (0+ / 0-)

    FIFA will have revised their playing rules.  For one, it would be great for FIFA to institute the use of video replay on questionable plays, fouls, and goals.

  •  FIFA sux. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    But you already know that.  You don't have to revisit their truculence about "goal post technology" in the last WC.  Or a half dozen other ridiculous things they've done.

    The choice of Russia and Qatar is perfect for FIFA.  It's just another dookie sandwich for futbol fans.

  •  There are sooooo many ways this can haunt FIFA... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

    by TheHalfrican on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:20:57 AM PST

  •  Russia hasn't had a World Cup in a long time if (0+ / 0-)

    ever and now has some gas money to organize it. So it makes sense. Qatar is tiny but again money is there and there weren't many World Cups in that region. And it's quite safe (other than a possible threat of terrorism but there were more terrorist attacks in Europe than there). I don't see the relevance with the type of government in the country so I think your title is misleading.

    •  The World Cup has been hosted (0+ / 0-)

      by a reasonably democratic country every time since 1978, when Argentina hosted.  Before then, it was hosted by a reasonably democratic country every time since 1934, when fascist Italy hosted.

      All of the other finalists had the financial resources to host and had the further advantage of being able to play in the tournament without embarrassing themselves.  Russia will probably be a weak side, but Qatar might well lose to an MLS team on a neutral pitch.  

      "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

      by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:36:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ok, but there is no requirement for the World (0+ / 0-)

        Cup to be hosted by democratic government. FIFA has nothing to do with promotion of democracy. Yeah, both Russian and Qatari teams are weak.

      •  Military dictatorship in argentina in 78 (0+ / 0-)

        Did you mean AFTER argentina hosted it?

        •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

          every world cup since 1978 has been hosted by a country not under the rule of a military dictatorship.  How could you possibly conclude I was saying Argentina was a democracy in 1978?  I don't think the word "since" is inclusive in that way, and I think I'm enough of a non-idiot for you to infer that I don't believe the 1974 World Cup in West Germany was in a dictatorship.  Do you have something substantive to say about the decision to award the Cups to Russia and Qatar, or do you just want to nitpick?  

          By the way, I'll bet you fewer than half of the French U-19 players are in the senior side by 2018, and that no current Inter Milan player is on the Italian side for the Euro 2012 championships, after you go back and read that I actually said that Italy and France are still stronger than the U.S. in international play, though the most recent world cup suggests the opposite. Indeed, I stand by the statements that the Italian selection won't get better until it cleans house of its past-its-prime players (whose replacements won't be found anywhere near Milan), and France is in disarray.  Italy's demographics aren't helping, and France's youth movement is only beneficial to the extent the players and coaches can mutually agree to hold practice.  The U.S. is getting younger and assimilates foreign-born talent well, and so is moving in the right direction.  

          By 2022, we'll be even more competitive than we are now, have even more soccer fans than we do now, and would have hosted an excellent Cup, like we did in 1994.  

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 02:15:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  hmmmm (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    over here in the u.k the murdoch press have been quick to use this as an excuse to attack the bbc (despite the fact that the corruption allegations first surfaced in the sunday times which is owned by the murdoch empire)

    Personally i would rather have the BBC than the world cup any day. As was said previously about British libel lwas i highly doubt the BBC would broadcast this unless they were almost certain they were correct. FIFA as an organization stinks and holds a large grudge against the English and Scottish FA's because we like to think of ourselves as "footballs motherland"

    screw 'em. I am sure Russia will put on a good World Cup, im sure Qatar will be an absolute disaster.

    McCain = world meltdown

    by mb6578 on Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 11:48:29 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site