Jump to content
IGNORED

Did Fifa Corruption Cost Us Ashton Vale ?


Major Isewater

Recommended Posts

We didn't lose the new stadium due to losing World cup bid.we lost it because too many moaning pensioners at Ashton Vale. And Mr Red trousers.

 

I think that Ashton Vale would have gone ahead if England had won the World Cup bid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We didn't lose the new stadium due to losing World cup bid.we lost it because too many moaning pensioners at Ashton Vale. And Mr Red trousers.

I'm talking about "political will " .I'm pretty sure that if the England bid had been successful ,as it arguably should have been , we would not have been held to ransom by the few nimbys and Red Trousers would have done the vote winning thing .

That is my opinion ,i have no other knowledge to back it up and am interested to hear others thoughts .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm talking about "political will " .I'm pretty sure that if the England bid had been successful ,as it arguably should have been , we would not have been held to ransom by the few nimbys and Red Trousers would have done the vote winning thing .

That is my opinion ,i have no other knowledge to back it up and am interested to hear others thoughts .

I agree with you. If the World Cup was awarded to Bristol I believe AV would have been built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmm Spain & Portugal and Holland/Belgium were still ahead of us even if the Russkies hadn't have bought it.

On the other hand, you wonder how a completely different Fifa executive, examining the bids purely on merit rather than prejudice would have seen things.

Australia was the obvious host in 2022, yet they finished last in the voting, like us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmm Spain & Portugal and Holland/Belgium were still ahead of us even if the Russkies hadn't have bought it.

On the other hand, you wonder how a completely different Fifa executive, examining the bids purely on merit rather than prejudice would have seen things.

Australia was the obvious host in 2022, yet they finished last in the voting, like us.

I'm finding that this Red-Robbo character talks a lot of sense, in fact I agree more with his opinions than I ever agree with myself. The only nonsense he ever spouts is about thinking it's more entertaining to watch paint dry than to watch cricket. I'm just glad he does utter some drivel now and again otherwise I would become his disciple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Ashton Vale would have gone ahead if England had won the World Cup bid

I personally think we pulled out as Lansdown caught wind of Sainsburys and their issues. We dropped Ashton Vale very suddenly.

Why would Sainsburys build a superstore at Ashton Gate...when they are pulling out of the Mem development and down sizing to smaller express stores?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm finding that this Red-Robbo character talks a lot of sense, in fact I agree more with his opinions than I ever agree with myself. The only nonsense he ever spouts is about thinking it's more entertaining to watch paint dry than to watch cricket. I'm just glad he does utter some drivel now and again otherwise I would become his disciple.

Naaaaawwwww, reminds me of that Jennifer Paige song 'it's just a little crush'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm finding that this Red-Robbo character talks a lot of sense, in fact I agree more with his opinions than I ever agree with myself. The only nonsense he ever spouts is about thinking it's more entertaining to watch paint dry than to watch cricket. I'm just glad he does utter some drivel now and again otherwise I would become his disciple.

Yeah my son, even as this written in ye book of Robbo doth your Lord concede that he did enjoyeth watching two days of Ashes play at Lords once.

Verily tis the ECB's decision to put themselves on Sky that maketh me say Go Forth And Procreate as a sport I'll be watching from this day forth....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think we pulled out as Lansdown caught wind of Sainsburys and their issues. We dropped Ashton Vale very suddenly.

Why would Sainsburys build a superstore at Ashton Gate...when they are pulling out of the Mem development and down sizing to smaller express stores?

ours wasn't dependant on sainsburys funding tho' if they pulled out we could still sell Ashton Gate and Lansdown would of funded any short fall,

Rovers aren't that lucky,

Remember the cost of redevloping ashton gate is about the same as the new build at ashton vale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ours wasn't dependant on sainsburys funding tho' if they pulled out we could still sell Ashton Gate and Lansdown would of funded any short fall,

Rovers aren't that lucky,

Remember the cost of redevloping ashton gate is about the same as the new build at ashton vale

Indeed. In fact, if we had Sainsburys related difficulties then option 2 - the reviled Ferguson's plan for housing on the site - might have seemed like a boon rather than a hindrance.

The difference between our club and Roverzzzz is that Lansdown could afford to build AV entirely from his own resources if he had to; the Gas wouldn't have the resources to put up a B&Q garden shed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see if there is a group action by the losing countries against FIFA. I can see EUFA pulling out of FIFA now. 

FIFA can't continue in its current format and blatter can't continue to lead it,

but the corruption seems to be so deep rooted that this will drag on for years, the FBI are targeting blatter which was just announced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FIFA can't continue in its current format and blatter can't continue to lead it,

but the corruption seems to be so deep rooted that this will drag on for years, the FBI are targeting blatter which was just announced

I have not seen the news today but have heard UEFA state that they do not want the vote to go ahead tomorrow and want their members to boycott. They have also stated that FIFA needs complete new leadership. If FIFA push through on the vote and Blatter is re elected then for me that will give EUFA all the motivation they need to boycott and set up a rival tournament.

 

Former UEFA president Johansson has called for the 2018 World cup to be given to England this morning and Visa and various other sponsors look like they are close to pulling the plug on their association. 

 

This looks like the beginning of the end for FIFA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happier now that we're staying at Ashton Gate.

Corruption definitely played a part in Russia winning the 2018 bid but that doesn't necessarily mean we'd have won it in a fair vote.

If we had won there's no way that the authorities would have allowed the nimbys to win. The financial and cultural gains of hosting World Cup football in Bristol would have been too great. So yes, if we had won, I reckon AV would have been approved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think we pulled out as Lansdown caught wind of Sainsburys and their issues. We dropped Ashton Vale very suddenly.

Why would Sainsburys build a superstore at Ashton Gate...when they are pulling out of the Mem development and down sizing to smaller express stores?

Very good point. We did seem to drop AV very quickly .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happier now that we're staying at Ashton Gate.

Corruption definitely played a part in Russia winning the 2018 bid but that doesn't necessarily mean we'd have won it in a fair vote.

If we had won there's no way that the authorities would have allowed the nimbys to win. The financial and cultural gains of hosting World Cup football in Bristol would have been too great. So yes, if we had won, I reckon AV would have been approved.

So naive to think that the "NIMBYs" were acting on their own, all those leaked planning "mistakes" by BCC, the incredible legal decision to then allow them to substitute the complainant well out of time after the original one withdrew..

As well as Red Trousers there were others high up conspiring to stop this and I don't believe even if England had got the World Cup AV would have been allowed to be built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good point. We did seem to drop AV very quickly .

we dropped it because we drew up good contingency plans and came to an agreement with the nimbys about building a sporting acadmey on the land at Ashton Vale,

not because of sainsburys our ground wasn't dependant on sainsburys money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the only reason AV wasn't built was because the land for years had been used for country fairs, morris dancing and country picnics.

Add to this their were some of the rarest creatures ever seen on this planet living there including the bamboo lemur and the hairy nosed wombat then what right did we ever have to build on it.

Nothing to do with corruption and bending the rules as far as i'm concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

With the shock news that FIFA officials are under investigation by the FBI ,CIA,MI5 and BBC could this mean that we lost the political will to push through Ashton Vale when England's water tight and excellent bid to host the World cup was over looked ?

You have to wonder.

 

Easy answer is FIFA did NOT cost us Ashton Vale

 

You need to look at the FACTS !

 

The American indictments - which focus on corruption allegations going back to 1991 - are the most serious, as they could potentially lead to prison terms. As well as the seven people arrested in Zurich, indictments were issued for seven others.

 

The Swiss criminal case is still at the investigative stage but could provide revelations about the allocation of the forthcoming World Cups. It is the first time that authorities with the power to prosecute have looked at the bids. However, in their statement the Swiss make it clear that Fifa are actually the "injured party". This means that they are investigating individuals who might have abused the bidding process and used it for money laundering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So naive to think that the "NIMBYs" were acting on their own, all those leaked planning "mistakes" by BCC, the incredible legal decision to then allow them to substitute the complainant well out of time after the original one withdrew..

As well as Red Trousers there were others high up conspiring to stop this and I don't believe even if England had got the World Cup AV would have been allowed to be built.

But Gray: Red Trousers was not mayor at that time and he actually supported AV. He just didn't want a supermarket to go in the vacant AG site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Gray: Red Trousers was not mayor at that time and he actually supported AV. He just didn't want a supermarket to go in the vacant AG site.

red trousers was never against ashton vale he was always a supporter of it,

he was against sainsburys being moved to ashton gate because he feared it would take trade away from his business's, and the fact he wanted the site and lansdown wouldn't sell it to him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 However, in their statement the Swiss make it clear that Fifa are actually the "injured party". This means that they are investigating individuals who might have abused the bidding process and used it for money laundering.

 

Whilst being an 'injured party' FIFA might still be culpable in relation to money laundering offences and subject to very severe consequences.

 

I don't know how the Swiss regulations are framed however if they are similar to money laundering offences in the UK, even though an injured party, if FIFA has not carried out reasonable due diligence or put in reasonable measures - and consider reasonable in light of the Yanks' accusations of endemic corruption over the past 25 years - they (FIFA) may still be liable to very serious offences.

 

I would imagine the Swiss regulations are broadly similar to the UK. Any piece of law which prohibits money laundering will have almost nil impact - you're already talking about someone dealing with the proceeds of crime, one more (crime) isn't going to be an effective deterrent. The theory I understand is If you want to have impact you shift the burden to companies which could be used as a conduit for the laundered money. You try to stop it at source by forcing 'X' to undertake due diligence to ensure money is clean. If it transpires it (money) was not clean, unless the 'innocent' acted reasonably in all the circumstances make them culpible. It's in effect shifting the burden for day-to-day policing of proceeds of crime from Govt to the vulnerable private sector institutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...