Blatter To Resign

[Fordy62]

It appears confirmed that Blatter is now subject of investigation... Tick tock, tick tock.

I wish I could get in on this investigation!

[MichaelRobartes]

and money laundering of course.

 

PS:- Haven't this wonderful democracy still got loads of Nazi hordes?.

 

Yep, and your lot are still nicking other people's countries whilst having bad teeth and good table manners and my lot are all getting bollixed and doing in their wives and kids.

 

Because all stereotypes are true.

[RumRed]

Ok first off, he has not been found guilty of any crime - and he has not even been charged with any crime. In fact the Swiss declared today that he is not even under investigation by their scope.

Here is my view, and I am sure I likely to be in a small minority.

Sepp Blatter did not hold onto power because of corruption. That view - much like many of the views on here - is a developed world, Euro-centric view of both him and FIFA.

For those of us from countries where football competes against others to be the number 1 - Blatter's FIFA did a lot of good, funded a lot of projects and built stadia to get children playing the game.

In my own country of Australia - where football to this day still struggles to shed its image given to it by Kerry Packer of being "that game for sheilas, wogs and poofters" - you find FIFA under Blatter did a lot of good for the game - where it really battles NRL, AFL in the minds of the people.

But its my time when I lived in Indonesia where I really saw what Blatter was about.

One of the most populated but poorest countries in the world had several stadia built, school programs and field funded and a game promoted across the many islands.

Blatter saw it as a world game. How did he fund these things? Well he took it from the UEFA dominated lands and competitions and re-distributed the wealth to those have-nots across Africa and Asia.

Do we think Africa has gone from being also-rans with the odd breakthrough of Cameroon in 1990 to their level and quality footballers to date by accident?

If anything the status now of Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon, South Africa can be attirubuted to FIFA under Blatter.

A lot of you parrot the stuff we hear out of UEFA. They don't like him, they hated his FIFA - but for me its because he challenged the view of European dominance in the world game.

He won President elections because Asia, Africa and the developing world backed him because of what he did. Why would they support someone who would be UEFAs mouthpiece and stop money going to them and keep it in Europe.

FIFA has corruption - no question. You name me a global organization that doesn't - but the aim of Blatter of putting the game global and of putting forward projects which have - without question - benefited Africa and Asia has reaped benefits to this day and for that he deserves credit.

The Europeans don't like him - but then turkeys don't vote for Christmas do they.

No, just no.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Yep, and your lot are still nicking other people's countries whilst having bad teeth and good table manners and my lot are all getting bollixed and doing in their wives and kids.

 

Because all stereotypes are true.

 

i've always favoured the Leatherman to the Swiss Army Knife myself.

[RumRed]

i've always favoured the Leatherman to the Swiss Army Knife myself.

That's because the leatherman can actually be useful.

[Aussie]

One of the main purposes of FIFA as a global organisation would surely be to promote the game in all counties, including poor ones such as Indonesia. He gets no extra credit for sharing SOME monies, which likely had big 'kick-backs' for the lucky few.

Yes it is and before Blatter they had made fk all attempt to promote it.

We had what African or Asian participation?

Cameroon in 1990?

Australia? We had one WC appearance. 1974 where we lost all 3 games.

Since then Africans have gone strength to strength and Australia - we've consistently played well in world cups and arguably been very unlucky twice now not to be in the last 16.

Before Blatter FIFA had been about Europe + Brazil and Argentina.

He took on FIFA's remit of being a global game rather than the Europe centric previous overlords.

And FIFA is corrupt because it's based in Switzerland?

I guess we think the World Health Org, Red Cross and UNHCR are all corrupt too.....

[Aussie]

No, just no.

Superb counter. You've won me over.

[Vincent Vega]

Yes it is and before Blatter they had made fk all attempt to promote it.

We had what African or Asian participation?

Cameroon in 1990?

Australia? We had one WC appearance. 1974 where we lost all 3 games.

Since then Africans have gone strength to strength and Australia - we've consistently played well in world cups and arguably been very unlucky twice now not to be in the last 16.

Before Blatter FIFA had been about Europe + Brazil and Argentina.

He took on FIFA's remit of being a global game rather than the Europe centric previous overlords.

And FIFA is corrupt because it's based in Switzerland?

I guess we think the World Health Org, Red Cross and UNHCR are all corrupt too.....

Very noble, but he's been caught with his hands in the till,,,,,,

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Yes it is and before Blatter they had made fk all attempt to promote it.

We had what African or Asian participation?

Cameroon in 1990?

Australia? We had one WC appearance. 1974 where we lost all 3 games.

Before Blatter FIFA had been about Europe + Brazil and Argentina.

He took on FIFA's remit of being a global game rather than the Europe centric previous overlords.

And FIFA is corrupt because it's based in Switzerland?

I guess we think the World Health Org, Red Cross and UNHCR are all corrupt too.....

 

Just the banks Aussie, the same the world over, but not to the same degree. Even your forbears knew that and have sued the Swiss for restitution I believe, on several occasions.

[ten minutes of rough]

Ok first off, he has not been found guilty of any crime - and he has not even been charged with any crime. In fact the Swiss declared today that he is not even under investigation by their scope.

Here is my view, and I am sure I likely to be in a small minority.

 

Sepp Blatter did not hold onto power because of corruption. That view - much like many of the views on here - is a developed world, Euro-centric view of both him and FIFA.

For those of us from countries where football competes against others to be the number 1 - Blatter's FIFA did a lot of good, funded a lot of projects and built stadia to get children playing the game.

 

In my own country of Australia - where football to this day still struggles to shed its image given to it by Kerry Packer of being "that game for sheilas, wogs and poofters" - you find FIFA under Blatter did a lot of good for the game - where it really battles NRL, AFL in the minds of the people.

But its my time when I lived in Indonesia where I really saw what Blatter was about.

One of the most populated but poorest countries in the world had several stadia built, school programs and field funded and a game promoted across the many islands.

 

Blatter saw it as a world game. How did he fund these things? Well he took it from the UEFA dominated lands and competitions and re-distributed the wealth to those have-nots across Africa and Asia.

Do we think Africa has gone from being also-rans with the odd breakthrough of Cameroon in 1990 to their level and quality footballers to date by accident?

If anything the status now of Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon, South Africa can be attirubuted to FIFA under Blatter.

 

A lot of you parrot the stuff we hear out of UEFA. They don't like him, they hated his FIFA - but for me its because he challenged the view of European dominance in the world game.

He won President elections because Asia, Africa and the developing world backed him because of what he did. Why would they support someone who would be UEFAs mouthpiece and stop money going to them and keep it in Europe.

 

FIFA has corruption - no question. You name me a global organization that doesn't - but the aim of Blatter of putting the game global and of putting forward projects which have - without question - benefited Africa and Asia has reaped benefits to this day and for that he deserves credit.

 

The Europeans don't like him - but then turkeys don't vote for Christmas do they.

Can't agree with any of that, Europe is pretty level headed and fair regarding distribution of the WC, however there have been some pretty dodgy dealings of late, including the 10million dollars that was paid to FIFA from SA after they had been awarded the WC. The Russian and Quater awards were dodgy to say the least, especially the latter, and now the ongoing 1,000's of deaths incurred by the slave labour of this hideous country that cares for little except wealth. 

 

The Russia bid was paid for, you will see it all unravel, FIFA has tarnished the game through greed and Blatter held on to power like a despot leader of his favoured African Counties that propped him up, Game over... go figure.  

 

You say FIFA is corrupt, so what, many global organisations are also, however, FIFA is a charity, and that does not allow in it's remit to turn a blind eye to bribary and corruption, and to oversee so many deaths

 

.

[ten minutes of rough]

Superb counter. You've won me over.

You really need convincing? 

[RumRed]

Yes it is and before Blatter they had made fk all attempt to promote it.

We had what African or Asian participation?

Cameroon in 1990?

Australia? We had one WC appearance. 1974 where we lost all 3 games.

Since then Africans have gone strength to strength and Australia - we've consistently played well in world cups and arguably been very unlucky twice now not to be in the last 16.

Before Blatter FIFA had been about Europe + Brazil and Argentina.

He took on FIFA's remit of being a global game rather than the Europe centric previous overlords.

And FIFA is corrupt because it's based in Switzerland?

I guess we think the World Health Org, Red Cross and UNHCR are all corrupt too.....

I don't know where to start but I'll start at the beginning.

Blatter did not care about football, he cared about money. Europe is now highly regulated, the Middle East and Russia are not.

You seriously think he did it for the good of the countries involved? Yep Qatar obviously need the investment that a World Cup would bring them. Oh and we'll have indentured workers building it. Check the death toll so far.

Truly if you're not fishing you really need to read the news.

[Stephen Lewis]

100% correct. Nowadays, the Swiss have the closest thing to democracy in Europe with rounds of referendums for the entire electorate to vote on several times a year. We could learn a thing or two from them ourselves in that regard.

 

 

But hardly anyone turns up in the UK to vote anyway.

[Aussie]

I wasn't talking about Qatar.

Blatter took the World Cup to Africa.

Do you think the emergence of African stars in the last decade has come about by accident?

That Japan, South Korea and Australia's performance the last decade is accidental?

It's because investment globally happened. FIFA didn't before. They did under him and the worlds countries voted for him.

UEFA hates Blatter. And the news? Dominated by the classic European view.

[Aussie]

I'm not saying FIFA has been perfect.

I am simply saying you guys are parroting the classic European bad guy view of him - his org did do good and he received votes as a result.

Just because Qatar is corrupt and I think that should be looked at. But it doesn't undo all the work done.

[Guest]

Aussie - do you believe those projects you mentioned were undertaken for altruistic reasons or that they were sanctioned by a very clever but odious man who very quickly identified that he could secure his tenor in perpetuity due to the voting system?

Aussie - do you wonder whether some of the work was carried out in less developed countries because there are much fewer obstacles to skimming the cream from the milk? Indeed in some it's culturally acceptable - particularly in say Africa....

My prediction, someone has sung like a fairy and the walls have closed in. 5 days ago he was the only man for the job and had the hunger to transform FIFA. He had almost two thirds of the vote in a presidential election - important, not party line but a popularity contest. There is no logic in a U-turn unless he was headline chasing - which I sincerely doubt.

[RumRed]

I'm not saying FIFA has been perfect.

I am simply saying you guys are parroting the classic European bad guy view of him - his org did do good and he received votes as a result.

Just because Qatar is corrupt and I think that should be looked at. But it doesn't undo all the work done.

We'll agree to disagree, I think he did the work in the less regulated countries for himself, not football. I've worked in some of these places and the blatant bribery is beyond words.

[ten minutes of rough]

I wasn't talking about Qatar.

Blatter took the World Cup to Africa.

Do you think the emergence of African stars in the last decade has come about by accident?

That Japan, South Korea and Australia's performance the last decade is accidental?

It's because investment globally happened. FIFA didn't before. They did under him and the worlds countries voted for him.

UEFA hates Blatter. And the news? Dominated by the classic European view.

Blatter  took football to Africa? He sure as hell supported Africa, because they were instrumental in keeping him in power, possibly feathered a few nests along the way too, it was in his interests to take football to Africa, not football, he was never a football man pre FIFA, but he did like power and of course money, the guy is a devious rat of a man, nothing to do with Africa Europe or even football.

 

Good rinse, and I hope they throw the book at him. 

[Vincent Vega]

I'm not saying FIFA has been perfect.

I am simply saying you guys are parroting the classic European bad guy view of him - his org did do good and he received votes as a result.

Just because Qatar is corrupt and I think that should be looked at. But it doesn't undo all the work done. 

Maybe,just maybe the European view of him is in fact correct.

[Aussie]

Yes I know how things are done. I had to occasionally "look the other way in Indonesia", it's just fact of life.

But I still compare FIFA work under him in the developing world v the previous 50 years and it was Europe 1st, 2nd and last before....,

You cannot tell me Africa's stars are not a product of that investment.

Ivory Coast in 1970's?

Did they even have a football?!

[Aussie]

Didn't expect my view to be in the majority as I said.

And that's fine.

[Vincent Vega]

Yes I know how things are done. I had to occasionally "look the other way in Indonesia", it's just fact of life.

But I still compare FIFA work under him in the developing world v the previous 50 years and it was Europe 1st, 2nd and last before....,

You cannot tell me Africa's stars are not a product of that investment.

Ivory Coast in 1970's?

Did they even have a football?!

So the ends justify the means,,,?

[ten minutes of rough]

I'm not saying FIFA has been perfect.

I am simply saying you guys are parroting the classic European bad guy view of him - his org did do good and he received votes as a result.

Just because Qatar is corrupt and I think that should be looked at. But it doesn't undo all the work done.

Well possibly, but I guess because we are a democracy then this sort of thing sticks in the craw.

[Bar BS3]

I'm not saying FIFA has been perfect.

I am simply saying you guys are parroting the classic European bad guy view of him - his org did do good and he received votes as a result.

Just because Qatar is corrupt and I think that should be looked at. But it doesn't undo all the work done.

People don't get to stay in power for as long as he has without appearing to do some good.

The question is ,what did he and others gain from pushing this help in the direction of these countries..?

[Guest]

Yes I know how things are done. I had to occasionally "look the other way in Indonesia", it's just fact of life.

But I still compare FIFA work under him in the developing world v the previous 50 years and it was Europe 1st, 2nd and last before....,

You cannot tell me Africa's stars are not a product of that investment.

Ivory Coast in 1970's?

Did they even have a football?!

You may be able to morally justify looking the other way but it does not mean 'Europe' has to or indeed that it should do.

A wrong is a wrong, even if culturally acceptable. Merely decades ago drink driving was culturally tolerated in the UK. Doesn't make it justifiable or excusable, then or now.

It's simple if there is a case to answer then answer it he must. If through my employment I accepted kickbacks or accepted financial benefits which were not bona fide I could have no complaints if I ended up in the nick. If he is implicated as seems increasingly likely then that is Blatter's legacy.

It might be the 'Europe' line, but I'm damn proud we take a stance against this type of thing and I'm glad we won't pander to 'the rest of the world' who may treat this type of thing as a 'fact of life'.

[RumRed]

just before I head up the stairs to bedminster I thought I'd summarise this thread so we can all sleep peacefully.

Blatter gone - good

Blatter did a lot for football in developing and non footballing countries - questionable

Blatter did the above to line his own pockets - yes by almost everyone

Blatter did the above for the love of foreign Countries and the desire to share football with them in an altruistic manner- Aussie

[Strictly Obi]

Yes it is and before Blatter they had made fk all attempt to promote it.

We had what African or Asian participation?

Cameroon in 1990?

Australia? We had one WC appearance. 1974 where we lost all 3 games.

Since then Africans have gone strength to strength and Australia - we've consistently played well in world cups and arguably been very unlucky twice now not to be in the last 16.

Before Blatter FIFA had been about Europe + Brazil and Argentina.

He took on FIFA's remit of being a global game rather than the Europe centric previous overlords.

And FIFA is corrupt because it's based in Switzerland?

I guess we think the World Health Org, Red Cross and UNHCR are all corrupt too.....

The investment by fifa in minor footballing countries over the last 30yrs, would still have happened without Blatter. He has in this time, done nothing to ensure the finances and business dealings of fifa be open and transparent. And is now comically trying to put out a fire, he started years ago. I believe the whole of the worlds football nations will be much better off without him!

[Up The City!]

We may actually get a world cup over here now.

[Red-Robbo]

Yes it is and before Blatter they had made fk all attempt to promote it.

We had what African or Asian participation?

Cameroon in 1990?

Australia? We had one WC appearance. 1974 where we lost all 3 games.

Since then Africans have gone strength to strength and Australia - we've consistently played well in world cups and arguably been very unlucky twice now not to be in the last 16.

Before Blatter FIFA had been about Europe + Brazil and Argentina.

He took on FIFA's remit of being a global game rather than the Europe centric previous overlords.

And FIFA is corrupt because it's based in Switzerland?

I guess we think the World Health Org, Red Cross and UNHCR are all corrupt too.....

Bollocks all to do with Blatter. A lot to do with relative increases in wealth in the Third World - access to radio, TV and urbanisation.

The standard of organisation and the quality of coaching given to African players has grown as the game grew in the continent.

(BTW loved your aside on Kerry Packer. "Football's for poofs" says man with a girl's name, who dressed cricketers up in fluorescent pink!)

[chipdawg]

Ok first off, he has not been found guilty of any crime - and he has not even been charged with any crime. In fact the Swiss declared today that he is not even under investigation by their scope.

Here is my view, and I am sure I likely to be in a small minority.

Sepp Blatter did not hold onto power because of corruption. That view - much like many of the views on here - is a developed world, Euro-centric view of both him and FIFA.

For those of us from countries where football competes against others to be the number 1 - Blatter's FIFA did a lot of good, funded a lot of projects and built stadia to get children playing the game.

In my own country of Australia - where football to this day still struggles to shed its image given to it by Kerry Packer of being "that game for sheilas, wogs and poofters" - you find FIFA under Blatter did a lot of good for the game - where it really battles NRL, AFL in the minds of the people.

But its my time when I lived in Indonesia where I really saw what Blatter was about.

One of the most populated but poorest countries in the world had several stadia built, school programs and field funded and a game promoted across the many islands.

Blatter saw it as a world game. How did he fund these things? Well he took it from the UEFA dominated lands and competitions and re-distributed the wealth to those have-nots across Africa and Asia.

Do we think Africa has gone from being also-rans with the odd breakthrough of Cameroon in 1990 to their level and quality footballers to date by accident?

If anything the status now of Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon, South Africa can be attirubuted to FIFA under Blatter.

A lot of you parrot the stuff we hear out of UEFA. They don't like him, they hated his FIFA - but for me its because he challenged the view of European dominance in the world game.

He won President elections because Asia, Africa and the developing world backed him because of what he did. Why would they support someone who would be UEFAs mouthpiece and stop money going to them and keep it in Europe.

FIFA has corruption - no question. You name me a global organization that doesn't - but the aim of Blatter of putting the game global and of putting forward projects which have - without question - benefited Africa and Asia has reaped benefits to this day and for that he deserves credit.

The Europeans don't like him - but then turkeys don't vote for Christmas do they.

I can actually relate to the argument that's been made in some quarter: "we wanted to give the poorest people access to the beautiful harm and in the third world you need to cross a few palms with silver". But that doesn't excuse the media execs paying bribes or the bribes for votes does it? Surely if FIFA turned round to, for example, Guinea-Bissau, and said "we'll give you $1million for pitches and kit but it's got to be above board" they'd have taken it anyway? I do agree that FIFAs work to 'globalise' the game in recent years is a great step, I just don't understand why so many pockets had to be lined to do that- especially at the FIFA end