Well done to the BBC


Status
Not open for further replies.
Today's decision proved everything in that show was correct. I'm pleased we were the country that stood up to the corruption, instead of sweeping it under the carpet and pandering to FIFA.

I would have been proud to see the World Cup here, but not under this FIFA.
 
http://themoscownews.com/sports/20101118/188212147.html?referfrommn

FIFA admits World Cup corruption - but the news could boost Russian hopes
by Andy Potts at 18/11/2010 15:40
FIFA has accepted that the bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups has been tainted by corruption – just two weeks before delegates gather in Zurich to choose the host nations.
But the news may enhance Russia’s chances of hosting the prestigious event, with a senior FIFA figure lambasting the British newspaper which broke the story.
The ethics committee of football’s governing body has ruled that two members of the executive commission were willing to solicit bribes from bidding nations, following an investigation by The Sunday Times newspaper.
Both men, Amos Adamu of Nigeria and Reynald Temarii of Thailand have been suspended from FIFA and banned from any footballing activity for three years and one year respectively.
The Dec. 2 vote will now take place with 22 delegates instead of 24.

Russia’s fate
The allegations which FIFA investigated were prompted by newspaper reports that the two men were willing to accept cash in return for backing a bid.
Russia was not implicated in that scam, but a later article in the same newspaper quoted Adamu saying he had been offered funding for football programmes in Nigeria during a visit to Moscow.
The Russian bid team strongly denied those allegations, and hinted that the newspaper was not treating all the bidding nations – including England – in an even-handed way.
Many in the UK feared that this scandal, coupled with earlier remarks from the former chairman of England’s bid, Lord Triesman, would end any prospect of Wembley hosting the World Cup Final – and that could pave the way for the tournament to come here.
And while FIFA has agreed that there is a case to answer, ethics committee chairman Claudio Sulser, pictured above, claimed that the British paper had “distorted” the facts in its reporting.
Speaking at a press conference in Zurich, he said: “I am not against investigative journalism, but this newspaper distorted the facts. It tore those statements out of context in such a way that was advantageous to them.”
FIFA also dismissed allegations of collusion between Spain-Portugal and 2022 bidders Qatar.

Technical doubts
On Wednesday the publication of the technical reports into the various bids dealt a blow to Russia with FIFA assessing the country’s ambitious plans as “medium risk”.
Main rivals England and Spain-Portugal were rated “low risk”.
The key concern for officials was transport: Russia’s bid covers by far the largest geographical area and it was noted that few of the proposed host cities were linked by high-speed rail.
And problems with flying were highlighted on the day of the report when the Belgian team travelling to play Russia in Voronezh was delayed due to fog at the south-western city’s airport.
That delay didn’t affect the team too much – they won 2-0 after a second-minute goal caught Russia napping – but added weight to FIFA’s worries.
But Russia’s bid chairman Alexei Sorokin was upbeat about the challenge ahead.
“We have noted FIFA’s assessment, which reflects the status quo,” he said in a statement. “Russia’s bid is resolutely geared towards the future.
“The additional guarantees signed by prime minister Putin … ensure that the risks mentioned by FIFA will be solved well ahead of 2018.”


:lol::lol:
 
Well done the BBC for running with it in my opinion. We were NEVER going to get it. Nowt to do with the BBC. I just hope they go after FIFA with more venom now.

You just don't know that. There is some explanation as to why we got eliminated first as we had the best bid in almost every measure. I firmly believe that the Panoram and the Sunday Times had a deterimental effect on our bid and will do nothing to sort out FIFA corruption.

Interesting that David Dein is alluding to the BBC negatively effecting the bid.
 
Last edited:
No it wasn't :lol:

Relative to the damage it would cause to the country and society that the BBC are supposed to be serving, of course it was. If they were going to "run" with something like that they should have (a) made sure they could actually prove something, rather than just tell us they have "found a document that may suggest..." and (b) wait until after the f***ing voting was done. What could possibly have been achieved by the BBC not broadcasting their sensationalist, baseless drivvel tomorrow rather than on Wednesday?
 
Relative to the damage it would cause to the country and society that the BBC are supposed to be serving, of course it was. If they were going to "run" with something like that they should have (a) made sure they could actually prove something, rather than just tell us they have "found a document that may suggest..." and (b) wait until after the f***ing voting was done. What could possibly have been achieved by the BBC not broadcasting their sensationalist, baseless drivvel tomorrow rather than on Wednesday?

Exactly and I look forward to the BBC showing in the future how this programme has sorted out corruption in FIFA.
 
Oh, I just thought with the amount of hatred you had for the BBC, Newscorp might be paying you to have their opinion instead of you paying them to take it... ;)

I just don't see how, in this day and age, the BBC can be allowed to continue as a compulsarily funded media source. It's outlived it's purpose; a purpose it doesn't seem to be too attached to these days anyway.
 
Relative to the damage it would cause to the country and society that the BBC are supposed to be serving, of course it was. If they were going to "run" with something like that they should have (a) made sure they could actually prove something, rather than just tell us they have "found a document that may suggest..." and (b) wait until after the f***ing voting was done. What could possibly have been achieved by the BBC not broadcasting their sensationalist, baseless drivvel tomorrow rather than on Wednesday?
a) it wasn't broadcast on Wednesday

b) FIFA knew that the programme was being produced as the BBC had asked them for interviews, etc., so why would delaying the broadcast have helped the England bid?
 
Yeah, BBC expose corruption in Fifa. Actually, expose and report it.

Fifa then reacts by burying its head in the sand, and not voting for England because of it.

Yeah, it's the BBC at fault. Not Fifa at all :roll:
 
a) it wasn't broadcast on Wednesday

b) FIFA knew that the programme was being produced as the BBC had asked them for interviews, etc., so why would delaying the broadcast have helped the England bid?

Monday then, as if that makes a difference.

Give ower man, are you seriously telling me that the BBC had NO cynical reason for airing the programme a few days before the vote, and that they had NO reason to believe that it would damage our bid?
 
Yeah, BBC expose corruption in Fifa. Actually, expose and report it.

Fifa then reacts by burying its head in the sand, and not voting for England because of it.

Yeah, it's the BBC at fault. Not Fifa at all :roll:

Do you think the Panorama programme will get rid of FIFA corruption? Cos I don't and quite frankly the timing of the programme clearly has had a deterimental effect, as alluded to by David Dein. The BBC are accountable to the public and deserve some severe criticism.
 
Do you think the Panorama programme will get rid of FIFA corruption? Cos I don't and quite frankly the timing of the programme clearly has had a deterimental effect, as alluded to by David Dein. The BBC are accountable to the public and deserve some severe criticism.

So, it won't stop corruption, so why bother?

I agree. Similarly, they should stop reporting about the war in Iraq, as it won't stop it.

And the weather, as it's going to happen regardless.
 
Yeah, BBC expose corruption in Fifa. Actually, expose and report it.

Fifa then reacts by burying its head in the sand, and not voting for England because of it.

Yeah, it's the BBC at fault. Not Fifa at all :roll:

The BBC haven't exposed anything and they won't expose anything - the programme they aired didn't prove anything. Like I said before, the programme amounted to "we've found a document that may suggest something, but won't prove anything." That's why the "corrupt" delegates named by the BBC weren't suspended from voting.
 
Do you think the Panorama programme will get rid of FIFA corruption? Cos I don't and quite frankly the timing of the programme clearly has had a deterimental effect, as alluded to by David Dein. The BBC are accountable to the public and deserve some severe criticism.


Indeed. Let us win it first then fuck the bastards over. If we didn't win it, still fuck them over.

Nee problem.
 
Yeah, BBC expose corruption in Fifa. Actually, expose and report it.

Fifa then reacts by burying its head in the sand, and not voting for England because of it.

Yeah, it's the BBC at fault. Not Fifa at all :roll:

^ This
 
Blatter has supposedly reminded the voters about "certain media coverage" so ultimately the BBC has fucked us over. I look forward to Gary Lineker resigning from the organisation in disgust.

But is it that wrong to expose corruption?
 
If youre a corrupt organisation you dont want that paraded in front of the world. FIFA know how to deal with such things - say nowt and let it pass.

football has too much money and power attached to it not to be corrupt.

Exactly.

People shouldn't let them sit and say nothing. Questions deserve answers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top