Well done to the BBC


Status
Not open for further replies.
If it involves delaying the exposure for about four days, in order to serve the best interests of the country and people you were set up, and are legally funded to serve, then yes, of course that's what it means. Particularly when there is absolutely NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER to exposing it at the earlier time.



No, that would just make us clever enough to not shoot ourselves in the foot for no reason whatsoever.

So hold on - you mean if Fifa knew that a show was going out tonight was going to expose them, they would have voted for us because it hadn't already gone out?

Aye, whatever :lol::lol:

Why didn't they report it as soon as they found out about it?

They have to give Fifa the right to reply. That's how good journalism works, believe it or not.
 
So hold on - you mean if Fifa knew that a show was going out tonight was going to expose them, they would have voted for us because it hadn't already gone out?

Aye, whatever :lol::lol:

Do you reckon the BBC sent them all a directors cut DVD of the programme prior to airing it like?
 
so, the message on here is

"Corruption - it's bad. But everyone has it, so who cares."

Bit of a depressing attitude really.

Sadly an attitude that seems to be taking over sport and society as a whole, lets just get on with being corrupt because everyone else is.:roll:

As I pointed out on another thread if any of these fuckwits does not believe FIFA is corrupt they should read David Yallop's "How They Sold The Game"

Or search for David Yallop on youtube, he has some stuff on there as well.
 
Last edited:
Do you reckon the BBC sent them all a directors cut DVD of the programme prior to airing it like?

So hold on.

Are you saying that, if we hadn't aired it until tonight, the Fifa Exco members would have thought "oh, the BBC, they're airing a nice show about us tonight, not at all criticising us or about our corruption."

Aye, reeto :lol::lol:

it was called 'Fifas Dirty Secrets' for fucks sake, what would you think the Fifa people would assume that to mean? "oh, they're going to talk about how I eat chocolate even though I'm on a diet."

FFS man
 
So hold on - you mean if Fifa knew that a show was going out tonight was going to expose them, they would have voted for us because it hadn't already gone out?

Aye, whatever :lol::lol:



They have to give Fifa the right to reply. That's how good journalism works, believe it or not.

Would we better or worse off if the programme was never made?

I would say better off, provided of course we had then gone onto win the bid.

Now we are in a position where we all know FIFA are corrupt, although that corruption is never going to be charged/acted upon/have any effect whatsoever, and have lost the bid.

The other option was to keep quiet, FIFA remains corrupt (as in fact it is even after the documentary), and we may have won the bid.

Surely a no-brainer?
 
So hold on.

Are you saying that, if we hadn't aired it until tonight, the Fifa Exco members would have thought "oh, the BBC, they're airing a nice show about us tonight, not at all criticising us or about our corruption."

Aye, reeto :lol::lol:

it was called 'Fifas Dirty Secrets' for fucks sake, what would you think the Fifa people would assume that to mean? "oh, they're going to talk about how I eat chocolate even though I'm on a diet."

FFS man

There *were* a lot of people there who looked like they ate quite a bit of chocolate mind
 
So hold on.

Are you saying that, if we hadn't aired it until tonight, the Fifa Exco members would have thought "oh, the BBC, they're airing a nice show about us tonight, not at all criticising us or about our corruption."

Aye, reeto :lol::lol:

it was called 'Fifas Dirty Secrets' for fucks sake, what would you think the Fifa people would assume that to mean? "oh, they're going to talk about how I eat chocolate even though I'm on a diet."

FFS man


Why air it all?
 
So hold on.

Are you saying that, if we hadn't aired it until tonight, the Fifa Exco members would have thought "oh, the BBC, they're airing a nice show about us tonight, not at all criticising us or about our corruption."

Aye, reeto :lol::lol:

it was called 'Fifas Dirty Secrets' for fucks sake, what would you think the Fifa people would assume that to mean? "oh, they're going to talk about how I eat chocolate even though I'm on a diet."

FFS man

So you don't believe there would have been any extra damage saved by not airing the programme after the vote?

Not that it should have been aired at all; as I've stated above the programme didn't prove a thing - it was complete, sensationalist and baseles drivvel. It caused a lot of damage for no reason or benefit.

That's how gutter journalism works, believe it or not.
 
Last edited:
This this and this. Corruption should be outed from all walks of life no matter the cost.

Surely there must be a reason for all actions? If airing corruption is going to make the world a worse place then why do it?
 
Would we better or worse off if the programme was never made?

I would say better off, provided of course we had then gone onto win the bid.

Now we are in a position where we all know FIFA are corrupt, although that corruption is never going to be charged/acted upon/have any effect whatsoever, and have lost the bid.

The other option was to keep quiet, FIFA remains corrupt (as in fact it is even after the documentary), and we may have won the bid.

Surely a no-brainer?

Morally indefensible is a phrase that springs to mind, if we never ever get a world cup again FIFA must be purged and made more transparent in it's dealings. Look up ISL and FIFA.
 
How can outing corruption make the world a worse place? Not being funny, I just can't think of an example?

For England?

How about millions and millions of pounds being injected into the economy? Money that will now be pumped into Russia and creating jobs there?

Not sure there is an upside to the documentary tbh.... can you think of one? Serious question..... can you think of one?
 
Why not ???


People are looking for a scapegoat. The result was bought, pure and simple. Wheels within wheels and all that.

Shouldn't stand idly by and do nothing because it's in our best interests, every person on this board has been crowing about Blatter/Platini and corruption at FIFA for years, yet now that we were in the running for something, nowt should be said? Not that it would have made the slightest bit of difference in this case.
 
So you don't believe there would have been any extra damage saved by not airing the programme after the vote?

Not that it should have been aired at all; as I've stated above the programme didn't prove a thing - it was complete, sensationalist and baseles drivvel. It caused a lot of damage for no reason or benefit.

That's how gutter journalism works, believe it or not.

Mate, you're talking shite.

First things first - if Fifa had known it was gonna be on, be it last Monday, next week, next month or whenever, then they (evidently) were going to withhold votes from us).

Secondly - it was baseless drivel at all. You're talking shit. The presenter guy, I admit, was a bit odd but his research was sound. Fifa delegates taking payments from a company that Fifa had awarded a World Cup contract to. Aye, that's completely above board, so above board that Fifa were happy to talk about it openly.....oh

it also spoke about Jack Warner selling tickets onto touts (or trying, and failing to). Once again though, that didn't happen according to you, even though Jack Warner is not currently suing the BBC, Jennings, or the Norwegian reporters who have pushed these claims.

But aye, baseless drivel. Fifa are all lovely people, don't do owt wrong. I hear Gandhi is their president :lol::lol:

Good link. That's what can happen when a major media source is funded exclusively by the state and has no-one to answer to other than the prevailing government of the day.

and yet the allusion you're making, of the BBC, still reports the truth despite what the government wants.

Doesn't quite tie in with what you're saying, does it?
 
So you want a media who don't expose corruption and report the truth, but report what the government would like them to?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Völkischer_Beobachter

Firstly this is a world-cup bid, not mass government cover up.

And no, i would like the media to be aware of their impact, therefore engage their brain before acting.

I think it is naive to consider the media/journalists to be performing the function of moral saints.

We have gained nothing by this, but have lost a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top