I keep hearing about this on the news and wondering who this guy “Step Ladder” is…
On what grounds are the Feds getting involved? Are FIFA officials considered public officials? Is it illegal for an executive of a private organization to take a bribe (as opposed to being just against the company’s policy?) Or is it the fact that they were paying bribes in exchange for votes?
Here’s the indictment: http://www.justice.gov/opa/file/450211/download (warning: pdf)
Here are the charges that have been plead guilty to:
Blatter was just re-elected for a fifth term as President of FIFA.
Damn, just when you thought you understood the rules of this game . . .
They could still call him for icing, right?
Beyond that, Putin seems to have taken the stance of “If the US says the sun rises in the east, I’ll claim it really rises in the west.”
That seems to me to be as much of a motivator as any scrutiny into the 2018 Russia World Cup.
Russia got the world cup 6 years before the US decided to be the worlds prosecutor. So if you change those two countries around the statement might be more accurate.
Not sure what you’re getting at… Putin’s had strongly anti-American rhetoric as one of his primary activities for nearly a decade now.
To me, it seems to be a way to try and boost Russia into some kind of relevance on the world stage, which it hasn’t really had since the fall of the Soviet Union, combined with a certain degree of angst and bitterness about that lack of relevance.
Interesting thought - akin to changing the venue of a trial due to public interest. Wonder if we can interest Interpol in a trade? “The FBI’ll nail FIFA; you guys clean up the NCAA.”
Interpol isn’t an investigative body - it’s a resource to help police agencies co-operate across national boundaries.
However, the current FBI/DOJ thing against FIFA seems to have been on the go for quite a few years. This week’s arrests coincided, in a not-at-all-coincidental way, with the Swiss authorities moving forward in an investigation into the 2018 and 2022 WC bidding processes. The UK Serious Fraud Office seems to be involved too. I suspect other countries are prepped and ready.
Why would a post-Blatter FIFA regime, perhaps not skimming off the top for personal enrichment, have less cash for football programs in poor countries?
The OP appears to have been seeking factual answers which the TM appear to be providing. Off to General Questions.
But since it’s about sports, let’s send it to the Game Room.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Ow, rejected!
Nah, it was just a subtle three-rail shot, right into the pocket.
Shit. Wrong metaphor.
And my brain autocorrects him as “Inept Blather”, but the guy doesn’t *seem *to be a Fox News anchor so I’unno.
Maybe, but I’d be willing to try for, say, two million dollars.
I think the Norwegian commentator (a legend in England, and probably even more popular in Scotland) might run him a close second…
Because UEFA’s rhetoric sounds a great deal like UEFA believes the Europeans (i.e., itself) have a god-given right to be the determining power in football, maybe shared with a select few Latin American countries. The arguments that you get to hear in European media all point in this direction: The criticism hurled against one country*, one vote; the constant statements that the many, many African, Asian and Latin American associations which make up the pro-Blatter bloc are entirely without significance in football; and the persistent hints that it is the European, and some Latin American, teams which make up the attractiveness of the World Cup to the media and thus secure the revenue from broadcasting rights. I think it is quite self-suggesting to assume that if UEFA gets to prevail in the FIFA reform, then ultimately there will be claims to channel a bigger share of the pie to the big teams in Europe and Latin America. UEFA’s flagship competitions, the European Cup and the Champions League, demonstrates that they master the art of commercialising a sport just as well as FIFA.
Personally, I fully agree that Blatter and his entourage are highly corrupt. But I also think it’s worth to briefly see the whole thing through the eyes of a football official from one of these tiny nations. Suppose you’re president of some insignificant Caribbean or African football association. Your country occasionally plays in the World Cup qualifiers, but never gets very far. The revenue from your national team’s friendlies, or the national league, or membership fees from football clubs, is miniscule. Now Blatter comes along, hosts a World Cup every four years, and disburses the greater share of these revenues to national associations. Maybe your tiny country will get a couple of million dollars. To a major European national association these are peanuts, but for your tiny country it constitutes the main source of revenue for the national football association. Under these circumstances, you will, of course, sympathise hugely with Blatter, and wou will see any attempt from European associations that make hundreds of millions themselves to change that status quo with a great deal of suspicion.
*): In fact, it’s not “one country, one vote”, but “one association, one vote”; the members of FIFA are not the countries as such (as e.g. in the UN), but their national football associations, which are usually private bodies.