Is FIFA corrupt and does this World Cup provide evidence of that?
Starting this to help minimise derailment of the footie threads.
Transparency International defines corruption as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain"
Personally, I think FIFA is endemically corrupt. It is out of the control of any national government and has huge amounts of money sloshing around. Without external control, corruption is almost inevitable. I think it mainly happens in the handouts to the national associations and during the process for awards of tournaments.
Let's remember that the FBI raided FIFA's Zurich offices in 2005, and that was the end of Blatter. It should have been the end of Infantino too, but he got away with scrutiny then, and has since talked the talk, but there is no evidence at all that he walked the walk.
However, that said, I agree with @SporadicAddick on the footie thread that none of the conspiracy theories being pushed around about what's gone on in this tournament stand up to any rational scrutiny . There could be refereeing incompetence and possible favoritism, perhaps subconscious, and there can be administrative incompetence in the way referees have been instructed, and the way the use of VAR appears to have changed as the tournament has proceeded. But this happens all the time in football, and we react in the same way. We are committed fans, and our bias is inbuilt.
The exception, though, is the Trump-Balogun Incident, but I'm going to put it down to global-level hubris on the part of Trump and Infantino, plus Infantino's inherent cowardice and arse licking. I don't think you can make a case for personal gain resulting from that decision.
Comments
-
Key question for me is 'what is their system for governance?' - because that does seem to failing; with 1) the particular incidents - Balogun/ Trump, Ronaldo red card, and others (some high level club cup games involving hiring out Ronaldo?, mentioned on radio 5 earlier today), and 2) importantly, the lack of assurance around integrity, of the organisation and as a consequence the competitions that they run.3
-
Argentina do seem to get a lot of favourable calls. Is that down to corruption, or is it simply a consequence of their quality forcing opponents into more desperate, high-risk challenges and mistakes that inevitably lead to VAR interventions?
The red card yesterday was without a doubt a red. The Swiss player was insane to commit such an obnoxious dive, and it ultimately cost his team the match.2 -
Is the Pope Catholic?4
-
I doubt that referees and VAR teams are being bribed to favour Argentina. Too many people would have to keep a secret and unclear how FIFA gains from it.
That's not to say that FIFA is not corrupt. It certainly is. Until teams/federations start pulling out of FIFA competitions nothing will happen.7 -
FIFA as an organisation is corrupt in the sense that it allows its strategic decisions to be manipulated by cash and political influence. I would love to see Infantino deposed, or better still, the major federations leave and reconstitute under a new banner. I think revolution from within would be most effective, but is least likely.
The conduct and behaviour of match officials is not corrupt. It may be incompetent, it may be swayed by scale ("big clubs always get the big decisions") and there may be individual instances of referees being influenced (Korea 2002) but there is no systemic organisational corruption that influences match outcomes.
The match thread derailment, of which I was a part (apologies all - it was late!), was in response to multiple claims that the rescinded penalty was "corrupt". The accusation that referees are corrupt generally focuses on supposed FIFA attempts to maintain the big nations - the money-spinners - in the tournament. If there was corruption, then surely we would be the beneficiary, not the victim?
Interestingly, there are huge claims of corruption around last night's game, but from the opposing side. The disallowed Norway goal from the corner...the ball hitting the wire...both apparently instances of a corrupt match official influenced by FIFA to keep England in at the expense of a small nation like Norway.
7 -
We didn't play Switzerland.1
-
Yes, FIFA is corrupt.
No, I don’t think the match officials are. If they are I think it would be about gambling and not FIFA.1 -
SporadicAddick said:FIFA as an organisation is corrupt in the sense that it allows its strategic decisions to be manipulated by cash and political influence. I would love to see Infantino deposed, or better still, the major federations leave and reconstitute under a new banner. I think revolution from within would be most effective, but is least likely.
The conduct and behaviour of match officials is not corrupt. It may be incompetent, it may be swayed by scale ("big clubs always get the big decisions") and there may be individual instances of referees being influenced (Korea 2002) but there is no systematic organisational corruption that influences match outcomes.
The match thread derailment, of which I was a part, was in response to multiple claims that the rescinded penalty was "corrupt". The accusation that referees are corrupt generally focuses on FIFA's attempt to maintain the big nations, the money-spinners, in the tournament. If there was corruption, then surely we would be the beneficiary, not the victim?
Interestingly, there are huge claims of corruption around last night's game, but from the opposing side. The disallowed Swiss goal from the corner...the ball hitting the wire...both apparently instances of a corrupt match official influenced by FIFA to keep England in at the expense of a small nation like Switzerland.
If there are posters that believe last nights rescinded penalty was corrupt, would they agree that England were the net beneficiaries of that corruption over the course of the game?Pretty much agree with this. FIFA corrupt? Yes, without a doubt when it comes to for example the awarding of host nation status. An opaque organisation with power over vast sums of revenue corrupt? No shit Sherlock.Are referees corrupt - no, just incompetent. There should be an international panel of referees who only get on the list if they referee at the very top level. Giving a big WC match to a referee from Uzbekistan so as to be inclusive is bollocks.However, taking brown envelopes from the likes of the US, Saudi and Qatar doesn't directly affect play on the pitch. FIFA crossed a red line when suspending the red card punishment for Balogun - that directly affected on field play. R7's lifting of the ban to allow him to take part in a tournament was almost as bad but it was pre-tournament. Trump's admitted intervention and FIFA's subsequent decision is in my opinion infinitely worse than any brown envelope for Saudi Arabia.Will it change? I doubt it. It isn't just FIFA - UEFA, Conmebol et al as well as individual country's FAs no doubt also have their snouts in the trough - including The FA.6 -
I was with you right up to that last sentence.PragueAddick said:Starting this to help minimise derailment of the footie threads.
Transparency International defines corruption as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain"
Personally, I think FIFA is endemically corrupt. It is out of the control of any national government and has huge amounts of money sloshing around. Without external control, corruption is almost inevitable. I think it mainly happens in the handouts to the national associations and during the process for awards of tournaments.
Let's remember that the FBI raided FIFA's Zurich offices in 2005, and that was the end of Blatter. It should have been the end of Infantino too, but he got away with scrutiny then, and has since talked the talk, but there is no evidence at all that he walked the walk.
However, that said, I agree with @SporadicAddick on the footie thread that none of the conspiracy theories being pushed around about what's gone on in this tournament stand up to any rational scrutiny . There could be refereeing incompetence and possible favoritism, perhaps subconscious, and there can be administrative incompetence in the way referees have been instructed, and the way the use of VAR appears to have changed as the tournament has proceeded. But this happens all the time in football, and we react in the same way. We are committed fans, and our bias is inbuilt.
The exception, though, is the Trump-Balogun Incident, but I'm going to put it down to global-level hubris on the part of Trump and Infantino, plus Infantino's inherent cowardice and arse licking. I don't think you can make a case for personal gain resulting from that decision.
You don't think Infantino may have gained personally from overturning the red card? Really? Even if that gain was maintaining his role, he's up to his fucking neck in it. Disgusting man.6 -
Fair point succinctly made...post edited...Off_it said:We didn't play Switzerland.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
It's as simplistic to assume everything that happens in FIFA World Cups is due to corruption, as it is to assume that it is all honest and conducted to the highest ethical standards.
Also overly simplistic to assume that there are no (subconscious) biases in refereeing, or that players and teams don't try to get unfair advantages.
We should accept the system will never be perfect: no system is. Rank areas for clean up in order of impact, and improve them. On this, I agree with swords_alive that governance is the first one to improve.4 -
FIFA seems to operate more like a nation-state than a body meant to serve the good of football worldwide.
As for refereeing bias, there may be some subconscious bias, but the biggest problem is VAR, the sensors in the ball, and the interpretation of contact. Could the ball coming into contact with a fly trigger a 'hit'? Does someone brushing a forward in the penalty area with the hairs on their arm constitute contact or the laces on a boot? If not, where does contact start? I am being somewhat facetious, but fouls, I think, begin where there is intent or recklessness. Likewise for handball. Referees are better placed to make decisions on the spot than slow-motion replays wound and re-wound a hundred times. Yes, referees will make mistakes, but that has always been part of the game. VAR causes just as much - and more, I would argue - risk of refereeing errors. You cannot remove errors from refereeing. Rant over.1 -
no, how can you possibly think so!
2 -
'FIFA is corrupt'
Two secs, let me just go and find a fictional 19th century detective and let him know we're all out of hard feculence0 -
Yes, and no0
-
Well, I agree with you 100% about the nature of Infantino, which means I certainly wouldn't put it past him if he was offered some bung, any bung. He is though, in his disgusting way, anything but stupid and has so many other ways to line his pockets, so he must have realised that he was making a decision that would come under intense scrutiny. Therefore, getting a bung on top of that might be more risk than it's worth.Off_it said:
I was with you right up to that last sentence.PragueAddick said:Starting this to help minimise derailment of the footie threads.
Transparency International defines corruption as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain"
Personally, I think FIFA is endemically corrupt. It is out of the control of any national government and has huge amounts of money sloshing around. Without external control, corruption is almost inevitable. I think it mainly happens in the handouts to the national associations and during the process for awards of tournaments.
Let's remember that the FBI raided FIFA's Zurich offices in 2005, and that was the end of Blatter. It should have been the end of Infantino too, but he got away with scrutiny then, and has since talked the talk, but there is no evidence at all that he walked the walk.
However, that said, I agree with @SporadicAddick on the footie thread that none of the conspiracy theories being pushed around about what's gone on in this tournament stand up to any rational scrutiny . There could be refereeing incompetence and possible favoritism, perhaps subconscious, and there can be administrative incompetence in the way referees have been instructed, and the way the use of VAR appears to have changed as the tournament has proceeded. But this happens all the time in football, and we react in the same way. We are committed fans, and our bias is inbuilt.
The exception, though, is the Trump-Balogun Incident, but I'm going to put it down to global-level hubris on the part of Trump and Infantino, plus Infantino's inherent cowardice and arse licking. I don't think you can make a case for personal gain resulting from that decision.
You don't think Infantino may have gained personally from overturning the red card? Really? Even if that gain was maintaining his role, he's up to his fucking neck in it. Disgusting man.
I wanted to more generally mention what I just heard from a Norwegian football journalist called Lars Sivertsen, who is a regular on the Guardian's football podcast (which I always listen to daily just for these tournaments, ever since 2006). He says about this stuff that, on the one hand, he absolutely doesn't believe all the popular conspiracy theories and doesn't even really complain about Cablegate; but he says that at the same time the Trump thing and also Ronaldo getting those two red cards deleted have shaken everyone's faith in FIFA's overall integrity. So he absolutely doesn't blame anyone who believes and retails any of these things. FIFA have no one but themselves to blame for this.
5 -
Straight as a corkscrew!3
-
Maybe the wrong thread but to the point on referee competency it’s good to see VAR (I feel) working well in terms of quick turnaround and clarity of decisions.The premier league should learn from this.And on a side note not sure who the female ‘ref’ is that ITV invite to comment on key decisions but she’s very clear and accurate in her assessment and again very promptly.5
-
Lol. Except for the time she watched a incident a couple of times and agreed 100% that the ref had made a correct decision. Only for it to be overturned by VAR and she then agreed 100% that VAR had made the right decision, without a hint of irony, apology or embarrassment.valleynick66 said:Maybe the wrong thread but to the point on referee competency it’s good to see VAR (I feel) working well in terms of quick turnaround and clarity of decisions.The premier league should learn from this.And on a side note not sure who the female ‘ref’ is that ITV invite to comment on key decisions but she’s very clear and accurate in her assessment and again very promptly.8 -
2002. South Korea v Italy. Case closed.
2 -
Sponsored links:
-
Maybe true. I didn’t see / don’t recall that.Off_it said:
Lol. Except for the time she watched an incident a couple of times and agreed 100% that the ref had made a correct decision. Only for it to be overturned by VAR and she then agreed 100% that VAR had made the right decision, without a hint of irony, apology or embarrassment.valleynick66 said:Maybe the wrong thread but to the point on referee competency it’s good to see VAR (I feel) working well in terms of quick turnaround and clarity of decisions.The premier league should learn from this.And on a side note not sure who the female ‘ref’ is that ITV invite to comment on key decisions but she’s very clear and accurate in her assessment and again very promptly.To be fair I should really have said ‘articulate’ rather than ‘accurate’. My observation I think stands re promptness and how VAR should / can work.As part of the programme I feel it works. The usual pundits rarely add much new insight.0 -
Yes, corrupt. We will go out Wednesday due to a dodgy VAR.3
-
In others news, new evidence suggests Bears defecate in wooded areas.Rossman92 said:Is the Pope Catholic?0 -
FIFA has allowed itself to get in a position where the laws of the game are so confusing that VAR becomes a mess. I have said this from day one, but if they gave up on perfection they could find a space much more satisfactory. Having said all that, the USA red card has given all the FIFA accusers amunition and that will not be forgotton yntil Infantini is diposed which is unlikely.4
-
And prior to that, South Korea vs SpainThe Red Robin said:2002. South Korea v Italy. Case closed.2 -
I dont think there is corruption on the pitch, maybe an unconscious bias to some players and therefore inconsistency, which we (think) we also see in the prem over the years3
-
Article by Dan Byrne of the Corproate Governance Institute from 4 days ago, is unequivocal, though lacks specifics for what it will take to improve. Reminds us also about the fifa peace award:Arthur_Trudgill said:It's as simplistic to assume everything that happens in FIFA World Cups is due to corruption, as it is to assume that it is all honest and conducted to the highest ethical standards.
Also overly simplistic to assume that there are no (subconscious) biases in refereeing, or that players and teams don't try to get unfair advantages.
We should accept the system will never be perfect: no system is. Rank areas for clean up in order of impact, and improve them. On this, I agree with swords_alive that governance is the first one to improve."Here’s the full list of problems FIFA has displayed over the last several days:
- No due diligence
- No transparency
- No proper management (or even declaration) of conflicts of interest
- No stakeholder communication
- No visible checks and balances against centralised power
- Deliberate violation of its own Statutes
Most directors and C-suite executives wouldn’t tolerate this in their own companies; it’s a no-brainer that most of the world’s football associations, pundits and players don’t tolerate it happening here.
The real problem, though, is that FIFA has displayed much of the above before. Many thought that the end of former President Sepp Blatter’s tenure would mean an end to a bleaker era of FIFA’s governance. With Infantino, there’s an entirely new but equally questionable set of problems. "
Full article
3 -
Thanks for the link, I liked this paragraph:swords_alive said:
Article by Dan Byrne of the Corproate Governance Institute from 4 days ago, is unequivocal, though lacks specifics for what it will take to improve. Reminds us also about the fifa peace award:Arthur_Trudgill said:It's as simplistic to assume everything that happens in FIFA World Cups is due to corruption, as it is to assume that it is all honest and conducted to the highest ethical standards.
Also overly simplistic to assume that there are no (subconscious) biases in refereeing, or that players and teams don't try to get unfair advantages.
We should accept the system will never be perfect: no system is. Rank areas for clean up in order of impact, and improve them. On this, I agree with swords_alive that governance is the first one to improve."Here’s the full list of problems FIFA has displayed over the last several days:
- No due diligence
- No transparency
- No proper management (or even declaration) of conflicts of interest
- No stakeholder communication
- No visible checks and balances against centralised power
- Deliberate violation of its own Statutes
Most directors and C-suite executives wouldn’t tolerate this in their own companies; it’s a no-brainer that most of the world’s football associations, pundits and players don’t tolerate it happening here.
The real problem, though, is that FIFA has displayed much of the above before. Many thought that the end of former President Sepp Blatter’s tenure would mean an end to a bleaker era of FIFA’s governance. With Infantino, there’s an entirely new but equally questionable set of problems. "
Full article
"However, with FIFA, it now seems like it’s one scandal after another. This one brought rebuke by UEFA – its most influential confederation. UEFA could have easily fallen in line behind its global boss, but didn’t. So, now, we have a dramatic vote of no confidence from within football governance itself. People are fed up."
I'm not sure I'd like FIFA disbanded: in my opinion its ideal of world football is still in there somewhere, just.
But it needs to be made accountable.4 -
valleynick66 said:
Maybe true. I didn’t see / don’t recall that.Off_it said:
Lol. Except for the time she watched an incident a couple of times and agreed 100% that the ref had made a correct decision. Only for it to be overturned by VAR and she then agreed 100% that VAR had made the right decision, without a hint of irony, apology or embarrassment.valleynick66 said:Maybe the wrong thread but to the point on referee competency it’s good to see VAR (I feel) working well in terms of quick turnaround and clarity of decisions.The premier league should learn from this.And on a side note not sure who the female ‘ref’ is that ITV invite to comment on key decisions but she’s very clear and accurate in her assessment and again very promptly.To be fair I should really have said ‘articulate’ rather than ‘accurate’. My observation I think stands re promptness and how VAR should / can work.As part of the programme I feel it works. The usual pundits rarely add much new insight.
Are you Arsene Wenger in disguise?1
