1) American prosecutors arrested their high command
2) We scared FIFA head, and Clinton donor Sepp Blatter into resigning
All in all a pretty good week for America, cleaning up a sport a growing minority of us really care about.
Please share widely!
…the nutshell version of what this FIFA scandal is? I get the sense there’s corruption or something like that, but I don’t really know anything about it.
The above link for arrested their high command brings you to John Oliver’s quick (10 min?) summary (NSFW due to justified swearing)
Is that a boatload of FIFA officials were arrested for bribing officials or accepting bribes from officials, depending on the circumstances. And these are BIG bribes ($10 million for one of em). And it may be directly linked to inhospitable places like Russia or Qatar getting the Cup in 2018 and 2022 respectively.
Basically FIFA is corruption. The Qatar deal was so bad, and the result of the choice has led directly to thousands of deaths of migrant workers – and we still have 7 years to go! That world cup needs to be relocated and fast. The Russia deal was just dumb and corrupt, but lives are at stake in Qatar.
And although it’s incredibly selfish and would look bad given the arrests, the US really is a perfect place to hold the Cup. We’re pretty much ready to go now, and without any of the issues attached with something like the Olympics.
FIFA makes the IOC look like the church picnic planning committee in comparison. They make the mafia like look lunch ladies skimming off the milk money. They make Pablo Escobar look like Juan Valdez. But unlike the IOC, they just got their asses handed to them by Team America.
Hosting the event should be fairly easy. Unlike Brazil, we already have several high caliber soccer specific stadiums spread across the country. Hold it on the West Coast and you get warm weather and some of the best fanbases in the MSL. Or hold some of the rounds here. We’ve done it before, and unlike Boston 2024, I fully expect the Revs stadium to be ready by 2022. It would be a fine idea and significantly less disruptive to the area than the Olympics.
Working with FIFA is the problem (although hopefully less so going forward). But just in terms of needed construction to host, there is almost nothing to do in the US – we’d just have to have team owners and cities fight about who hosts the later rounds.
It seems highly unlikely that the US will be chosen any time in the near future to either host the World Cup or head FIFA. We are already scheduled to host the 2016 Copa Cup for CONCACAF, which has been described by many analysts as a one-time only deal. And last week, Foreign Policy headlined a story with the world consensus: “With FIFA Indictment, U.S. Takes Aim at Russian and Qatari World Cups.” We won’t likely be rewarded with that kind of thinking. Besides, it would be a heckuva lot more rational to send the World Cup back to Brazil to help them get a little more money back from the billions pilfered by fraud for the last games.
In the NYTimes today, speculating on Blatter’s replacement comes this summation of the chances that the American, Sunil Gulati, will replace Blatter:
FIFA is more likely to give the top job to Loretta E. Lynch than to Gulati, the head of U.S. Soccer, right now, which is to say that no American will get anywhere near the FIFA presidency in the near future. Anti-Americanism runs high in world sports generally, and perhaps nowhere higher than inside FIFA. Many member countries — not to mention leaders like Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — viewed the Department of Justice investigation as an unwelcome intrusion by American officials into a sovereign body, and they are surely not going to change their view now.
is the outrage in FIFA and the developing world over the gloating by American social media critics who publicly express their happiness that the US is at war with FIFA (e.g. “America 2, FIFA 0”). That kind of imperialism does not play well with the folks I deal with in the rest of the world and it is widely spoken of — see the NYTimes article I referenced previously for how that nastiness has already made it into the US paper of record, let alone the rest of the world.
I go to bars around the world whenever FIFA games are played, as I have done this past week with the U-20 games in the country where I am currently under contract. The locals are almost universally appreciative that an individual American enters their territory, their turf for a game and does not scream for blood nor gloat when we win. But they know the individual is innocent while our country is not.
It is the curse of the US political psyche that some of us see our country at war with everyone else, even after we have crushed most of them politically for almost a century. Phrases like “America 2, FIFA 0” is why we are not trusted. And it is not even accurate, as Switzerland is also seeking prosecution of the malefactors (they won’t chase tax fraud but they know the rest of their economy hinges on not being seen as corrupt). Lot’s of other national governments are speaking out, even if they do not have laws like Dodd-Frank that allow the pursuit of economic criminals.
… the corner kicks..
Sepp Blatter was largely able to keep his position for so long by playing the entire rest of the world against first England, and then, the US. Sometimes he swizzled Europe into the mix. So to the extent that imperialism is totemic, it’s largely a set-up. No doubt people do bristle at a purported American imperialism because it’s advantageous for people like Blatter (and Vladimir Putin) to tell them to do so.
This isn’t to say, of course, that American doesn’t need to get somewhat humbler. We do, indeed, but we need to do so for reasons other than those defined by the likes of Blatter and Putin.
I agree with you that Blatter played the world against England, his most formidable rival but I did not detect worry on his part about the US. He only wanted to keep his power and wealth and the US would never be a challenge on that front.
Putin’s commentary on FIFA is malarkey, mostly used for domestic consumption, just as was his hosting of the Olympics in Socchi. I long ago wrote to the major sponsors of the Russian World Cup games to indicate I am boycotting Sony and all Budweiser/InBev products. Blatter has demonstrated his craven nature over many years but as long as he had the votes from Africa, Middle East and the Caribbean he never had to worry about angry Americans.
And again, I agree that we don’t need lessons in humility from either of them. We need it because our arrogance gets us into wars we cannot win and helping corporations run roughshod over pretty much everyone.
…is even if the privilege of hosting the World Cup is a blatant pay-to-play operation, why is that a criminal offense? I did not see an indication of public officials being involved. Seems to me as a private organization they can make whatever decision they want by whatever criteria they want.
using US banks and corporations. That means it involves multiple felonious violations of US law. Here is the first graph of the “FIFA Arrests For Dummies” version (a.k.a wikipedia):
The arrests center on the alleged use of bribery, fraud and money laundering to corrupt the issuing of media and marketing rights for FIFA games in the Americas, estimated at $150 million, including at least $110 million in bribes related to the Copa América Centenario to be hosted in 2016 in the United States. In addition, the indictment handed down by the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, New York, alleges that bribery was used in an attempt to influence clothing sponsorship contracts, the selection process for the 2010 FIFA World Cup host, and the 2011 FIFA presidential election. Specifically, an unnamed sports equipment company – identified in multiple sources as Nike, Inc.– is alleged to have paid at least $40 million in bribes to become the sole provider of uniforms, footwear, accessories, and equipment to the Brazil national team.
This news was in virtually every daily newspaper in the world when the arrests occurred. You missed it ?
…no this story isn’t in my wheelhouse and I tend not to follow sports stories. Secondly, downrating questions is bad form; I wish you would knock it off. When I ask a question it is out of genuine interest, not to be snarky or argumentative.
It strains credulity to believe that someone with the education and experience in politics that you bring to BMG has to actually ask whether bribery, fraud, kickbacks, and similar things are illegal. Were you not paying attention to Enron, Bernie Madoff, or any of the innumerable crooks who are prosecuted for Ponzi schemes and similar criminal acts?
I didn’t downrate your question, but I certainly rolled my eyes. 🙂
We do have laws that govern behavior in the private sector.
there is a downrate button for a reason. I use it to indicate my belief that a post is misleading or plain wrong but don’t feel it worth my time to respond. But sometimes when I go back to a thread I feel the need to respond so stinking thinking does not spread. If you think downrating is bad form, then you can stop doing it yourself, right?
And I don’t follow sports either. You won’t find me reading a sports page or watching a game, any game on the TV at home. But the FIFA imbroglio is about world governance, finance and corruption. That is why you might have noticed that I referenced an article from Foreign Policy magazine, and no, they don’t have a sports page. If you think the issue is not worth caring about, no problem, but why come here and start asking and opining on it?
I agree with this:
And no. this story has not been restricted to the sports pages — far from it. It’s been on every news outlet I have looked at for the last several days. I don’t know how anyone could have missed it.
Downrating is not bad form. This very comment will likely be downrated and I’ll be fine with that. Have at it.
However, Christopher wrote, clearly, that downrating a question is bad form and I agree with him. It is.
Uprating a question is a good way of saying “I”d like to see an answer to this question” Downrating a question says you don’t want to see an answer. If you disagree with the question or the manner in which it is formatted and/or style or tone, that’s what a reply is for…
…cannot be misleading or wrong since it is asking rather than stating, or have those who don’t still teach elementary students the difference between declarative and interrogative sentences on a regular basis forgotten that?:)
I said downrating a question is bad form, but I don’t do it nearly as often as you do so don’t you dare criticize me for it. I limit my downratings to hostility and attitude which you demonstrate in spades. My BMG experience has become a lot less pleasant since you showed up, though I’m starting to learn to take your downrates as badges of honor.
As for the issue at hand, it just has not been on my radar. If you had asked me what I know my answer would have been something like, “er, um, I think I heard something about arrests, and a couple of people compared it to the IOC on BMG, and um, maybe there was something corrupt about site selection and, uh, let me check with my brother the soccer fan, maybe he knows more.” BMG is a discussion forum. If someone posts about something somebody doesn’t know about, the appropriate thing IS to ask for more information.
Not really wanting to wade into this, but… If the question had been asked as a simple, “I haven’t paid much attention to this – can someone give me the Cliff Notes version of what the illegal activity was?” there would have been no hoopla.
You stated, “Seems to me as a private organization they can make whatever decision they want by whatever criteria they want.” That is more than a question and likely what set people off. You know the answer to that is a resounding NO, right??
… Christopher is (IMHO justifiably) tweaked about getting a downrate for a question from an interlocutor who took the time to reply.
I don’t think Christopher is tweaked because he got a reply, and I’m not sure he’s tweaked just because he got a downrate… but that he got both from the same individual. (that seems like a bit much piling on from said interlocutor, to me, without actually addressing the style and/or tone..)
I agree with Christopher that downrating a question is bad form. Downrating the question, then answering it is even poorer form, IMHO. The reply, and not the simplistic ratings, is the place to voice difference and/or note that the question might be improper or poorly phrased.
Just trying to give a sense of where I am and why I asked.
Christopher, I downrated your post, which not only started with a question that has an obvious answer, but included an offensive sentence that elicited my ire:
Seems to me as a private organization they can make whatever decision they want by whatever criteria they want.
I know you don’t think it was okay for the Catholic Church to protect pedophile priests because the Church had/has different criteria than civil society. Likewise, FIFA cannot bribe countries and businesses because they have different criteria from US laws.
And BTW, a question can be misleading. Go ahead and teach your elementary students that questions cannot be misleading. When I teach and train, it is to adults and I make it clear that many questions are misleading, some intentionally so, some because of ignorance. Sometimes one ignores stupidity and sometimes one responds to a misleading question with a smack down, as Barney Frank did in that memorable town hall meeting on health care in Dartmouth when he was asked why he “continued to support a Nazi plan” (Obamacare): “On what planet do you spend most of your time?” he asked.
Yes, some questions are misleading. I went easy on you. All I did was downrate your post and then returned to post a detailed comment about the FIFA indictments and arrests. If you don’t like the soft downrate, next time I can pull a Barney on you if you prefer. ;->
How’s this for a misleading or wrong question: “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
Words like “cannot”, “always”, “never” and “all” are best used carefully.
I wrote that question as an example and then deleted it from my response. Then I wrote a second one that was a little too personal and deleted that. So I went back to the Barney classic confrontation about DAMF questions.
And please don’t tell us that you think it is not a criminal offense when one business bribes and corrupts another to the detriment of other businesses, their employees and the US consumer. Please don’t continue on this line of thinking.
… The indictment (which I’ve only skimmed) specifies fraud, bribery and and money laundering as the crimes and a conspiracy amongst the defendants to both perpetrate the crimes and prevent disclosure.
So maybe it wouldn’t be fraud if they did advertise the World Cup as a “blatant pay-to-play” operation. But that’s not what FIFA is set up to do. They are set up to promote and regulate football.
In addition, as far as I can tell, some of the bribery doesn’t directly involve the World Cup city selection (but some does) but ancillary activities like marketing and advertising… and setting up fake consultancies to do this and to launder the funds.
There are lots of actual crimes here. And many many people all over the world are extra-ordinarily happy this week because the US did this. Football is the most popular sport on the planet and the rest of the world has long known how corrupt FIFA is.
Sadly, all this obscures the game: The women’s world cup is about to start in Canada. The US team is ranked #2 and could win it but face tough competition from Germany (ranked #1) and France (#3).
Fraud is fraud. It does not matter if FIFA acknowledges that it uses a pay-to-play system to award games to countries. Moreover, many of the fraud and bribery accusations don’t involve World Cup game locations, which were not in the US, but involve other domestic commercial activities. Watch for Nike to get hit soon because of its ties to the Brazil team and maybe some of the individuals who secured the US hosting of the 2016 Gold Cup CONCACAF/ CONMEBOL games, which are not officially controlled by but are associated with FIFA.
FIFA must adhere to all US laws when any of its activities and transactions take place, even in part, in the US. Federal law grants law enforcement agencies broad authority to pursue criminal investigations as long as there is some connection to the United States, even a tangential one such as the involvement of a bank, Internet service provider or cell phone company. US law has extraterritorial provisions that can reach foreign citizens if they violate certain laws, including if an aspect of the crime took place within the United States’ jurisdiction. “If you touch our shores with your corrupt enterprise … you will be held accountable,” FBI Director James B. Comey said Wednesday (WaPo 5/27/15).
FIFA corrupt acts that do not touch the US are beyond US prosecution, so many of them will go unprosecuted unless other countries pursue them. That does seem to be happening. Switzerland, the home of the FIFA headquarters, is pursuing criminal charges against many other malefactors and they can cast the widest net possible. Politicians, the media and soccer officials in other countries are calling on their governments to pursue investigations and prosecutions where called for.
On a tangential note, there is a great piece in The Guardian by the always intriguing Natalie Nougayrède, entitled : “Try telling Sepp Blatter we live in a post-American world,” about the evolving definition of soft vs. hard power.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/04/sepp-blatter-post-american-world-soft-power
Probably slept better than he has in weeks!