Mental Lental
Well-known member
What a bunch of c*nts.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] FIFA has decided not to show videos or signage which explicitly mention challenging racism or discrimination in US Club World Cup venues.
- Thread starter Mental Lental
- Start date
What a bunch of c*nts.
smillie's garden
Am I evil?
- Aug 11, 2003
- 2,845
Mustn’t hurt any fascist’s feelings.
What a bunch of c*nts.
If that is true, (and I'm taking it at face value which I accept is risky) then that is beyond appalling. It is exactly the same excuse that sportspeople used to make when visiting apartheid-era South Africa: "Oh it's all about the sport, we're not involved in politics."
Didn't think it was possible, but my opinion of FIFA has fallen even lower.
- Oct 20, 2022
- 8,979
Corruption, misgovernance, vote fixing, fascism, social injustice and a new world order of billionaire megalomaniacs …
It’s a match made in Heaven:
Making The World Great Again: FIFA’s role in the new authoritarian world order
FairSquare director Nick McGeehan offers reflections on the increasing interdependence of authoritarian leaders and sports bodies, FIFA in particular, which should be sounding alarm bells around the world. A version of this article was published in the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten on 29...
fairsq.org
Austrian Gull
Well-known member
Yet more proof that Infantino is worse than Blatter or Havelange.
Mental Lental
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #6
Any chance of any countries boycotting it this time? I'd love some of the big guns to refuse to play in America. Just to wipe the smile off their stupid fat greedy money-grabbing faces.Corruption, misgovernance, vote fixing, fascism, social injustice and a new world order of billionaire megalomaniacs …
It’s a match made in Heaven:
View attachment 204599
Making The World Great Again: FIFA’s role in the new authoritarian world order
FairSquare director Nick McGeehan offers reflections on the increasing interdependence of authoritarian leaders and sports bodies, FIFA in particular, which should be sounding alarm bells around the world. A version of this article was published in the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten on 29...
5Ways Gull
Well-known member
It was during Trump's first term that I started to get nostalgic for Reagan and Dubyah.
Johnson/Truss had me thinking maybe Thatcher wasn't that bad (ok I know she was)
And yes I genuinely thought Blatters removal would see an upturn in the administration of world football. Suddenly he's the voice of reason.
stewart12
Well-known member
- Jan 16, 2019
- 2,242
Blatter may have had his hand in the tills on a regular basis, but you did at least get the vague impression that he was acting in the interests of the game, or at least trying to
this guy just seems to be money, money, money
stewart12
Well-known member
- Jan 16, 2019
- 2,242
there was a lot of posturing before the Qatar world cup but not a single player or team boycotted the tournament. So I can't see this being any different
(apart from, of course, the only country with the moral fibre to DELIEBRATELY not take part, the mighty Tartan Army)
Craven, cowardly ****s
MattBackHome
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 12,023
I think it's more that Blatter's form of corruption was just more clunky, brazen and analogue than we're seeing now. Your Jack Warner's and Tokyo Sexwhale's look like complete dinosaurs, yet weren't THAT long ago.
Similar to how football tactics have evolved since the 90's, so have the tactics and performance of corruption. It's a golden age now if you think about it.
Similar to how football tactics have evolved since the 90's, so have the tactics and performance of corruption. It's a golden age now if you think about it.
stewart12
Well-known member
- Jan 16, 2019
- 2,242
I definitely miss Tokyo Sexwhale
I am not at all interested in this vanity competition nor watching the games. Just FIFA being their usual money grabbing selves!
Austrian Gull
Well-known member
Blatter's one positive legacy was bringing a World Cup to Africa. He also voted against Qatar IIRC.
The club word cup is already in play.
Yesterday Chelsea played some American side in front of a 20% full stadium,
with the US team's fans made up entirely of 'hispanics' who are probably all on Trumps deportation list.
Ooh it’s a corner
Well-known member
It annoys me that sky sports news is still giving it a lot of coverage
We (England) should definitely boycott the actual WC (the same rules will apply). Although if the FA tried, I can imagine the pressure from Trump’s bestie (SKS) would be monumental.
About time the players spoke up. But I won’t be holding my breath.
About time the players spoke up. But I won’t be holding my breath.
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 10,278
Absolutely no way we would do this. For loads of reasons, not least that the FA is basically broke anyway and boycotting FIFA competitions would tip it over the edge
The FA wouldn't try, but yeh, I imagine Starmer would want us to participate, because the vast majority of football fans still want us to participate
It's absolutely not up to the players. They are young blokes, trying to focus on the sport they play for a living. They've already done more than anyone else, taking the knee etc.
Where are the brand partners in all this? What's Nike and MacDonald's and Heineken's stance on the loss of diversity messaging?
While I agree with the distaste for the attempts to not offend people who disapprove of, and even persecute minorities of race and gender, plus of course one group that is not a 'minority' (women), I don't thing 'we' can expect the players to take a lead here.
Players are employees and are required to participate in competitions that their clubs enter.
It is for football authorities to set the standards.
Discrimination on the basis of innate characteristics such as race, gender and sexual orientation should be illegal
(within the game).
Active promotion against such discrimination should be part of the laws of football governance.
It is that simple.
I am more equivocal about religious persecution.
This is because some practitioners profess their religion dictates a discrimination based on one or more of the three innate characteristics.
This brings them into conflict with what I would label for want of a better term, basic human values.
I also appreciate that this allows whataboutery.
It is easy to rebut those who claim sexual orientation is a lifestyle choice. It isn't and that's all there is to it.
But whatabout political freedom? Who is to say full and free enfranchisement is a necessity?
What about nations with limited or no enfranchisement?
Or nations with notoriously corrupt voting rubrics?
In one swoop, Saudi Arabia, most (all?) Islamic republics, many African states, even the US if you squint,
would be out.
What about the legal voting age?
The UK could argue that the US discriminates against young adults (voting age of 21).
And whatabout nations whose age of consent is 14? Or 18?
Many UK footballers would be guilty of 'statuary rape' for having a 17 year old GF.
(And let's not even start on you know who and his under 16 GF of a year or so ago....).
Any attempt to argue 'what is legal in country X means country X is 'OK' is feeble when it comes to some issues.
So I think if 'we' are to have traction with whimsical discrimination like that we see now,
'we' need to get our ducks properly lined up.
Sadly I don't think they are.
So a competition not actively engaging with antidiscrimination will not attract much opposition.
That's where we are, and I am not sure what to do about it.