4 ms·

CONCACAF join UEFA and reject FIFA's World Cup sell-off plan. https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/49488584/uefa-boycott-all-fifa-competitions-protest-world-c

• conradfr 2mo ago
  While the football business is horrible it's nice that this may fail like the Super League. Now if only that could put a dent in Infantino reelection...
  • runarberg 2mo ago
    I am not sure a replacement for Infantino is enough. It seems like FIFA has a culture of corruption and Infantino is merely the latest manifestation of said culture. Some serious reform and restructuring seem needed.
    • jamesblonde 2mo ago
      Fifa is a reflection of the world. All members (nations) get a vote. Most countries are corrupt. Thank go there is still a bastion of democracy/fairness left in Uefa.
      • runarberg 2mo ago
        I am all in favor of a global revolution to overthrow capitalism with a solidarity of workers of the world. But I think we can have a non-corrupt FIFA without one.
        • retr0rocket 2mo ago
          [dead]
      • plufz 2mo ago
        Still there are plenty of world wide organizations that are less corrupt than fifa.
        • tialaramex 2mo ago
          I'm actually not even sure I can think of an organisation more corrupt. Maybe the IOC is up there?
          • basisword 2mo ago
            The FIA (motorsport governing body) is giving them a run for their money. Recently removed presidency term limits and made several other rule changes to prevent challengers. And like FIFA, despite the majority opinion seeming to be against the corruption the decisions get rubber stamped anyway.
      • darepublic 2mo ago
        The world is a reflection of the laws of physics. When complex self propagating systems coexist in an environment with limited material competition arises, and corruption is simply one inevitable result of that.
      • LanceH 2mo ago
        > Thank go there is still a bastion of democracy/fairness left in Uefa To be a bit cynical on this, I'm going to say that UEFA is worried the international scene will infringe on the European league scene. They've found something to be outraged about, but the reality is more about the threat to their own bottom line than it is about the international game.
        • bornfreddy 2mo ago
          This is probably at least partially true. And they know that if they get together with South America, they can easily replace FIFA with another governing structure.
          • LanceH 2mo ago
            I'm a bit surprised to be downvoted on this, except maybe that it's seen as an attack on Europe. There have been other attempts at a league superior to the individual national leagues -- like a permanent champions league. Establishment of anything more regular at the international level would be one more way this could be accomplished. Each European league (and leagues from other confederations) has a vested interest in keeping the World Cup not just "free" but rare as well. The time to be on the high horse against FIFA isn't 2026, it was against he labor conditions in Qatar, or the corruption to award the 2018 and 2022 hosts, or any number of other things. However correct they are, they only complain when it's against their own self interest.
      • hvb2 2mo ago
        > Thank go there is still a bastion of democracy/fairness left in Uefa Do you know who Platini is? This is only because Europe cares about soccer. If this was basketball, ice hockey or baseball then I don't think Europe would care and would be the country to bribe
    • zimpenfish 2mo ago
      > It seems like FIFA has a culture of corruption I think any large multi-national organisation that deals with handing out events that generate vast sums of money inevitably succumbs to the rot. See also: the IOC.
      • sizzzzlerz 2mo ago
        FIA has entered the room
      • FabHK 2mo ago
        Reminiscent of the resource curse, the observation that many countries "blessed" with an abundance of natural resources actually fare pretty badly (including lots of corruption). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse
    • mcmcmc 2mo ago
      Here’s a solution: bar FIFA from selling viewing rights to their competitions and allow any station or channel to stream for free. That would grow the global game. Take away the money and FIFA doesn’t have much to bargain with. They need to remember they are a purely administrative organization.
      • bdangubic 2mo ago
        > That would grow the global game. The game is already as global as it gets, 1.5bn people watched the wc final…
        • jurgenburgen 2mo ago
          So a minority of the human population?
          • illliillll 2mo ago
            Now consider time zones.
            • actionfromafar 2mo ago
              Standard Eastern Tribe
          • bdangubic 2mo ago
            ~2bn are under 12, ~1bn are over 65 so not really a minority :)
        • Someone 2mo ago
          > The game is already as global as it gets There is a tiny bit of room for expansion. https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c5y03dermmeo https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c5y03dermmeo: “Football is almost non-existent on this Pacific island. Nauru has never fielded a team in an official international match and it has just one – hard sand – pitch. While there is interest in big Premier League matches, and children wear Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo kits, any attempts to actually play football tend to be mocked, unless it's Aussie rules.” (Nauru is about 21 km², 21,000 people)
  • bluedevil2k 2mo ago
    The Super League was a wonderful idea! Imagine watching the best teams in Europe playing each other multiple nights a week for months on end! Instead you’d rather watch 1 or 2 teams spend 10x more than anyone else and dominate the league every season. How is that fun or exciting? Would you rather watch a Bayern v Bremen match or a Bayern v Chelsea match? Or PSG, is it fun watching them not even bother playing their best guys in games against Lyon? It makes no sense to me that people favored the (much) worse product because “tradition”.
    • crote 2mo ago
      Easy: it was going to be a (mostly) closed competition. Competition gets boring real fast when it is always the same handful of teams. When there are no real consequences to losing, winning becomes meaningless. Bayern v Chelsea matches stop being as interesting when every game is a Bayern v Chelsea match and most of them have no real impact either way. On the other hand, football becomes most interesting when it's a Bayern v Bremen and Bremen wins. People love an underdog after all, and nothing is more exciting than seeing an elite team take the game for granted and being punished for it. The Super League is only a more interesting product from the "big name play ball" perspective. It is great when you want to make a fortune in tv rights and licensing, but it sucks for everyone who cares about football as a sport.
      • bluedevil2k 2mo ago
        That’s the same justification my German friend made. I guess it’s American viewpoint vs European. The Super League would have been like the NFL in the US, where every team can beat any other any given night. That’s much more appealing to me, but to each their own.
        • dpark 2mo ago
          The NFL is so balanced not because it’s a “super” league but because every team has the same salary cap. The best team and the worst team all have to spend essentially the exact same amount of money on their players, ensuring that no team can buy their way to the top. Even there it’s still not really true that the best team can lose to the worst team in any given night. The best team is generally favored a lot and justifiably so. In soccer teams can also be quite mismatched and a lucky goal by the worse team can be the only score and win the match.
• Vinnl 2mo ago
  CONCACAF statement: https://www.concacaf.com/competitions/concacaf/news/statement-on-behalf-of-concacaf-and-its-41-member-associations https://www.concacaf.com/competitions/concacaf/news/statemen...
  • skywhopper 2mo ago
    This statement is weak and wishy-washy compared to the blunt UEFA statement. Kudos to Europe. Here’s hoping CONCACAF can get brave enough to take the moral stance as well.
    • deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]
    • Departed7405 2mo ago
      Yeah, they just rejected the proposal. Meanwhile, UEFA is boycotting the game until those plans are DEFINITELY abandoned. I am wondering whether UEFA could even ask for a change in FIFA statute to ensure it can never be proposed again.
      • wongarsu 2mo ago
        FTA: "As a result of today’s discussion, no UEFA national teams will participate in any FIFA competition for so long as these proposals remain alive, unless this proposal has been abandoned in its entirety and binding assurances have been given that FIFA will never again open its governance or competitions to private ownership." (emphasis mine)
  • afavour 2mo ago
    I actually think the CONCACAF statement shows that they could be on board… they’re just mad they weren’t consulted. Give them the cut they want and they might change their tune. By comparison UEFA sounds a lot stronger.
    • locallost 2mo ago
• worik 2mo ago
  > unprecedented amounts of corruption... Yes I hear about that a lot. Yuk But I also hear that FIFA puts a lot of resources into developing the game in African countries. I am asking: Is that true in your experience?
  • skywhopper 2mo ago
    Who told you that? FIFA?
  • wood_spirit 2mo ago
    Both can be - and seem to be - true.
  • ifwinterco 2mo ago
    And strangely a very high percentage of those resources get converted into mansions and yachts
    • ethbr1 2mo ago
      Nobody specified what game.
  • Fnoord 2mo ago
    Look, it is pretty bullshit if you ask me. So it used to be that there were pre-tournament games, to qualify. A lot of countries... they wouldn't qualify. They'd play an ample amount of pre-tournament games though. Now, you seen more countries qualify, and you see countries who used to not qualify, dropping ASAP (in the deathmatch 16th matches, right after poule). So what did we get out of that? A few matches during the tournament, and they were quite frankly meaningless. These countries which made it to deathmatch 1/16th gained nothing. It is a scam, a trick. They think they gained fame, but they really have not, since the barrier to get to the deathmatch has been lowered. Furthermore, if you follow a corrupt scheme, you can ensure a country like Argentina is going to have the least chance to end up with strong opponents. No, mr. Infantino. We need less corruption in FIFA, not more. * We don't want a drink break to watch commercials.. * ..or a 30 min break with a bunch of actors (who sing with autotune) when your own rules say it may only be a 15 min break. * We don't want red cards commutated or revoked. * We don't want star players not getting yellow or red card, when other players are getting one for the same foul. * We don't want a yellow card being reversed, then given to an opponent, based on 'identity mismatch'. * We don't want to see racism or political statements. * We don't want to see rugby, we want to see football. * We want to see fair-play, with a meaningful VAR which can be called by the captain or coach of each team twice (getting back their call if agreed on). You don't need a for-profit in your chain to fix the above. You need a non-profit with a non-corrupt chair, and you've proven you're not fit. Red card for you, mr. Infantino. You're out, arrivederci.
• sizzzzlerz 2mo ago
  However, all all-Africa World Cup won't find too many takers.
  • pirates 2mo ago
    AFCON is already a thing and while it is decently popular it’s no where near the world cup or the euros. Part of that is that it takes place during the domestic club competitions though.
    • nephihaha 2mo ago
      African teams are definitely up and coming. South Africa was surprisingly poor in the tournament but there were some decent performances by African teams, notably Morocco. Cape Verde also punched (or kicked?) way above their weight.
      • _djo_ 2mo ago
        South Africa performed above its traditional level just in reaching the second round, which it has not done before.
• vagrantJin 2mo ago
  My own frustration isn't corruption per se, a state cannot exist without it - at least not for long, but how cheap African corruption is in general. Others may require considerable resources and billions perhaps. Not here. Just a few Land Rover discoverys for key officials and a scholarship for their kids in Europe is all that is required to sell a whole state. To say nothing of a sporting organization.
  • fifilura 2mo ago
    What do you mean that "a state cannot exist without [corruption]"?
    • doomboiardee 2mo ago
      Assuming they meant it as in it's unavoidable. We should still be frustrated by it, but I think I get what they were getting at.
      • runarberg 2mo ago
        When you tie money to power (i.e. capitalism) people will use money to buy more power, and their power the gain more money. This is a feature of capitalism, not a bug. The system is working as intended. Luckily capitalism is not the only system available to us, and we can find a system which is not inherently corrupt.
        • p91paul 2mo ago
          I think that's not capitalism, that's human nature. On every possible power structure you can think of, there will be people available to compromise on their moral principles if given the right incentives to do so. Under capitalism that's easily money, under other systems it might be something else. You can work to mitigate or detect and deter it (the amount of effort put on that is what makes the difference between limited and widespread corruption). You cannot hope to eliminate it entirely.
      • fifilura 2mo ago
• freely0085 2mo ago
  CONCACAF extremely weak. They didn't even say they'll boycott. They're likely just as corrupt as the other countries and may still vote it through, they're just sad they were not consulted.
• aucisson_masque 2mo ago
  Honestly no one care about United States, Canada and Mexico in soccer. These countries are irrelevant.
  • JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
    They’re massively relevant when it comes to sponsorship. The U.S. alone represents like 40% of global discretionary income and ad spend.
  • hdgvhicv 2mo ago
    Mexico are decent
  • sien 2mo ago
    I'm not an American but FIFA certainly care about the US and Mexico. The US is a vast market. It's played a lot in the US as well. The MLS also not a tiny league. Football is also huge in Mexico. Hugo Sanchez was truly a legend. Among many.
  • brabel 2mo ago
    The US just hosted as main host again after only 30 years. Brazil waited from 1950 to 2014 to host again, a full 64 years, and it’s arguably one of the countries most cared about in soccer.
    • parthdesai 2mo ago
      Hosting the tournament has nothing to do with it. America is a lucrative market, and on top of that, FIFA can get away with charging insane ticket prices. I'm Canadian and soccer is my primary sport. Unfortunately, on a global level, nobody really cares about Canada or US when it comes to soccer.
• JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
  “The effort is being bankrolled by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Jared Kushner, U.S. President Donald Trump's son-in-law.” Ah. This boondoggle makes sense now.
• dataengineer56 2mo ago
  CONCACAF and UEFA almost always vote together, but they are far outnumbered by every other region and FIFA only needs a majority vote for a rule to pass. You're excluding about half of the planet by only mentioning Africa.
  • illliillll 2mo ago
    FIFA can't really exist in any way similar to it's current form without UEFA > You're excluding about half of the planet by only mentioning Africa. It's the half of the planet that nobody cares about when it comes to football.
    • Departed7405 2mo ago
      The issue is every federation - whether they never qualified for the world cup or won final(s) - gets one vote. This has become a big issue, with any proposal to give more money (even if that entails compromising on key principles) to federations (by making more money) is almost certain to pass because of very poor FAs that need it / want it desperately.
      • wongarsu 2mo ago
        Yeah, but if UEFA stays true to their word, passing this proposal is guaranteed to lead to the end of a FIFA-led world cup. They have the votes to privatize the world cup, but in doing so would destroy the very thing they are trying to privatize, and likely destroy FIFA as a whole Meanwhile UEFA can just get together with South America and form a new governing body for a new world cup
  • ganzsz 2mo ago
    Nobody is going to watch a worldcup if south America joins this boycott.
    • dwedge 2mo ago
      Wondering about this. 10 years ago it was true but Brazil are a shadow of their former selves, and Argentina without the likes of Messi and Aguero aren't the same. I know they reached the final but Messi almost had the golden boot. Wouldn't be surprised to see Africa surpass South America in the next decade
• esalman 2mo ago
  Americans (Kushner et al.) looked at an opportunity to make money and found a willing ally in Infantino, and they took it. I am Asian. Our country FA is corrupt as hell too. The way I read this, FIFA needs a yes from roughly half of the member nations to go forward with this. Yes to a offer (not promise) to receive $20m. I can totaly see the top brass of our FA, 10-20 people at most, looking at this as an opportunity to earn easy several million bucks and voting yes.