That FIFA is “allegedly” a sewer is no great surprise, although whether cleaning it up should really be a priority for U.S. prosecutors is a different question.
The indignation over the FIFA allegations has been amusing to watch.
Here, via the BBC, is a quick walk down memory lane (from 2010):
The BBC programme investigating world football’s governing body will be aired on 29 November – three days before the vote on 2 December in Zurich.
“Is it frustrating that Panorama’s doing this programme a few days before? Of course it is,” [David] Cameron told the BBC.
“But it’s a free country. I think Fifa will understand.”
England 2018 bid chief executive Andy Anson had accused the BBC of being ‘unpatriotic’ in airing the programme so soon before the vote. And, with a recent Sunday Times investigation into world football’s governing body also resulting in two Fifa officials being banned while four others were suspended , the British media were feared to be harming England’s hopes.
I think the job that Andy and others and myself are going to have in Zurich is to say to Fifa to look at the bids on their merits.
In his fine article on the FIFA scandal, Charlie Cooke offers up some useful reminders that ‘winning’ the right to host FIFA’S World Cup is a distinctly mixed blessing. Here’s one:
Consider South Africa, which accommodated the 2010 World Cup. Per Canada’s Globe and Mail, the majority of the venues that were constructed for the 2010 World Cup are deteriorating rapidly, at great cost to the country’s government. As of today, “the $600-million Cape Town Stadium” — the flagship of the collection — has been “largely abandoned” and is “losing an estimated $6-million to $10-million (U.S.) annually.” So dire is its future supposed to be, the paper concludes, that “some residents have even suggested that it should be demolished to save money.”
The same story of ruinous legacies, no even more so, is true of the Olympics, another overblown spectacle that, unlike the World Cup, lacks even the merit of being entertaining.
And on the topic of the Olympics, here’s some completely unexpected news:
Revelations that Boston 2024 planned to tap taxpayer cash to pay for land and cover infrastructure costs to host the Olympics has caught even some of the state’s highest-ranking officials off-guard and is fueling warnings by bid critics, who called the developments “devastating” to the committee’s quest to win over the public.
“This puts every person in elected office in Massachusetts in a tough spot,” said Evan Falchuk, a vocal bid critic who’s pushed for a statewide ballot question on hosting the games. “They’ve been saying for months, ‘No taxpayer (money).’ Then you read what they told the USOC. … It’s a devastating blow to their credibility. There’s a reason why voters don’t trust what they’ve heard and (Boston 2024 has) got a lot of work to do to earn that trust.”
Details from the group’s so-called bid book — outlined in published reports and confirmed by Boston 2024 — indicate that plans sent to the U.S. Olympic Committee in December called for the Hub to fund “land acquisition and infrastructure costs” at Widett Circle, where a temporary Olympic stadium is being proposed. It comes after months of promises that the group planned to run a privately funded Olympics.
To anyone who believed those “months of promises,” I have a bridge to sell you.
Boston should say no to the Olympics. And sooner rather than later.