Panorama

[aintforever]

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that it is the timing that has ****ed people off not the fact that FIFA has been exposed.

[Verbal]

There was nothing new in the programme, the events took place 10-20 years ago. The timing was a delibrate commercial decision to attract viewers and publicity, not to weed out corruption in FIFA. If that was the case then they would have aired the programme with enough time for the corrupt members to be investigated and even suspended (like the Times story did).If the BBC want to act like a commercial outlet, then fine, do away with the poll tax that funds them. My issue was not the content or the right to investigate it was the timing of the programme.

 

This is just nonsense. The BBC does not make 'deliberate commercial decisions' - it doesn't make more or less money whatever Panorama's ratings. The timing of the programme was to coincide with the vote precisely because there is an issue of public interest at stake: the apparently limitless corruptibility of the world governing body for football. And 'there was nothing new' in it? You knew all that already, did you? I think not.

 

The desire to punish the BBC by advocating something that will destroy it is a pathetic piece of small-minded revenge - all because of some weird perception that FIFA would vote against England 2018 simply because of Panorama. If true, that, in itself, would surely prove Panorama was right! And does a World Cup mean THAT much to you - that you want to wreak terrible revenge on a piece of investigative journalism by the BBC? The dimwitted, money-grubbing, genuflecting-to-corrupt-wealth Prince Andrew must be your hero.

[Saint in Paradise]

This is just nonsense. The BBC does not make 'deliberate commercial decisions' - it doesn't make more or less money whatever Panorama's ratings. The timing of the programme was to coincide with the vote precisely because there is an issue of public interest at stake: the apparently limitless corruptibility of the world governing body for football. And 'there was nothing new' in it? You knew all that already, did you? I think not.

 

The desire to punish the BBC by advocating something that will destroy it is a pathetic piece of small-minded revenge - all because of some weird perception that FIFA would vote against England 2018 simply because of Panorama. If true, that, in itself, would surely prove Panorama was right! And does a World Cup mean THAT much to you - that you want to wreak terrible revenge on a piece of investigative journalism by the BBC? The dimwitted, money-grubbing, genuflecting-to-corrupt-wealth Prince Andrew must be your hero.

 

I agree with that plus I still have a smile when reading about people thinking that fifa would have given the WC to the UK anyway.

IMHO fifa were just looking for any excuse not to give it to the UK. However I read somewhere that that person wondered IF the

BBC did it so that fifa would have to give it to the UK to show that they are not as corrupt as people think.

 

IMHO it doesn't matter to fifa who has the WC as I think they only care about who will send the most money back to fifa.

 

.

[Chez]

Nobody is denying the right to publish what they want, the issue is the timing. They had this info 3 weeks ago, why didn't they run with it then. Had they, it may have stopped the 3 alledged corrupt members from voting. Had the programme stopped these 3 voting, then that would have been a good outcome, as it is, it's too near to the vote for that to happen.

I think they had it 5 weeks ago. They did however write to both the people being accused and to FIFA, therefore FIFA had an opportunity to investigate the accusations made prior to the programme going out, butt they chose to stick theor heads in the sand again. If you watched the programme you will have seen the joUrnalists from Norway ask Sep Blatter at a press conference about Jack Walker's ticket touting and just fobbed them off. The vote is this week, the perfect time therefore to embaress FIFA into perhaps changing its ways.

 

On a seperate issue are you all comfortable about the government obliging FIFA with a 100% tax break?

[Chez]

There was nothing new in the programme, the events took place 10-20 years ago. The timing was a delibrate commercial decision to attract viewers and publicity, not to weed out corruption in FIFA.

 

the bribes revealed may have been taken in the late 1990s, but the evidence showing this has only just come to light. The Times' expose revealed that curruption continues.

[The9]

Interesting that people are choosing to completely ignore the evidence of Jack Warner (in particular) having annexed vast swathes of T&T's tickets in 2006 and (despite getting caught and asked to donate a similar amount to charity) did it again in 2010 - I'm pretty sure that evidence wasn't "around 10 years ago".

[landford.saint]

Many on here seems to have missed the almost aside from the program reference the demands made by FIFA to the host country which we have signed up to. There were several requirements including FIFA its members and all working for and on its behaf will pay absolutely no tax at all. Nothing ,zippo, zilch. Therefore The $3bn that FIFA will get for hosting the games will not be subject to tax of any kind. Also neither will its members (corrupt or otherwise) or their families or companies/businesses.

[dellboypete]

.......

 

IMHO it doesn't matter to fifa who has the WC as I think they only care about who will send the most money back to fifa.

 

.

 

Well they know that if it came here their coffers would be bulging. The only venue that would gaurantee full houses for almost every game

[dellboypete]

One sure fire way of getting here would be for Prince Wills to accidentally invite all the voters to his forthcoming wedding (all expenses paid of course) on condition of us getting the WC.

 

That's almost above board and almost not bribery in my book - there must be plenty of spare space in Westminster Abbey for them.

[Chez]

Many on here seems to have missed the almost aside from the program reference the demands made by FIFA to the host country which we have signed up to. There were several requirements including FIFA its members and all working for and on its behaf will pay absolutely no tax at all. Nothing ,zippo, zilch. Therefore The $3bn that FIFA will get for hosting the games will not be subject to tax of any kind. Also neither will its members (corrupt or otherwise) or their families or companies/businesses.

 

I wonder of this tax break contravenes UK law in any way? What is the government going to do, just allow it and shrug their shoulders should anyone ask? The Dutch seem very unhappy by this stipulation and the suggestion was that they would look to negotiate this out if they were awarded the competition. I think this factor alone means Russia have it in the bag.

[Viking Warrior]

Just maybe. the fifa vote will go in our favour. that way they can say it was a fair and democratic vote and perhaps all the allegations of corruption will disseminate into the ether.

 

Reverse psycology by the Beeb ?? Maybe

[Thedelldays]

I think FIFA wil give us the nod just to shut us up and us go away for 50 years

[aintforever]

I think the fact that the last World Cup was rubbish will sway the decision our way, Russia is a bigger risk than England.