How the FIFA became resistant to arguments (and new presidents)
Sepp Blatter or no Sepp Blatter: that's the question that keeps the football world in its grip now that a new president has to be chosen. But more important still is the question: how do you make an organisation that is so endemically corrupt healthy again?
If Jérôme Champagne, presidential candidate of the FIFA, can reform as quickly as he can talk, the federation would be cured within two days.
Calling from his native city of Zürich, the French ex-diplomat and ex-FIFA-executive talks openly and with excitement about his plans for the organisation.One ambition is followed by the next analysis.. Bring up an issue and Champagne provides solutions: how he wants to modernise the rules of the game, how he wants to stimulate the sport in India, how he wants to make FIFA's finances transparent and what he wants to do about the financial inequality between clubs -an inequality that continues to grow and therefore starts to make football predictable.
"In the eighties, IFK Göteborg was able to win the UEFA Cup. Do you think such a thing is still possible now? In the nineties, Ajax was able to win the Champions League. Do you think that is still possible now? No, of course not. And that's the problem. People can lose their interest in the sport if the same clubs continue to keep on winning."
But when asked about his chances of winning the election, Champagne suddenly falls silent. For a split second; an unusually long time for the man.
That's the one problem he does not yet have a solution for: if he wants to participate in the presidential elections on the 29th of May, five of the 209 football associations connected to the FIFA have to openly support him.
Five out of 209? You'd think that's doable.
The only problem is that those nominations immediately become public. If Champagne doesn't win the presidential elections -and Blatter does instead- the associations that nominated Champagne will henceforth be known as 'anti-Blatter'. A risk not many associations are willing to take, Champagne has noticed. "That fear is my problem."
Could you think of a better example of the poisonous culture of football politics?
"That’s FIFA," Champagne laughs.
For a year now, he has lobbied. How many nominations he's managed to secure? "More than one, but still less than five."
Tuesday (today) he will present his plans to the KNVB in Zeist, in the hopes that the Netherlands will nominate him. Time is of the essence. "I still have hope I will manage to reach five nominations."
Jérôme Champagne
DOES ANY CANDIDATE EVEN HAVE A CHANCE AGAINST BLATTER?
But even if Champagne manages to secure five nominations, it doesn't look like he'll have much of a chance going up against Blatter in an election, FIFA experts say.
"Champagne? An amiable man, a competent candidate, who tells a great story to boot," Mark Pieth says, "but he doesn't stand a chance at all." Between 2011 and 2013, Pieth was the chairman of a FIFA-reform commission. He knows the organisation well.
The problem, Pieth explains, is that thinking 'FIFA has got an image problem - here's an experienced and intelligent man with solutions - it'll all be okay' is hopeless.
The 209 members of the FIFA do not seem to think that way. At the end of 2013 the Swede quit his job as a FIFA-reformer, after concluding that the FIFA -the organisation that had asked him for help in the first place- doesn't want to reform at all.
He calls the world football association "surprisingly resistant to arguments and ideas". "The FIFA is just like the United Nations or the Vatican: the only thing they have above them is the sky."
For a long time, Pieth believed Michel Platini -French ex-international and chairman of the European football association UEFA- should be the one to govern the FIFA. Platini possessed the rare combination of ideas and a platform. "He's younger than Blatter, smarter than Blatter and knows more about football than Blatter." But, as Pieth noticed in the beginning of 2013, like Blatter he's completely disinterested in 'good governance'. (Aside from this fact, Platini also declined to put in a candidacy)
After that, Pieth's best hope of reforming became, yes, Sepp Blatter. That's what he told de Neu Zürcher Zeitung in April of 2014. "He didn't work very hard on reforming, but he did something. At any rate, he has the authority and the platform. Something a new president will have to earn for himself first, and that could take a very long time. That's why -for lack of a better option- Blatter seemed like my best hope."
But as of two weeks ago, the Swiss professor has new hope. The Jordan prince Ali bin Al-Hussein, one of FIFA's vice-presidents, announced his candidacy on Twitter. Prince Ali does have a serious chance against Blatter, Pieth says, and therefore calls on Champagne to step back in order to increase the prince's chances even more. "I know the prince well, he is a reformer and he will get votes in Africa and Asia, in countries that traditionally vote for Blatter."
Other experts, like Sylvia Schenk, FIFA-watcher at Transparency International, also believe that Prince Ali stands a chance against Blatter. "Blatter's exit will create space for innovation. It's important to support the candidate who has the better chance of winning."
Ali bin Al-Hussein
Aside from Champagne and prince Ali, to this day there are no other serious candidates. (Note: It's possible old-president of the Chilean football association, Harold Mayne-Nicholls, might still announce his candidacy. He lead the 'technical inspection' of the nine candidate-countries for the World Cups of 2018 and 2022. But -and this is typical for FIFA- Maybe-Nicholls himself is under inspection by the FIFA for corrupt behaviour relating to his work for the organisation. Last Friday, ex-chairman David Ginola also made himself a candidate. This candidacy however, is sponsored by betting company Paddy Power, and mostly looks to be a publicity stunt.)
BREATHTAKING CORRUPTION UNDER BLATTER'S REIGN
Blatter is sort of like your drunken uncle who can start misbehaving at any moment. He has talked about football on other planets before, and reduced a minute of silence for Nelson Mandela to just eleven seconds.
With any publicly traded corporation this alone would have cost Blatter his head. But it goes even further. Most Western football associations -the European, North-American and Australian- look at Blatter as the symbol of corruption within the organisation. Still, Blatter himself is probably not corrupt, says Schenk. "He's too subtle for that. Besides, if he had really done something inadmissible, we would have known about it already. There's big money to be made with information like that."
Critique is mostly aimed at the breathtaking scandals that have managed to take place under his leadership. The most recent one? In November it became public knowledge just how guilty the American Chuck Blazer had made himself of personal enrichment as a FIFA-director. He even rented an apartment in Manhattan for his cat, all with money of the football association.
Even more recently, the ethical commission of FIFA managed to somehow get its hands on a rapport about alleged corruption regarding the hosting of the World Cups in 2018 and 2022 -a rapport it had personally ordered(!)- and swiped it under the rug. (Note: both scandals could still carry substantial consequences. After FIFA announced it would not make the Garcia rapport public, they received so much critique that the association could do nothing but back-pedal and reconsider their decision. Blazer, the corrupt American director, was recruited by the FBI as an informant, and has managed to gather incriminating video evidence on a few of the big FIFA-bosses. When the FBI rounds up their investigation, this could do them serious harm)
Blatter's reaction to the scandals is perhaps even more meaningful. Pieth and Schenk both refer to what happened in June of 2014, when the Sunday Times revealed the corruption of Mohamed bin Hammam, president of the football association of Qatar. The piece read as instructions on 'How to become president of FIFA?' The BBC on this.
You would expect Blatter to speak openly about how disgraceful this corruption is. "But what he did was -in a certain way- brilliant," says Schenk. "He said: that news coverage, it's racism, those Europeans discriminate. He stood up for Qatar and especially for the African population, who were very grateful to him."
So Blatter barely acts against corruption, excuses it, and uses it as well. "Poisonous for the governing culture," Pieth says.
If change needs to happen within the FIFA, says Schenk, and for that change to be believable, the association needs a new, irreproachable president. "How does FIFA expect to teach youngsters about fair play, how does it expect to deal with violence among supporters, or how does it expect to put any sort of boundaries on matchfixing, if the association itself shows every sign of being corrupt? None of that is possible with a man like Blatter at the helm, who is the symbol of a rotten organisation." (underlined by OP for accuracy)
IF BLATTER IS WRONG, WHY IS HE STILL SO POPULAR?
It's difficult to deny any of this, and the western FIFA-members want him gone for this very reason. But the rest of the world still thinks very differently about Blatter. They mostly see everything he's done for football outside of Europe. Merits that are equally difficult to deny.
So says Jérôme Champagne, too. "In Africa and Asia there are numerous football fields and accommodations which were financed by FIFA-money. Blatter and I have worked hard for this, and I'm proud of it." He also remarks that under Blatter, the first World Cups in Asia and Africa took place. In South-Korea/Japan (2002) and South-Africa (2010) respectively.(Note: it's no surprise Champagne boasts about this; it was his own work)
Pieth agrees that under Blatter, football has managed to develop itself outside of the traditional 'football countries'. "You can have no issues with that accomplishment, and have to acknowledge it for what it is. Every country receives the same subsidy from the FIFA: England and Germany receive one million, but for example Saint Kitts, Nevis and Botswana as well. Every country has a voice, no matter how large or small. That earns Blatter a lot of goodwill."
That the FIFA didn't exactly keep track of how that money was spent - read: that FIFA-money disappeared in the pockets of de Warners and de Blazers- definitely helped too. "Indeed, that's not good," says Champagne euphemistically. "And that's something I plan to change, should I become president. But that doesn't take away from Blatter's accomplishment."
But do those smaller countries fear other candidates may put an end to the money stream?
According to Schenk -who works for Transparency International- it's a matter of 'gratitude'. "Under Blatter, FIFA's profits increased exponentially. (Up to one billion a year earned by sponsor- and television deals). Sponsors and television stations kept paying more and more money to FIFA. And with that, the associations received more money as well. For most of the African and Asian associations, you are talking about incredible sums. Why change anything about that, when you look at it from their perspective?"
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR FIFA TO CHANGE WITH SEPP BLATTER?
That's why most experts expect Blatter to win the elections easily. And yet that doesn't have to mean the FIFA will remain exactly the way it is.
Schenk: "Blatter will be 79, physically he's deteriorating quickly. It's impossible for other chairmen to be blind to the fact he cannot be president much longer. It's no longer rewarding to remain loyal. It's likely there are already more people doubting him than we might think."
Perhaps this will influence the race to the presidency already. "If a country turns its back on Blatter, more could swiftly follow," Schenk believes. "That would give prince Ali a chance. But even if Blatter wins, the realisation could bring reformism one step closer."
Professionalism and transparency are trends that can no longer be held at bay, thinks Schenk. "Even the IOC has reformed itself. A lot of people within the FIFA realize that the association is an anachronism." It's not even unthinkable Blatter may yet waive his candidacy. Pieth even expexts him to resign after two years, once he's exhausted.
FIFA's future is a lot brighter than it was in 2010, says Pieth. "After those scandals, Blatter called on our commission and ever since, a lot of corrupt people -or those suspected of corruption- have left. A third of the FIFA-board consists out of reformers now." The University of Colorado keeps track of this. "It's true that a lot of our recommendations haven't been heeded, but I still don't think the reform process is buried." (Note: The most important recommendations consisted of putting restrictions on the tenure of the FIFA president and the members of the board. Pieth wanted to reduce those to eight and twelve years respectively, to prevent patronage among other things. The FIFA-members refused politely. Pieth also wanted to introduce an independent screening of new members of the board, but they said no to this as well.)
And if it should be, sponsors and -especially- politics may still help. Next week, action group 'New FIFA Now' will gather in the European Parliament. One of the instigators, Belgian member of the European Parliament Ivo Belet, says that politics can take away football's tax benefits, should FIFA decline to reform. "People within the football world are sensitive to that." (Note: I just bet they are! New FIFA Now is an initiative by British member of Parliament and renowned FIFA-critic Damian Collins, a few members of European Parliament, and whistle blowers like Bonita Mersiades, former chief of press responsible for the Australian candidacy to host the WCs of 2018 and 2022. Mersiades saw her country too wanting to bribe FIFA-members, and drew attention to the fact.)
The European Commission called on FIFA recently to publish Michael Garcia's investigation re: corruption within the FIFA. The Commission pressures them to do so by threatening to keep a more watchful eye when it comes to the negotiation of television rights. Belet: "It all boils down to this: Europe can make the FIFA lose a lot of money."
Another, more radical proposition on the site of New FIFA Now, is that European governments need to insist on a temporary commission tasked with reforming the FIFA.
It's not pretty, governments that take action against a sports association. But if it's necessary, it needs to happen, says Pieth. According to him, sponsors will not be the cause of any changes; if one decides to pull back, another is waiting in line to take its place. So it isn't crazy to think representatives of the people are thinking about a better structural policy, because not everything is in Blatter's hands.
"The FIFA is all about a sick culture. Blatter is important for that culture, but not crucial. Of course, if a reformer becomes president, things can move quickly. That's why Ali should be his only competition. But if that doesn't happen, you have to have a plan B. I blame politicians for this, but journalists as well. If Blatter dies, journalists have nothing more to write about."/b>
SOURCE. (De Correspondent is a Dutch-language, online journalism platform that focuses on background, analysis, investigative reporting, and the kinds of stories that tend to escape the radar of mainstream media because they do not conform to what is normally understood to be 'news'.)
I took the liberty to translate this because Champagne came to the Netherlands today, and I thought it was such an interesting read. There are a few other relevant pieces on football on this site, from Financial Fair Play & how it would make the competition even more unfair to why European football almost always has the same winners. Would anyone be interested in reading about that? If so, let me know! I'll see what I can do. :-)
If Jérôme Champagne, presidential candidate of the FIFA, can reform as quickly as he can talk, the federation would be cured within two days.
Calling from his native city of Zürich, the French ex-diplomat and ex-FIFA-executive talks openly and with excitement about his plans for the organisation.One ambition is followed by the next analysis.. Bring up an issue and Champagne provides solutions: how he wants to modernise the rules of the game, how he wants to stimulate the sport in India, how he wants to make FIFA's finances transparent and what he wants to do about the financial inequality between clubs -an inequality that continues to grow and therefore starts to make football predictable.
"In the eighties, IFK Göteborg was able to win the UEFA Cup. Do you think such a thing is still possible now? In the nineties, Ajax was able to win the Champions League. Do you think that is still possible now? No, of course not. And that's the problem. People can lose their interest in the sport if the same clubs continue to keep on winning."
But when asked about his chances of winning the election, Champagne suddenly falls silent. For a split second; an unusually long time for the man.
That's the one problem he does not yet have a solution for: if he wants to participate in the presidential elections on the 29th of May, five of the 209 football associations connected to the FIFA have to openly support him.
Five out of 209? You'd think that's doable.
The only problem is that those nominations immediately become public. If Champagne doesn't win the presidential elections -and Blatter does instead- the associations that nominated Champagne will henceforth be known as 'anti-Blatter'. A risk not many associations are willing to take, Champagne has noticed. "That fear is my problem."
Could you think of a better example of the poisonous culture of football politics?
"That’s FIFA," Champagne laughs.
For a year now, he has lobbied. How many nominations he's managed to secure? "More than one, but still less than five."
Tuesday (today) he will present his plans to the KNVB in Zeist, in the hopes that the Netherlands will nominate him. Time is of the essence. "I still have hope I will manage to reach five nominations."
Jérôme Champagne
DOES ANY CANDIDATE EVEN HAVE A CHANCE AGAINST BLATTER?
But even if Champagne manages to secure five nominations, it doesn't look like he'll have much of a chance going up against Blatter in an election, FIFA experts say.
"Champagne? An amiable man, a competent candidate, who tells a great story to boot," Mark Pieth says, "but he doesn't stand a chance at all." Between 2011 and 2013, Pieth was the chairman of a FIFA-reform commission. He knows the organisation well.
The problem, Pieth explains, is that thinking 'FIFA has got an image problem - here's an experienced and intelligent man with solutions - it'll all be okay' is hopeless.
The 209 members of the FIFA do not seem to think that way. At the end of 2013 the Swede quit his job as a FIFA-reformer, after concluding that the FIFA -the organisation that had asked him for help in the first place- doesn't want to reform at all.
He calls the world football association "surprisingly resistant to arguments and ideas". "The FIFA is just like the United Nations or the Vatican: the only thing they have above them is the sky."
For a long time, Pieth believed Michel Platini -French ex-international and chairman of the European football association UEFA- should be the one to govern the FIFA. Platini possessed the rare combination of ideas and a platform. "He's younger than Blatter, smarter than Blatter and knows more about football than Blatter." But, as Pieth noticed in the beginning of 2013, like Blatter he's completely disinterested in 'good governance'. (Aside from this fact, Platini also declined to put in a candidacy)
After that, Pieth's best hope of reforming became, yes, Sepp Blatter. That's what he told de Neu Zürcher Zeitung in April of 2014. "He didn't work very hard on reforming, but he did something. At any rate, he has the authority and the platform. Something a new president will have to earn for himself first, and that could take a very long time. That's why -for lack of a better option- Blatter seemed like my best hope."
But as of two weeks ago, the Swiss professor has new hope. The Jordan prince Ali bin Al-Hussein, one of FIFA's vice-presidents, announced his candidacy on Twitter. Prince Ali does have a serious chance against Blatter, Pieth says, and therefore calls on Champagne to step back in order to increase the prince's chances even more. "I know the prince well, he is a reformer and he will get votes in Africa and Asia, in countries that traditionally vote for Blatter."
Other experts, like Sylvia Schenk, FIFA-watcher at Transparency International, also believe that Prince Ali stands a chance against Blatter. "Blatter's exit will create space for innovation. It's important to support the candidate who has the better chance of winning."
Ali bin Al-Hussein
Aside from Champagne and prince Ali, to this day there are no other serious candidates. (Note: It's possible old-president of the Chilean football association, Harold Mayne-Nicholls, might still announce his candidacy. He lead the 'technical inspection' of the nine candidate-countries for the World Cups of 2018 and 2022. But -and this is typical for FIFA- Maybe-Nicholls himself is under inspection by the FIFA for corrupt behaviour relating to his work for the organisation. Last Friday, ex-chairman David Ginola also made himself a candidate. This candidacy however, is sponsored by betting company Paddy Power, and mostly looks to be a publicity stunt.)
BREATHTAKING CORRUPTION UNDER BLATTER'S REIGN
Blatter is sort of like your drunken uncle who can start misbehaving at any moment. He has talked about football on other planets before, and reduced a minute of silence for Nelson Mandela to just eleven seconds.
With any publicly traded corporation this alone would have cost Blatter his head. But it goes even further. Most Western football associations -the European, North-American and Australian- look at Blatter as the symbol of corruption within the organisation. Still, Blatter himself is probably not corrupt, says Schenk. "He's too subtle for that. Besides, if he had really done something inadmissible, we would have known about it already. There's big money to be made with information like that."
Critique is mostly aimed at the breathtaking scandals that have managed to take place under his leadership. The most recent one? In November it became public knowledge just how guilty the American Chuck Blazer had made himself of personal enrichment as a FIFA-director. He even rented an apartment in Manhattan for his cat, all with money of the football association.
Even more recently, the ethical commission of FIFA managed to somehow get its hands on a rapport about alleged corruption regarding the hosting of the World Cups in 2018 and 2022 -a rapport it had personally ordered(!)- and swiped it under the rug. (Note: both scandals could still carry substantial consequences. After FIFA announced it would not make the Garcia rapport public, they received so much critique that the association could do nothing but back-pedal and reconsider their decision. Blazer, the corrupt American director, was recruited by the FBI as an informant, and has managed to gather incriminating video evidence on a few of the big FIFA-bosses. When the FBI rounds up their investigation, this could do them serious harm)
Blatter's reaction to the scandals is perhaps even more meaningful. Pieth and Schenk both refer to what happened in June of 2014, when the Sunday Times revealed the corruption of Mohamed bin Hammam, president of the football association of Qatar. The piece read as instructions on 'How to become president of FIFA?' The BBC on this.
You would expect Blatter to speak openly about how disgraceful this corruption is. "But what he did was -in a certain way- brilliant," says Schenk. "He said: that news coverage, it's racism, those Europeans discriminate. He stood up for Qatar and especially for the African population, who were very grateful to him."
So Blatter barely acts against corruption, excuses it, and uses it as well. "Poisonous for the governing culture," Pieth says.
If change needs to happen within the FIFA, says Schenk, and for that change to be believable, the association needs a new, irreproachable president. "How does FIFA expect to teach youngsters about fair play, how does it expect to deal with violence among supporters, or how does it expect to put any sort of boundaries on matchfixing, if the association itself shows every sign of being corrupt? None of that is possible with a man like Blatter at the helm, who is the symbol of a rotten organisation." (underlined by OP for accuracy)
IF BLATTER IS WRONG, WHY IS HE STILL SO POPULAR?
It's difficult to deny any of this, and the western FIFA-members want him gone for this very reason. But the rest of the world still thinks very differently about Blatter. They mostly see everything he's done for football outside of Europe. Merits that are equally difficult to deny.
So says Jérôme Champagne, too. "In Africa and Asia there are numerous football fields and accommodations which were financed by FIFA-money. Blatter and I have worked hard for this, and I'm proud of it." He also remarks that under Blatter, the first World Cups in Asia and Africa took place. In South-Korea/Japan (2002) and South-Africa (2010) respectively.(Note: it's no surprise Champagne boasts about this; it was his own work)
Pieth agrees that under Blatter, football has managed to develop itself outside of the traditional 'football countries'. "You can have no issues with that accomplishment, and have to acknowledge it for what it is. Every country receives the same subsidy from the FIFA: England and Germany receive one million, but for example Saint Kitts, Nevis and Botswana as well. Every country has a voice, no matter how large or small. That earns Blatter a lot of goodwill."
That the FIFA didn't exactly keep track of how that money was spent - read: that FIFA-money disappeared in the pockets of de Warners and de Blazers- definitely helped too. "Indeed, that's not good," says Champagne euphemistically. "And that's something I plan to change, should I become president. But that doesn't take away from Blatter's accomplishment."
But do those smaller countries fear other candidates may put an end to the money stream?
According to Schenk -who works for Transparency International- it's a matter of 'gratitude'. "Under Blatter, FIFA's profits increased exponentially. (Up to one billion a year earned by sponsor- and television deals). Sponsors and television stations kept paying more and more money to FIFA. And with that, the associations received more money as well. For most of the African and Asian associations, you are talking about incredible sums. Why change anything about that, when you look at it from their perspective?"
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR FIFA TO CHANGE WITH SEPP BLATTER?
That's why most experts expect Blatter to win the elections easily. And yet that doesn't have to mean the FIFA will remain exactly the way it is.
Schenk: "Blatter will be 79, physically he's deteriorating quickly. It's impossible for other chairmen to be blind to the fact he cannot be president much longer. It's no longer rewarding to remain loyal. It's likely there are already more people doubting him than we might think."
Perhaps this will influence the race to the presidency already. "If a country turns its back on Blatter, more could swiftly follow," Schenk believes. "That would give prince Ali a chance. But even if Blatter wins, the realisation could bring reformism one step closer."
Professionalism and transparency are trends that can no longer be held at bay, thinks Schenk. "Even the IOC has reformed itself. A lot of people within the FIFA realize that the association is an anachronism." It's not even unthinkable Blatter may yet waive his candidacy. Pieth even expexts him to resign after two years, once he's exhausted.
FIFA's future is a lot brighter than it was in 2010, says Pieth. "After those scandals, Blatter called on our commission and ever since, a lot of corrupt people -or those suspected of corruption- have left. A third of the FIFA-board consists out of reformers now." The University of Colorado keeps track of this. "It's true that a lot of our recommendations haven't been heeded, but I still don't think the reform process is buried." (Note: The most important recommendations consisted of putting restrictions on the tenure of the FIFA president and the members of the board. Pieth wanted to reduce those to eight and twelve years respectively, to prevent patronage among other things. The FIFA-members refused politely. Pieth also wanted to introduce an independent screening of new members of the board, but they said no to this as well.)
And if it should be, sponsors and -especially- politics may still help. Next week, action group 'New FIFA Now' will gather in the European Parliament. One of the instigators, Belgian member of the European Parliament Ivo Belet, says that politics can take away football's tax benefits, should FIFA decline to reform. "People within the football world are sensitive to that." (Note: I just bet they are! New FIFA Now is an initiative by British member of Parliament and renowned FIFA-critic Damian Collins, a few members of European Parliament, and whistle blowers like Bonita Mersiades, former chief of press responsible for the Australian candidacy to host the WCs of 2018 and 2022. Mersiades saw her country too wanting to bribe FIFA-members, and drew attention to the fact.)
The European Commission called on FIFA recently to publish Michael Garcia's investigation re: corruption within the FIFA. The Commission pressures them to do so by threatening to keep a more watchful eye when it comes to the negotiation of television rights. Belet: "It all boils down to this: Europe can make the FIFA lose a lot of money."
Another, more radical proposition on the site of New FIFA Now, is that European governments need to insist on a temporary commission tasked with reforming the FIFA.
It's not pretty, governments that take action against a sports association. But if it's necessary, it needs to happen, says Pieth. According to him, sponsors will not be the cause of any changes; if one decides to pull back, another is waiting in line to take its place. So it isn't crazy to think representatives of the people are thinking about a better structural policy, because not everything is in Blatter's hands.
"The FIFA is all about a sick culture. Blatter is important for that culture, but not crucial. Of course, if a reformer becomes president, things can move quickly. That's why Ali should be his only competition. But if that doesn't happen, you have to have a plan B. I blame politicians for this, but journalists as well. If Blatter dies, journalists have nothing more to write about."/b>
SOURCE. (De Correspondent is a Dutch-language, online journalism platform that focuses on background, analysis, investigative reporting, and the kinds of stories that tend to escape the radar of mainstream media because they do not conform to what is normally understood to be 'news'.)
I took the liberty to translate this because Champagne came to the Netherlands today, and I thought it was such an interesting read. There are a few other relevant pieces on football on this site, from Financial Fair Play & how it would make the competition even more unfair to why European football almost always has the same winners. Would anyone be interested in reading about that? If so, let me know! I'll see what I can do. :-)