Archive for the ‘Corruption’ Category

World cup England

Image by doug88888 via Flickr

Trevor Brooking’s recent statement that Fabio Capello could yet be persuaded to stay on beyond Euro 2012 should have come as no surprise to any football fan. The only real surprise is that it took so long for someone in the FA to put forward such a view, and that the FA is persisting with its stated intention of only having an English manager replace Capello.

British football, and England in particular, have long been accused of insularity and a resistance to new ideas. That thought holds some weight as far back as the 1930s with the FA declining to participate in the first three World Cups seeing the competition as nothing more than a silly fad. Fast forward 80 years and the same accusation of insularity might seem harsh given the advancement of the game, the existence of the Premier League (still technically ‘licenced’ by the FA) and the influx of foreign talent.

Excepting the fans, and look at the other most important elements of English football though, the players and the managers, and for all the money and glamour, the game still has its philosophy rooted in the mid 20th century. Very few English players ever play overseas, even fewer coaches do so and those that do, with the exception of David Beckham, tend to disappear from the national consciousness.

It is this culture and the FA’s desire to appease the press and fans that has led to a situation whereby the next national manager will be drawn from a tiny pool of talent. Fans are not blameless in this – whipped up by the press, the majority of England’s supporters seem to believe that Capello’s nationality is the main factor in the lack of success over the last 4 years. The press meanwhile, also point at Capello’s age and his lack of international experience.

All three of these criticisms clumsily ignore several important facts. First, that the majority of England’s players over the last 15 years have spent almost all of their club careers under foreign coaches, with a remarkable degree of success. Secondly, that the only current English manager with international tournament experience is Roy Hodgson, with his time with Switzerland. And lastly, that the two most eligible candidates, Harry Redknapp along with Hodgson, are both in their mid-60s, which is hardly a blueprint for the future of the current squad. In fact, there are only four top-flight English managers to choose from: Redknapp, Hodgson, Alan Pardew and Neil Warnock. None of them come close to being as decorated, successful or internationally experienced as Capello or the other potential foreign candidates such as Hiddink

It is worth considering Redknapp for a moment. In a managerial career of almost 30 years, his only achievements of any note are an FA Cup with Portsmouth, and leading Spurs into the Champions League. His recent heart trouble is well documented and at 64, he would be almost 72 by the time he’d taken England to two World Cups. If off the pitch affairs are also criteria for selection, as they wrongly were for Terry Venables, then Redknapp’s looming court appearance for tax evasion makes his popularity amongst the press and fans almost inexplicable.

The FA’s stance begs a question: What other organisation or industry willing to pay up to £6 million a year for the top job would choose to constrain the talent they recruit by nationality? Would Tesco or HSBC declare that their next CEO must be English? Do clubs at any level of the game declare that their next manager will be from the local area? And with a similar paucity of good candidates for the job, would any other nation insist their manager must not be foreign? English clubs and the game overall have made huge leaps in success and quality, due in large part to the influx of foreign players, managers and coaches. Consider the advances that Arsene Wenger and Gerard Houllier brought to English football, both of them receiving OBEs in 2003 for their contribution to the game.

Perhaps the most compelling argument for an English manager is that it keeps international competition a genuine test of the relative strengths of each nation – the best players under the best manager. Yet this too is undermined by the many other nations with foreign managers helping to maximise the potential of their players – look no further than across the Irish sea at another successful Italian helping a national side to over-achieve. In any case, until UEFA and FIFA mandate that managers must come from the country they represent, why should the FA impose such an artificial barrier on the England team? What England need is the most qualified coach for the job, not the most English.

So here we are, trapped in what Brooking refers to as a “mindset for change”, with the FA committed to employing an under-qualified English manager in one of international football’s toughest jobs. Not all change is for the better.

Joseph "Sepp" Blatter, President of FIFA

Image via Wikipedia

Where the hell do you start on the entire mess that is FIFA? The corruption, the arrogance, the stupidity, the cronyism? There are so many issues that it’s too much to cover in one blog post. Plus a lot was covered in a previous post on this site So, I’ll take the position that you’re all intelligent football fans who pay attention and focus on the events leading up to and at the FIFA congress.

As a brief recap, two executive committee members were suspended for corruption by FIFA, while the former head of the English FA has accused four more executive committee of being corrupt, a claim being looked into by FIFA. Then over the weekend two FIFA vice presidents accused of buying votes in the upcoming presidential elections (including current president Sepp Blatter’s challenger, Mohammed Bin Hammam) and were suspended leaving Blatter unopposed in the election. In addition, a FIFA vice-president (Jerome Valcke) has accused Qatar of buying the 2022 World Cup.

The suspension of Bin Hammam feels dubious to say the least. Blatter has apparently emerged guilt free from the extremely swift investigation which distributed summary justice at a stroke rather than after a thoughtful consideration of the myriad accusations and complaints. These crude and obvious political machinations are reminiscent of a dodgy election in a former communist state in Central Asia rather than an election for the president of the global governing body for the world’s greatest sport.

In response to this affront to presenting even a vague sheen of democracy and transparency, the English FA proposed re-opening the elections to at least have a vote with more than one candidate on the ballot paper. Unfortunately this didn’t fly, and most of the morning was spent with increasingly minor FAs coming to the podium to shoot down the suggestion. As the morning dragged on we had to endure being lectured to by a representative of the Haitian FA (Haiti, trying to get all high and mighty about corruption!), cringeworthy proclamations and declarations of fealty to Blatter and insidious statements from Argentinian FA supremo Julio Grondona, who said that “we always have attacks from England, mostly with lies”. Can we remind ourselves that he said about the English world cup bid “let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote”. This is a man who once said “I do not believe a Jew can ever be a referee at this level. It’s hard work and, you know, Jews don’t like hard work”. Just so you can get an accurate gauge on the character of the man.

Now, I don’t see the English FA’s request as an unreasonable one. Open and challenging elections are healthy for any governing body. And when you’re being told to clean up your act by the English FA, themselves the subject of a parliamentary review to promote better governance and transparency, then you know you’re in a bad spot. One of the most depressing things from today is the way that Blatter and the ‘FIFA family’ have rounded up the toadies and lickspittles to go out and defend Blatter and attack the English FA (and the British press) for having the temerity to question the glorious leader and ask for, you know, a contested election. A contested election that Blatter was always likely to win, but has now walked through unopposed.

But what needs to be remembered is that these are not baseless accusations being bandied about. There are genuine charges to be answered. The cash-for-votes operation by the Sunday Times resulted in two executive committee members being suspended by FIFA itself. FIFA accepted there was serious wrongdoing. Lord Triesman, not the media, made the accusations against four executive committee members. Finally, the most serious, the scandal of cash for presidential votes bribery allegations against Mohamed bin Hammam and Jack Warner came from within FIFA, from Caribbean football associations and Concacaf general secretary Chuck Blazer. FIFA announced ethics committee proceedings against them and have suspended them.

These are not smear tactics by low-brow British tabloids on a par with the Giggs super-injunction debacle, these are genuine, serious accusations backed with evidence that have led to actions being taken by FIFA, admissions of guilt and suspensions. Yet delegates have just spent the day talking as if this is some great conspiracy by a bitter British media.

Change needs to come to FIFA and it needs to come soon. The next 4 years are crucial, and reforms need to go further than the lukewarm sops announced by Blatter at today’s conference. Sponsors such as Adidas and Emirates have already voiced concerns on the reputational damage being done to the governing body of football. The English FA need to follow up this protest by becoming a beacon of good governance and transparency within the game, by showing that football can governed honestly and openly. And the British press should carry on doing what they’re doing; poking and prying, shining a light on the undergrowth and generally making it difficult for FIFA to be anything other than open.

But what really needs to happen is for the suits at FIFA to remember that it’s OUR game, not theirs.