At what point would it be worth it for clubs to just decouple from FIFA and start a new international federation without all the bullshit? I know as long as there's massive amounts of money involved corruption is bound to seep in, but the optimist in me wants to believe a new federation could be structured to be slightly more resistant to it.
That's the problem. You can create a new thing with the initial leadership that is well intended, but say 250 years later some one less well intended gets voted in charge. So something smaller like FIFA and IOC would be much more susceptible as the voting base is much smaller and easier to corrupt.
> thing with the initial leadership that is well intended, but say 250 years later some one less well intended gets voted in charge
The fundamental problem with FIFA is the revenue body is also the sport’s standards and adjudication body. Split those functions, with one selling tickets and divvying up spoils, while a separate committee polices the sport, and you put aside a lot of the corruption issues unique to FIFA.
Corruption has been part of the game since forever. One of the most infamous world cups was in Argentina during a brutal dictatorship. The one who threw people out of airplanes and took babies from pregnant women.
National clubs? They can and UEFA considered it but the problem is always buy-in.
FIFA has a billions in revenue and reserves. Many of the supranational areas are developing and need that income support, at least it looks like outreach, even if it's bribery-shaped. Even in developed nations the people who make the decisions have long tenures and like paid lunches and free tickets. Tough one to crack.
AFAIK, you can’t actually bring criminal charges as a civilian. You make a complaint to the public prosecutor and they choose to press criminal charges. Some crimes are only prosecuted if somebody complains. And obviously public prosecutors have far more legal power than civilians.
I wonder how sure UEFA is that the prosecutors will prosecute.
No, UEFA is performing discovery in Florida on FIFA's US affiliates to gather evidence of Infantino's corruption. The suit against Infantino will still be filed in Switzerland since that's where FIFA is headquartered (in Zürich).
Guidelines explicitly mention this type of submissions:
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
You think it is an interesting submission, but it isn't even a particularly relevant step in the ongoing soccer drama.
For the HN curious: What was wrong with the plan to further commercialize football via creating an SPV for the World Cup?
I detest Infantino and the grotesque corruption in FIFA, like in IOC and a certain administration. But UEFA Champions League and Nations League are the model Infantino proposed?
Another note is that I see a match of my favorite club every fortnight and have gotten used to the economics of being the 1500th club worldwide. Money changed football, but that change was 60 years ago. No manna from heaven is going to change that. So I’ll be gentle: without graft and corruption, and with adequate distribution, more money /could/ even mean better conditions for youth worldwide (/naive dreams).
Because there is zero reason to sell off parts of FIFA to external investors. FIFA is rich and profitable and can fund everything themselves with cash or loans.
24 comments
[ 0.25 ms ] story [ 16.9 ms ] threadThe fundamental problem with FIFA is the revenue body is also the sport’s standards and adjudication body. Split those functions, with one selling tickets and divvying up spoils, while a separate committee polices the sport, and you put aside a lot of the corruption issues unique to FIFA.
FIFA has a billions in revenue and reserves. Many of the supranational areas are developing and need that income support, at least it looks like outreach, even if it's bribery-shaped. Even in developed nations the people who make the decisions have long tenures and like paid lunches and free tickets. Tough one to crack.
AFAIK, you can’t actually bring criminal charges as a civilian. You make a complaint to the public prosecutor and they choose to press criminal charges. Some crimes are only prosecuted if somebody complains. And obviously public prosecutors have far more legal power than civilians.
I wonder how sure UEFA is that the prosecutors will prosecute.
ok who?
Only governments (state, local, federal) can bring about criminal proceedings.
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
You think it is an interesting submission, but it isn't even a particularly relevant step in the ongoing soccer drama.
I'd rather not read all the non-front page submissions [https://news.ycombinator.com/newest] and paste this under them.
I detest Infantino and the grotesque corruption in FIFA, like in IOC and a certain administration. But UEFA Champions League and Nations League are the model Infantino proposed?
Another note is that I see a match of my favorite club every fortnight and have gotten used to the economics of being the 1500th club worldwide. Money changed football, but that change was 60 years ago. No manna from heaven is going to change that. So I’ll be gentle: without graft and corruption, and with adequate distribution, more money /could/ even mean better conditions for youth worldwide (/naive dreams).
This money will only go into Infantino and friends’ pockets. Not an ounce of it would ever touch youth programs.