The initial furore over the abject failure of England's bit to host the soccer word cup has subsided.
New things take attention away from it and it sometimes seems that there is quite a limited public attention span for such things. Politicians and officials probably rely rather strongly on that. I imagine Joseph (Sepp) Blatter and his cronies are... having arguably decided attack is the best form of defence.
England's bid to host the soccer world cup was solid. It offered a concentration of some of the finest actually existing venues anywhere on the planet. There is a transport infrastructure and the country is stable.
It seems unlikely that, all else being equal, the bid should have secured more than two votes. while there is no guarantee of victory it seems unlikely such a solid bid would fare quite so badly.
One might also wonder at the countries FIFA actually selected, Russia will need to do a fair bit of building and one wonders at the attraction of a tiny hot middle eastern state such as Quatar with very little soccer related infrastructure that if built might be considered to be overkill, given their population (less that that of the county of Derbishire., much less than the City of Birmingham)
It seems clear more than two votes had been confidentially promised to the England bid team. At least 6 to be precise.
It says something that the English Football Association's acting chief Roger Burden, known for being 'above board', has unequivocally stated that he can no longer trust members of Fifa.
Three prominent members, Nicolas Leoz, Issa Hayatou and Ricardo Teixeira are implicated it taking money from a Sports Marketing company in exchange for being awarded contracts.
There is a strong suggestion, apparently backed by evidence that FIFA is blighted by dishonesty, and corruption.
Now Fifa vice-president Jack Warner, (allegedly one of those who had indicated, apparently inaccurately if they did, that they would support the England bid) has justified what looks suspiciously like a planned 'revenge' by claiming: "Fifa could not have voted for England having been insulted by their media in the worst possible way." "... To do so would have been the ultimate insult to Fifa."
It is perhaps time the England no longer lent FIFA credibility by taking it seriously.
In any event England are unlikely to get a look in. Members of FIFA have apparently taken against England because the UK press reported on some of their corruption.
One suspects it will likely be a cold day in hell before FIFA gives England the time of day, let alone anything else. Seeing England have little to loose it would seem to make sense to take the lead in an unenviable task and to do its best to unrelentingly root out any corrupt individuals and attempt to force some real anti corruption rules upon FIFA.
Unleashing if not the dogs of, war, then the press, upon FIFA. Possibly even with a quiet information related nudge or two from MI5.
It might also be worth seriously considering starting something like a Commonwealth Football cup. Maybe put our money where our mouth is and show how things can be done.
Possibly it could be based around nations, possibly around teams. Possibly best of all more on the lines the FA cup. We should ensure it is absolutely honest and above board. Matches could be played in many nations improving the game across the board and earning smaller nations the chance to earn money also to develop and showcase talent. It could be a fresh breeze and good for the game.