mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
Yep. That's arrested to me.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Blatter and Platini lose appeal... *** Update: Platini detained ***
- Thread starter essbee
- Start date
Yep. That's arrested to me.
maltaseagull
Well-known member
How come Blatter is still free ?
seagullsslimjim
New member
- Sep 26, 2003
- 701
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
The old boys club will ensure this NEVER happens. There are as many fingers in the pie as there are dead asian slave labourers.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,269
Platini. Shamed. Guilty
"No love, I haven't been arrested...no...no I'm just being detained by the police and being forced to answer some questions they have which involve my actions...no, definitely not arrested. OK. Got to go now, bye!"
blue-shifted
Banned
So where are we? Three years out. What would be the practicalities and downsides of stripping Qatar of the tournament?
FIFA gets sued by Qatar for the tournament profits and (financial) costs so far.
New nation needs to be willing and able to take on the planning and execution of the tournament. Hmm, looks suspiciously like England, given we bidded originally. This would be another barrier as everyone hates us even more than they did at the time of the bid.
All the middle east nations sympathetic to Qatar (OK not many) will take it as a massive snub. The oil men who own City and PSG etc will be bringing their influence to bear to make sure it doesn't happen.
What have I missed?
FIFA gets sued by Qatar for the tournament profits and (financial) costs so far.
New nation needs to be willing and able to take on the planning and execution of the tournament. Hmm, looks suspiciously like England, given we bidded originally. This would be another barrier as everyone hates us even more than they did at the time of the bid.
All the middle east nations sympathetic to Qatar (OK not many) will take it as a massive snub. The oil men who own City and PSG etc will be bringing their influence to bear to make sure it doesn't happen.
What have I missed?
Although not entirely relevant to your specific question, it's probably best not forget the deaths of thousands of slave labourers?
Who could have foreseen a World Cup staged in Qatar would be such a kerfuffle.
Iggle Piggle
Well-known member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 5,959
It's a proper #disgrace job this.
In an international court? Mmm. There would be (in the scenario where FIFA withdrew the WC because of corruption) plenty of evidence of said corruption. So the evidence to the court would be that Qatar bribed FIFA to give them the WC, and then they're complaining FIFA have subsequently withdrawn the WC in a bid to tackle corruption. Yeah, good luck with that.
dejavuatbtn
Well-known member
Football is so corrupt at all levels in all countries. More gravy for the hangers-on. Make as many bucks as possible for the least effort. It’s no surprise as greed has taken over all big business across the globe - all funded by those who can least afford it. A sad state of affairs and a shame for the national game.
You missed the fact that we didn't bid for it, so didn't lose out to Qatar. We bid for 2018 and lost out to Russia.
There's absolutely no chance of nations ganging up against FIFA's WC. It's a move that, probably, wouldn't be supported by half a dozen countries,
Not Andy Naylor
Well-known member
Blatter voted for the USA.
AmexRuislip
Retired Spy 🕵️♂️
Ugly face of the beautiful game..........
The 2015 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) bribery scandal has all the hallmarks of a Shakespearian melodrama: money, deceit and the meteoric fall of the villain – former FIFA president Sepp Blatter (who has not been charged by US authorities and maintains his innocence of any wrongdoing). A decade on from the initial investigation, the full extent of the fraud is still being unearthed, with new indictments shedding further light on this intricate web of criminality and alleged criminality. The plot centres on ‘rampant… and deep-rooted’ corruption linked to – among other things – awarding the 2018 and 2022 FIFA world cups to Russia and Qatar respectively. The inquiry has resulted in 26 guilty pleas and 42 indictments to date, with new characters being drawn into the tragedy.
Despite consistently denying these allegations, Russia and Qatar have now been accused by the US of bribing FIFA officials to secure the coveted hosting spots. The April 2020 indictment charged a host of actors, including marketing company Full Play Group SA and former media executives from 21st Century Fox, with crimes including money laundering and wire fraud for their roles in (allegedly dishonestly) securing broadcasting and marketing rights for both world cups. The indictment states that the former presidents of South American governing body Conmebol and the Brazil Federation (Nicolás Leoz and Ricardo Teixeira respectively) received bribes to vote for Qatar. Teixeira denies the allegations and an appeal against FIFA’s determination is currently being considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Leoz died last year. The presidents of Concacaf (the North and Central American and Caribbean governing body) and the Guatemalan Federation were allegedly bribed to cast votes for Russia. Both pleaded guilty at trial. Fox officials Hernan Lopez and Carlos Martinez were named as having paid Conmebol representatives to secure broadcasting rights, allegations which they deny.
Red card
Due to the global reach of the wrongdoing, it is plausible that other jurisdictions may soon join in on the action. None would be better placed than the UK, owing to the ambit of our robust anti-corruption and money laundering laws.
An obvious example is section 328 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, whereby it is an offence if a person ‘enters into or becomes concerned in an arrangement which he knows or suspects facilitates (by whatever means) the acquisition, retention, use or control of criminal property’. If the US proceedings render guilty verdicts, which by-proxy would condemn both hosting nations as having acted unlawfully, UK companies who secure the commercial rights to the 2022 games could be accused under English law of the offence of entering into an arrangement that they ‘know’ facilitates criminality. Even while waiting for a US judgment, English law may still be called into play regarding historic arrangements in relation to the 2018 games. There has been serious suspicion regarding the lawfulness of both the Russian and Qatar wins for years. As section 328 simply requires ‘suspicion’ that arrangements facilitate illegality, arrangements entered into for the 2018 cup could also be caught (as would those for the 2022 tournament).
Watching from the sidelines
As the governing body of international football, FIFA has played the Shakespearian antagonist’s role deftly. In light of the barrage of new evidence and mounting charges against its execs, the FIFA’s ethics committee’s decision to clear Russia and Qatar of wrongdoing as a result of its own internal investigation has attracted strong criticism. It is also interesting that despite the global implications of the fraud, the US and Swiss authorities are the only nations to have launched prosecutorial action. However, although the UK has the requisite arsenal of legislative tools, it is perhaps unlikely that any international action will take place while the US leads the charge. In cases where corruption runs deep, our well-resourced friends across the pond may be in a better position to hunt down more avenues of criminality. Nevertheless, we may start to see trickle-down litigation in other jurisdictions in the wake of any convictions in the US proceedings. It will be hard to ignore the potential criminality of interlinked commercial agreements for broadcasting rights et al in the UK, if what they are set to broadcast is deemed to be the result of an unlawfully won World Cup bid.
Additionally, we may not have to wait for a US outcome to get the ball rolling overseas in light of the latest twist in the tale.
In May, Israeli bank Bank Hapoalim BM (BHBM) and its wholly owned subsidiary Hapoalim (Switzerland) Ltd (BHS) entered into a three-year non-prosecution agreement (NPA) for their involvement with the scandal. Both entities admitted to conspiring with marketing executives to launder over $20m worth of bribes linked to FIFA from December 2010 to February 2015, agreeing to pay the Department of Justice over $30m as part of a financial penalty. As these charges are interconnected with the broader issues of the 2018 and 2022 bids, the fact that the NPA has secured an admission of wrongdoing regarding interlinked activities may be enough to engage both the ‘suspicion’ and ‘knowing’ thresholds of section 328, allowing the UK to enter swiftly, stage left.
Whether this happens remains to be seen. In the meantime, let us not forget the words of Claudius in Hamlet: ‘In the corrupted currents of this world, offence’s gilded hand may shove by justice, and oft is seen the wicked prize itself buys out the law.’"
It'll be interesting to see how all this will pans out after the current pandemic has subsided.
Only winners will be the lawyers
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice-points/ugly-face-of-the-beautiful-game/5104786.article
The 2015 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) bribery scandal has all the hallmarks of a Shakespearian melodrama: money, deceit and the meteoric fall of the villain – former FIFA president Sepp Blatter (who has not been charged by US authorities and maintains his innocence of any wrongdoing). A decade on from the initial investigation, the full extent of the fraud is still being unearthed, with new indictments shedding further light on this intricate web of criminality and alleged criminality. The plot centres on ‘rampant… and deep-rooted’ corruption linked to – among other things – awarding the 2018 and 2022 FIFA world cups to Russia and Qatar respectively. The inquiry has resulted in 26 guilty pleas and 42 indictments to date, with new characters being drawn into the tragedy.
Despite consistently denying these allegations, Russia and Qatar have now been accused by the US of bribing FIFA officials to secure the coveted hosting spots. The April 2020 indictment charged a host of actors, including marketing company Full Play Group SA and former media executives from 21st Century Fox, with crimes including money laundering and wire fraud for their roles in (allegedly dishonestly) securing broadcasting and marketing rights for both world cups. The indictment states that the former presidents of South American governing body Conmebol and the Brazil Federation (Nicolás Leoz and Ricardo Teixeira respectively) received bribes to vote for Qatar. Teixeira denies the allegations and an appeal against FIFA’s determination is currently being considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Leoz died last year. The presidents of Concacaf (the North and Central American and Caribbean governing body) and the Guatemalan Federation were allegedly bribed to cast votes for Russia. Both pleaded guilty at trial. Fox officials Hernan Lopez and Carlos Martinez were named as having paid Conmebol representatives to secure broadcasting rights, allegations which they deny.
Red card
Due to the global reach of the wrongdoing, it is plausible that other jurisdictions may soon join in on the action. None would be better placed than the UK, owing to the ambit of our robust anti-corruption and money laundering laws.
An obvious example is section 328 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, whereby it is an offence if a person ‘enters into or becomes concerned in an arrangement which he knows or suspects facilitates (by whatever means) the acquisition, retention, use or control of criminal property’. If the US proceedings render guilty verdicts, which by-proxy would condemn both hosting nations as having acted unlawfully, UK companies who secure the commercial rights to the 2022 games could be accused under English law of the offence of entering into an arrangement that they ‘know’ facilitates criminality. Even while waiting for a US judgment, English law may still be called into play regarding historic arrangements in relation to the 2018 games. There has been serious suspicion regarding the lawfulness of both the Russian and Qatar wins for years. As section 328 simply requires ‘suspicion’ that arrangements facilitate illegality, arrangements entered into for the 2018 cup could also be caught (as would those for the 2022 tournament).
Watching from the sidelines
As the governing body of international football, FIFA has played the Shakespearian antagonist’s role deftly. In light of the barrage of new evidence and mounting charges against its execs, the FIFA’s ethics committee’s decision to clear Russia and Qatar of wrongdoing as a result of its own internal investigation has attracted strong criticism. It is also interesting that despite the global implications of the fraud, the US and Swiss authorities are the only nations to have launched prosecutorial action. However, although the UK has the requisite arsenal of legislative tools, it is perhaps unlikely that any international action will take place while the US leads the charge. In cases where corruption runs deep, our well-resourced friends across the pond may be in a better position to hunt down more avenues of criminality. Nevertheless, we may start to see trickle-down litigation in other jurisdictions in the wake of any convictions in the US proceedings. It will be hard to ignore the potential criminality of interlinked commercial agreements for broadcasting rights et al in the UK, if what they are set to broadcast is deemed to be the result of an unlawfully won World Cup bid.
Additionally, we may not have to wait for a US outcome to get the ball rolling overseas in light of the latest twist in the tale.
In May, Israeli bank Bank Hapoalim BM (BHBM) and its wholly owned subsidiary Hapoalim (Switzerland) Ltd (BHS) entered into a three-year non-prosecution agreement (NPA) for their involvement with the scandal. Both entities admitted to conspiring with marketing executives to launder over $20m worth of bribes linked to FIFA from December 2010 to February 2015, agreeing to pay the Department of Justice over $30m as part of a financial penalty. As these charges are interconnected with the broader issues of the 2018 and 2022 bids, the fact that the NPA has secured an admission of wrongdoing regarding interlinked activities may be enough to engage both the ‘suspicion’ and ‘knowing’ thresholds of section 328, allowing the UK to enter swiftly, stage left.
Whether this happens remains to be seen. In the meantime, let us not forget the words of Claudius in Hamlet: ‘In the corrupted currents of this world, offence’s gilded hand may shove by justice, and oft is seen the wicked prize itself buys out the law.’"
It'll be interesting to see how all this will pans out after the current pandemic has subsided.
Only winners will be the lawyers
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice-points/ugly-face-of-the-beautiful-game/5104786.article
SeagullDubai
Well-known member
- May 13, 2016
- 3,561
One can only guess how many years this has been going on and the amount of money that has found its way into the pockets of the officials. All under bloaters watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.skysports.com/football/...-and-eight-months-for-breaches-of-ethics-code
Former FIFA president Sepp Blatter's ban from football has been imposed for multiple breaches of FIFA’s ethics code and comes into force when a current suspension ends in October; former secretary general Jerome Valcke to serve same ban
banjo
GOSBTS
Sepp Blatter and Michel Platini to go on trial in June to face corruption charges.
The Swiss case centres on a request for payment for advisory work Platini did for the then-Fifa president Blatter, 86, between 1998 and 2002.
The Swiss case centres on a request for payment for advisory work Platini did for the then-Fifa president Blatter, 86, between 1998 and 2002.