We were so naive. (We, obviously, is me. I don't want to admit it, so I'll paint you into the picture with my grammatical wizardry.)
The global soccer community has watched as FIFA has played men's World Cups in Russia and Qatar (in fairness to Infantino, those rights were awarded (corruptly - so, so corruptly) before he took over), as FIFA kowtowed to the Qataris and squashed players' right to support gay rights, as Infantino offered a bizarre, rambling speech during that competition ("I feel African, I feel gay..."), as scores of migrant workers perished while building the stadia for that stained World Cup, as - in an amazing coincidence - Infantino moved to Doha, as the men's World Cup was expanded to 48 teams despite the complexity that adds to the competitive structure, as multiple federations failed to pay their 2023 Women's World Cup squads on time, and as the Spanish federation demonstrated its institutional misogny even as its team WON THE WORLD CUP.
All of that gross, nakedly corrupt institutional venality was in keeping with FIFA's legacy. And this month's news about the 2030 men's World Cup and the knock-on implications for the 2034 competition were of a slimy piece with everything that's come before, and even more so.
On October 4, FIFA announced that the 2030 World Cup will be hosted by Spain, Portugal, and Morocco. (The 2026 event will be held in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.) And in a nod to the event being held on the 100th anniversary of the first World Cup in Montevideo, the tournament will kick off with a single game being hosted by each of Uruguay, Paraguay, and Argentina.
Unwieldy, but interesting - that was my first thought. If the U.S., Canada, and Mexico can host, the more geographically compact trio of Spain, Portugal, and Morocco certainly can. And having another Cup on African soil is a positive...waiiiit just a goshdarn minute!
FIFA's rules stipulate that the same continent can't host consecutive World Cups, and with the 2026 event in North America, our continent is effectively sidelined for a while. And with FIFA's "celebratory" inclusion of three South American games in 2030 on top of the Moroccan addition, the field for 2034 has been reduced to Asia and Oceania.
At the same time it announced the 2030 hosts, FIFA declared that bidding for the 2034 event would be closed next year, which is a departure from the previous plan to vote in 2027 or 2028. It also voted to reduce the number of fully-certified stadiums required of a host nation from seven to four.
Australia and New Zealand have been planning a bid for the 2034 Cup, and they're both eligible and proven, having just hosted a very successful women's event. They also have as much chance as Jamal Khashoggi did in that room.
I confess, friends, that I was surprised to see FIFA's corrupt machinations laid this bare. And then I was surprised that I was surprised. This isn't new, just grosser.
The headline of this post references a quote by the late Italian (and New York Cosmos) great Giorgio Chinaglia on the early days of SiriusXMFC as he described the state of the modern game a decade or so ago. The various shows on that platform use Chinaglia's audio of that quote to this day to cut through whatever confusing decision leagues and teams and FIFA make. It has never been more true than in describing FIFA's near-certain move to award its crown jewel to a repressive regime that's embarked on a guns-blazing campaign of sportswashing, splashing its unlimited cash to curry favor and gain legitimacy on the world stage.
I get it, but god damn I can't help but continue to find it disgusting.
Prolly still watch it, though, which I suppose is what FIFA understands best of all.
Posts
23 comments:
You boycotted watching Dan Snyder's team for disgusting behavior...
RIP Suzanne Somers.
Bad american football product and the world cup are not equal in the boycott equation.
Thanks, Rootsy
I do what I can to advance the discourse. I usually end up killing it instead. C'est la vie.
i feel like rootsy is on my side here.
is knapp in this way weird video with mark zuckerberg?
https://twitter.com/JoePompliano/status/1714434704005345340
One of those guys could definitely be Knapp, assuming he's aged unreasonably well.
So... just to keep this discussion lingering... do we only boycott what we don't have much of an interest in anyway? Real sacrifice is the path to change!
Look, gheorghies, I know of which I speak. Sometime in the 1990's I boycotted the Wendy's on Route 29 near George Mason Drive. They mangled so, so many of my drive-thru orders that I simply had to bring the hammer down. I put them on probation, and then -- in sheer defiance of my warning shot -- they forgot my chili on the very next time I cruised through 'twixt post-work beers and bed. That was it. I never went back... despite badly wanting a double with cheese/no onions across many instances into the future. I lived in the adjacent neighborhood not once, not twice, but thrice between 1993 and 2005, long before the legendary Chicken Sandwich Wars. A Spicy Chicken Sandwich could have hit the spot many, many times. But no. I have not returned, and I know they felt the sting*. But I am nothing if not a man of strict principle.
*The Wendy's in question appears to still be in business, but I see a meager 3.5 rating. Take that, Wendy.
i recall that boycott. we also, if memory serves, boycotted the salvadoran nightclub right across the street from that wendy's that didn't let us in one night when we were multiple sheets to the wind.
did we not break the boycott when our pipes froze and burst and we had nowhere to use the toilet for a couple of days? we lived like goddamn kings* back then.
*animals
Yes. And those were great days. Cheap beer, wiffleball, Lost Dog, and the Cowboy Café.
someone should write a movie about those days. or at least a series of blog posts.
Boycott Sal's!
What’s your take on people who whistle loudly in public? Awesome that they are chipper and bringing music into the world? Or annoying weirdos?
Where are they? Bathroom is weird. Mowing the lawn is not. Standing behind you in a line is annoying. Walking the dog less so. I guess if they are outside and moving around it's fine. Also, what are they whistling? If it's "If I Only Had A Brain" they're fine--I used to work with a guy who whistled that while walking down the hall and I always thought it was funny.
i've been known to freestyle whistle while walking the dog. just did it at the beer store, too.
Like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZwsK36BzcY
I don't always love the whistling, but I'm forgiving if it's not an extremely inappropriate place to do it. I saw a guy at the grocery store the other day whistling his heart out. I felt good for him that was happy and secure enough to let it rip.
The sonuvabitch could whistle better than anybody I ever heard. He'd be making his bed, or hanging up stuff in a closet - he was always hanging stuff up in the closet - it drove me crazy - and he'd be whistling while he did it, if he wasn't talking in this raspy voice. He could take something very jazzy, like "Tin Roof Blues," and whistle it so nice and easy - right while he was hanging stuff up in the closet - that it could kill you. Naturally, I never told him I thought he was a terrific whistler. I mean you don't just go up to somebody and say, "You're a terrific whistler." But I roomed with him for about two whole months, even though he bored me till I was half crazy, because he was such a terrific whistler, the best I ever heard. So I don't know about bores. Maybe you shouldn't feel sorry if you see some swell girl getting married to them. They don't hurt anybody, most of them, and maybe they're all terrific whistlers or something. Who the hell knows? Not me.
I'm talking about Harris Macklin, of course.
This is why we keep an English teacher on staff, even though he claims to hate Salinger.
he's got more stories than jd got salinger.
This is why I adore GTB. I ask a simple/dumb question and get brilliant answers.
Post a Comment