World Cup Hosts 2018
- Thread starter Rotty
- Start date
They know something we dont?
I really cant see how we cant get it, many of the worlds top clubs,good transport links,all stadiums infrastructure in place. By then hopefully our youngsters have reached their potential and we do a 1966
I really cant see how we cant get it, many of the worlds top clubs,good transport links,all stadiums infrastructure in place. By then hopefully our youngsters have reached their potential and we do a 1966
Doesn't matter about the odds, IMO we don't have a cat in hell's chance. I'll be amazed if we're not bottom of the voting.
I agree with Panorama in that FIFA are corrupt to the core, but at the end of the day that program ruined what small chance we had. FIFA don't and won't like being told about how corrupt they are, no matter how true it is.
All in the "public interest" eh? The BBC should be fined for it, quite frankly.
I agree with Panorama in that FIFA are corrupt to the core, but at the end of the day that program ruined what small chance we had. FIFA don't and won't like being told about how corrupt they are, no matter how true it is.
All in the "public interest" eh? The BBC should be fined for it, quite frankly.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
Corruption does more harm than good, don't blame the whistle blowers on the news atm.
If we can host it, great. Lots of money for us. By then we should more e.g. stadia about if Spurs/Pool/Everton have completed theirs. The Olympic Stadium will be available as well.
If we can host it, great. Lots of money for us. By then we should more e.g. stadia about if Spurs/Pool/Everton have completed theirs. The Olympic Stadium will be available as well.
Last edited:
I really hope we both have egg face after tomorrow but this is what i think also.
It's not about "whistle blowing". It's about the BBC airing it right before the vote. What was wrong with delaying it a week?
Then they have the bottle to say it's "in the public interest". I mean what a load of first class crap, really. At least have the decency to be honest.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 2,218
On talk sport a couple of days ago a Russian jouralist said that if Putin didn't show up thats an indication that russia haven't won the bid, he also said England will
get knocked out by the second round and not even make it to the end result. Lets see what happens tomorrow some saying we got it in the bag some saying we got no chance.
get knocked out by the second round and not even make it to the end result. Lets see what happens tomorrow some saying we got it in the bag some saying we got no chance.
Because no-one would have given a **** about it if it had been aired in a week.
Thankyou for proving my point. The BBC put their program above our bid.
That's why they should be fined, a lot of public money has gone into this effort, what gives the BBC the right to ruin it for the sake of viewing figures?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
People are looking at the BBC in completely the wrong light, the were merely trying to help our bid team by highlighting potential bride candidates 
This is Fifa don't forget, and the bottom line is our bid is said to be the most profitable, largely because we have people and stadiums and resources to charge a higher price for tickets than most other countries that will be bidding. Fifa care about cash in their pockets and the bosses I'm sure as with anything else will give themselves a nice bonus for the extra income.
This is Fifa don't forget, and the bottom line is our bid is said to be the most profitable, largely because we have people and stadiums and resources to charge a higher price for tickets than most other countries that will be bidding. Fifa care about cash in their pockets and the bosses I'm sure as with anything else will give themselves a nice bonus for the extra income.
You asked what was wrong with airing it in a week. The point is the show would have been as good as worthless in a week, it had to be aired when it was to have any impact. Are the BBC not allowed to make any programs that expose companies/organisations and subsequently put jobs at risk, or just ones involving the most popular sport in the country?
Essentially this comes down to whether or not you're happy to look the other way with the corruption for the benefits of bringing the World Cup here. I guess some people have principles, but then we are talking about football
I'm saying that the bid for the WC 2018, which involves millions of pounds of public money, not to mention massive effort for the team putting the bid together, should be protected from some corporation only interested in lining their fat cats' pockets?
Essentially this comes down to whether or not you're happy to look the other way with the corruption for the benefits of bringing the World Cup here. I guess some people have principles, but then we are talking about football
I'm not willing to look the other way. But what good does showing the program do? Nothing - people will carry on their normal lives. Instead it ruins the bid, which would have brought billions to an economy that needs it.
The only good it does is boost ratings for the BBC.
I'm also pretty annoyed that they hid behind the whole "public interest" lies and smoke - as if they actually give a **** beyond their own profits.
I'm saying that the bid for the WC 2018, which involves millions of pounds of public money, not to mention massive effort for the team putting the bid together, should be protected from some corporation only interested in lining their fat cats' pockets?
I'm not willing to look the other way. But what good does showing the program do? Nothing - people will carry on their normal lives. Instead it ruins the bid, which would have brought billions to an economy that needs it.
The only good it does is boost ratings for the BBC.
I'm also pretty annoyed that they hid behind the whole "public interest" lies and smoke - as if they actually give a **** beyond their own profits.
After all my rambling, I do actually agree with you
Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with the Panorama programs on principle, I know they all to often extend to a chat over the coffee machine the morning after, and not a single moment further. We just collectively don't give that much of a **** unless it's effecting us directly. Logic does unfortunately suggest we should have kept the program quiet until the bid had been finalised.because the panorama program had little effect. even a guy it focused on said pretty much said that it wouldnt put him off his almost certain bid for us. i guess other people have been making similar comments and the bookies pretty much know how many votes we are going to get
fined for what ? telling the truth ? the public are interested in the truth. so it IS public interest. like someone says no one would have cared next week. it would be too late.
we have spent years convincing people to vote for us. one program is not going to stop them. the fact that FIFA will make the most cash with it being here is all thats important
Last edited:
It certainly didn't gain us any votes?
The public couldn't care less about the programme. If they did, there would have been something done about the corruption, rather than have FIFA investigate it "internally" - I mean come on, what are they going to do?
"Ah yes, we've found that we're... naughty. Slap on the wrist for us. As you were..."
I hope you're right, but I stand by my comments.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 325
- Location
- Bailieborough Co. Cavan
I'am irish and i have to say i would love to see england get the world cup as it would be great to see all the great stadiums in england hold a great event . I think though tonights crap at the Aston Villa Vs. Birmingham game might put doubts into FIFAS mind but i hope it doesn't at all and its mostly because the english are viewed as the hooligans of football but in actual fact the english game probably has the least amount of hooliganism in the world right now .
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
To be fair, they seemingly dredged up a lot of VERY OLD rumours and allegations, with some truth, that most people already knew about.
If this was hard hitting proof of CURRENT, or unheard of corruption, then it was relevant but it doesn't come across as required as much as "whats coming up we can try and SOUND controversial about to GET VIEWERS, rather than actually provide hard hitting relevant content".
AS in, they almost realistically rehashed an old program purely because the subject matter matched with an up coming event, nothing more or less, it wasn't shocking news, or new, or particularly relevant, iI can't think of the word, this isn't serious journalism, but shock journalisn, hoping the situation adn context currently going on provides the story rather than the program itself, which was tame, old news, boring and stupid.
BBC trying to get their names mentioned in all the stories going on more than anything else, as a publicity stunt, at the potential cost of jobs, billions of income and making the country look stupid its incredibly selfish to broadcast the program when they did.
Absolutely. It was clearly not in the public interest and could have easily been screened a couple of weeks later. I do hope it’s another nail in the coffin of the evil empire but not at the expense of us not winning the bid.
Anyway, fingers crossed and good luck to the bid team today.