Yesterday, I wrote a post saying how surprised I was that Russia and Qatar won the right to host the World Cup. I thought it had gone right down to the wire between Russia and England with Russia eventually getting the honour. But, just after I finished the post, I was then surprised to see that England only racked up two votes by FIFA.
I thought it was a joke that England didn't get the World Cup, so I guess you know how much of a joke I think it is that they could only manage two votes. FIFA said England have the media to blame but I thought you gave the honour to the nation with best bid, and England had the best bid. Yet again, FIFA have made themselves look like tools.
This leads me to believe that BBC and "Panorama" knew what they were talking about. If you didn't see the show, it was investigating if there was any bribery by bidding nations towards the FIFA Board. I read the magazine "FourFourTwo" and in a poll, 17.1% of people said that Sepp Blatter and FIFA is the biggest problem facing football. I'd have to, to some extent, agree with that.
Sepp Blatter announced that two new nations would be hosting the World Cup. I don't know if he was saying that because that was the truth or because that was the direction FIFA were heading in, to try and give to nations that hadn't hosted a World Cup to try and promote football in that country. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, but if it is it's a bit of a joke.
You should give it to the nation that you know has the best bid and is going to put on a great show. Who better to give it to than the founders of the game, England. Why not the world champions, Spain (who were obviously bidding along side Portugal).
Instead they decide to give it to a nation that knows a bit about football but doesn't really look nice (Russia) and a nation that looks beautiful but doesn't have a clue about the game (Qatar).
I would love to hear any comments you may have.