FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Qatar and the World Cup

by

The delusionary forces of football commentary have been bringing out the scrubbers, hoping that allegations of corruption, deep in the bowels of FIFA and World Cup bids, will simply wash away.  Gavin Brown of The Metro wishes that the “football do the talking” after the “stench” of such allegations evidently made him pall in disappointment.  With the tournament now starting, the pessimists and down cast brigade had to be given their silencing orders.

Brazil is the appropriate venue for what has been termed the world game, but Brazil, if you read the appropriate sources, is entirely inappropriate for many who see a government confused by its priorities. Football, for all its visual merits, does not take people across a city. It doesn’t ameliorate conditions of poverty – at least for the vast majority of people. It has become, at least at the elite level, extortionately expensive.

It is true that South America has managed to bring the poem to football, to see its players as majestic, graceful, even libidinal. Hysterical outbursts at the scoring of a goal resonate with orgasmic potency. This does nothing to powder or conceal the ugliness that is the modern game.

For too long, the aesthetic delights of “football” have been doing the sort of talking that simply relegates the game to that of marionettes battling on a pitch. The true players, the speech givers, and the policy makers, are the ones brokering the deals and forging the agreements that whittle reserves and see other sources of money vanish. Brown assumes this to be axiomatic with big sporting events. If you want spectacles, you are bound to get some dirt in the master mix.

Qatar’s 2022 bid was one such show, and more countries are calling for a full review of the award. Australia, for instance, is seeking to recoup over $40 million expended in the bid, suggesting rather imaginatively that a clean process (is there such a thing in this sport?) would have led to an improvement in their chances. The better view is expressed by David Hill, the former Soccer Australia boss who suggested that the Rudd Government had been “mad” to throw public funds at an enterprise “when everybody knew the process was crook.”

The individual sprung in the act is bound to find some formidable excuse, though the race card is a fanciful one, even by the standards of a FIFA chief.  Sepp Blatter, who feels the FIFA crown slipping from his heavily greased grasp, did not have much time for the suggestions that the Qatar bid was mucked and tucked from the start.  The British media, noisy and vindictive with claims of foul play, have become a distinct target. “Once again, there is the sort of storm against FIFA relating to the Qatar World Cup.”

The British side of the bidding has tended to come up short, with its 2018 effort receiving the loneliest of solitary votes.  Britain might well have been a pioneer of football, but it wasn’t a pioneer of football politics, a field it remains a conspicuous amateur in.

Rarely does Blatter reflect on the labyrinthine monster that is FIFA politics, its ducking and weaving the stuff of legend. If he is right to be annoyed about anything, it is simply the fact that Qatar is a standout in a rather rotten field. Bids for the World Cup tend to find company with Olympic ones. Ample amounts of cash will carry you far, and if you do have at least some good chance of getting the stadiums up and running by the opening date, few will complain.

The other feature of such monumental bids is personal. Blatter, following the legacy of other presidents before, cultivates fiefdoms and props supporters. He will reward those who are kind to him, the only problem being that such rewards don’t tend to be his.  He is looking for a fifth term.

To be fair to Blatter, the Qatari example is more specific to Mohamed bin Hammam, who had been busy stirring up enthusiasm among African and Asian nations for the state.  It is hard to surmise that Bin Hammam’s activity was off Blatter’s radar, having been FIFA’s vice-president.  Football is business, and winning World Cups off the field is arguably one of the biggest businesses there is.

Sponsors have been muttering about money that might be going to a bad cause. In what can only be a remarkable attack of conscience, upstanding corporate members such as Castrol. Budweiser, Adidas, Coca-Cola, Sony and Visa have expressed concern.  What if these allegations were true? The overfed cat, they fear, may be out of the bag. “Anything that detracts from the values of football, the values of the World Cup, the idea of fair play,” claimed James Quincey, President of Coca-Cola Europe, “is of concern to us, yes absolutely.”

Quincey is certainly over-egging the pudding here, not least because his company can hardly come to be regarded as a paragon of equitable practice. What game he is observing, and from what standpoint, is highly questionable. Fair play is a well and truly extinct animal when it comes to the multi-billion dollar industry that is world football. Unfair play, however, is rife and king.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:
June 28, 2016
Jonathan Cook
The Neoliberal Prison: Brexit Hysteria and the Liberal Mind
Paul Street
Bernie, Bakken, and Electoral Delusion: Letting Rich Guys Ruin Iowa and the World
Anthony DiMaggio
Fatally Flawed: the Bi-Partisan Travesty of American Health Care Reform
Mike King
The “Free State of Jones” in Trump’s America: Freedom Beyond White Imagination
Antonis Vradis
Stop Shedding Tears for the EU Monster: Brexit, the View From the Peloponnese
Omar Kassem
The End of the Atlantic Project: Slamming the Brakes on the Neoliberal Order
Binoy Kampmark
Brexit and the Neoliberal Revolt Against Jeremy Corbyn
Ruth Hopkins
Save Bear Butte: Mecca of the Lakota
Celestino Gusmao
Time to End Impunity for Suharto’’s Crimes in Indonesia and Timor-Leste
Thomas Knapp
SCOTUS: Amply Serving Law Enforcement’s Interests versus Society’s
Manuel E. Yepe
Capitalism is the Opposite of Democracy
Winslow Myers
Up Against the Wall
Chris Ernesto
Bernie’s “Political Revolution” = Vote for Clinton and the Neocons
Stephanie Van Hook
The Time for Silence is Over
Ajamu Nangwaya
Toronto’s Bathhouse Raids: Racialized, Queer Solidarity and Police Violence
June 27, 2016
Robin Hahnel
Brexit: Establishment Freak Out
James Bradley
Omar’s Motive
Gregory Wilpert – Michael Hudson
How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
Leonard Peltier
41 Years Since Jumping Bull (But 500 Years of Trauma)
Rev. William Alberts
Orlando: the Latest Victim of Radicalizing American Imperialism
Patrick Cockburn
Brexiteers Have Much in Common With Arab Spring Protesters
Franklin Lamb
How 100 Syrians, 200 Russians and 11 Dogs Out-Witted ISIS and Saved Palmyra
John Grant
Omar Mateen: The Answers are All Around Us
Dean Baker
In the Wake of Brexit Will the EU Finally Turn Away From Austerity?
Ralph Nader
The IRS and the Self-Minimization of Congressman Jason Chaffetz
Johan Galtung
Goodbye UK, Goodbye Great Britain: What Next?
Martha Pskowski
Detained in Dilley: Deportation and Asylum in Texas
Binoy Kampmark
Headaches of Empire: Brexit’s Effect on the United States
Dave Lindorff
Honest Election System Needed to Defeat Ruling Elite
Louisa Willcox
Delisting Grizzly Bears to Save the Endangered Species Act?
Jason Holland
The Tragedy of Nothing
Jeffrey St. Clair
Revolution Reconsidered: a Fragment (Guest Starring Bernard Sanders in the Role of Robespierre)
Weekend Edition
June 24, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
A Blow for Peace and Democracy: Why the British Said No to Europe
Pepe Escobar
Goodbye to All That: Why the UK Left the EU
Michael Hudson
Revolts of the Debtors: From Socrates to Ibn Khaldun
Andrew Levine
Summer Spectaculars: Prelude to a Tea Party?
Kshama Sawant
Beyond Bernie: Still Not With Her
Mike Whitney
¡Basta Ya, Brussels! British Voters Reject EU Corporate Slavestate
Tariq Ali
Panic in the House: Brexit as Revolt Against the Political Establishment
Paul Street
Miranda, Obama, and Hamilton: an Orwellian Ménage à Trois for the Neoliberal Age
Ellen Brown
The War on Weed is Winding Down, But Will Monsanto Emerge the Winner?
Gary Leupp
Why God Created the Two-Party System
Conn Hallinan
Brexit Vote: a Very British Affair (But Spain May Rock the Continent)
Ruth Fowler
England, My England
Jeffrey St. Clair
Lines Written on the Occasion of Bernie Sanders’ Announcement of His Intention to Vote for Hillary Clinton
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail