Jump to content

FIFA should now strip Russia of 2018


baron-pierreIV
 Share

Recommended Posts

Russians are Russian sympathizers are very strong in a majority of the federations and within the IOC. The Russian IOC members have been considered king-makers for about a decade now. Some credit them with London's victory over Paris for instance

Yeah, but those were friendly to Russia when they weren't rocking the boat..which is more than they're doing now. It doesn't mean they all view Russia's current moves as acceptable. The old fogeys retire, etc., etc., so things change over the years.

I just watched 1/2 hour of the IAAF Diamond League competition in Zurich and there wasn't a single Russian athlete shown. So how could Russia and her friends be in a majority of the federations when their athletes aren't even showing up in major T&F competitions??

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what FIFA would do if an alternate tournament were organized at the same time as the World Cup. (Perhaps a "Heritage Cup" to be played in England?) Because that's the only way to get countries to intentionally flunk out of World Cup qualification.

Well it would have to be sanctioned by FIFA or else if your FA sent a team then the FA would get kicked out of FIFA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of teams not competing in Russia, I can't see how the Netherlands can possibly field a team in 2018. I just can't wrap my head around the idea of them playing in a country that was directly responsible for the mass murder of 150 or so Dutch citizens.

How do the French compete at tournaments in Germany? How do the Irish compete in England?

Japan, Korea and Chna have 2,000 years of atrocities afaist each other. They manage to make it work. Heck, japan and Korea cohost end the World Cup

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do the French compete at tournaments in Germany? How do the Irish compete in England?

Japan, Korea and Chna have 2,000 years of atrocities afaist each other. They manage to make it work. Heck, japan and Korea cohost end the World Cup

Terrible comparison. None of these events happened a month ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrible comparison. None of these events happened a month ago.

Okay, so here's a better comparison..

1994 World Cup qualifying, Asian confederation. Final qualifying group included Iraq (shortly after Operation Desert Storm), as well as Iran and North Korea, both under economic sanctions by the United States. None of them wound up qualifying, but they were all in the picture. Based on that.. once again ask yourself do you really think Netherlands will refuse to compete in a World Cup held in Russia over an incident that by then will be several years old

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so here's a better comparison..

1994 World Cup qualifying, Asian confederation. Final qualifying group included Iraq (shortly after Operation Desert Storm), as well as Iran and North Korea, both under economic sanctions by the United States. None of them wound up qualifying, but they were all in the picture. Based on that.. once again ask yourself do you really think Netherlands will refuse to compete in a World Cup held in Russia over an incident that by then will be several years old

You're missing the point. These are separate issues. This is a country who had a bunch of their civilians blown out of the sky for no good reason. At least with the example you cited, there was a mutual conflict between those nations. The Dutch had a bunch of their citizens randomly killed, unprovoked, due to the negligence of the host nation. How can you possibly send a soccer team to play in the country that was responsible?

And the issue won't be several years old. The World Cup in Russia won't take place generations and decades removed from the incident. It will still be pretty fresh in the minds of the Dutch people. In addition, qualification for the World Cup starts next year, much closer to the events than the actual tournament. Ultimately, it will come down to whether the Dutch FA treats it as just a football tournament, and an opportunity to hoist the World Cup. They may even go to "stick it" to Russia. It'd be pretty awesome to see the Dutch smother Russia in a game. But with all this being said, I see the downing of the Malaysian Airlines flight as too big of an issue to ignore, and I can't see how the Dutch FA wouldn't seriously weigh their options.

Edited by ofan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're missing the point. These are separate issues. This is a country who had a bunch of their civilians blown out of the sky for no good reason. At least with the example you cited, there was a mutual conflict between those nations. The Dutch had a bunch of their citizens randomly killed, unprovoked, due to the negligence of the host nation. How can you possibly send a soccer team to play in the country that was responsible?

And the issue won't be several years old. The World Cup in Russia won't take place generations and decades removed from the incident. It will still be pretty fresh in the minds of the Dutch people. In addition, qualification for the World Cup starts next year, much closer to the events than the actual tournament. Ultimately, it will come down to whether the Dutch FA treats it as just a football tournament, and an opportunity to hoist the World Cup. They may even go to "stick it" to Russia. It'd be pretty awesome to see the Dutch smother Russia in a game. But with all this being said, I see the downing of the Malaysian Airlines flight as too big of an issue to ignore, and I can't see how the Dutch FA wouldn't seriously weigh their options.

None of the big teams will have Qualifying till at least 2016 Next year will only have the small countries with terrible teams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the big teams will have Qualifying till at least 2016 Next year will only have the small countries with terrible teams

European qualifiers work differently. They always mix major and minor teams. You are right though that qualifying only starts in 2016 - for Europe, as first Euro 2016 in France has to be over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the big teams will have Qualifying till at least 2016 Next year will only have the small countries with terrible teams

That's missing the WHOLE point. The point is do we let a big, aggressive nation, fomenting a rebellion next door and destabilzing a neighbor that was once part of its territory, get away with its bully actions by still letting it stage a prestigious int'l event? So what if they've built a dozen new stadia? It's NOT like there are NO other countries who can quickly take over and stage the tournament with only 26 months' notice. Do you let the big schoolyard bully who kicks sand in the face of the smaller kids, get away with such behavior? One shouldn't, and if you do, then you are complicit in the actions of the bully which are WRONG and you let the misdeeds perpetuate themselves.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you honestly see a nation like the Netherlands or the United States refusing to play in the World Cup because it's in Russia? As things stand now, I can't see any way that happens. We heard this talk in the lead-up to the Olympics in Sochi. And what came of it? Nothing. Ukraine still sent athletes to the Paralympics even after their country got invaded. You think the Malaysia jet is going to be an exception? Boycotts aren't going to help the issue here. They would need a whole lot of nations to boycott the World Cup in order for that to happen. And remember. the World Cup is merely the culmination of 2 years of soccer competition, so if you're talking about boycotting the World Cup, a nation would have to decide that BEFORE they start qualifying less they look really sleazy in trying to make a statement.

In the lead up to Sochi we did not have Russia invading another sovereign power, shoot down a plan filled with innocent people, or threaten nuclear war if we did not let Putin have is way. I would say that there is a much more legitimate case to boycott the event now then in the lead up to Sochi.

Russians are Russian sympathizers are very strong in a majority of the federations and within the IOC. The Russian IOC members have been considered king-makers for about a decade now. Some credit them with London's victory over Paris for instance

Why would Russian king-makers want the games in London?

Wait...never-mind. Forgot about the investments many Russians have in the English capitol. But it still makes no sense, why not have them in Moscow? They were in the running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the lead up to Sochi we did not have Russia invading another sovereign power, shoot down a plan filled with innocent people, or threaten nuclear war if we did not let Putin have is way. I would say that there is a much more legitimate case to boycott the event now then in the lead up to Sochi.

How many countries has the US invaded recently? How many innocent civilians have we killed recently? We still threaten nuclear war every day.

Pretty sure nobody from the US should be pushing for a boycott of a Russian games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the lead up to Sochi we did not have Russia invading another sovereign power, shoot down a plan filled with innocent people, or threaten nuclear war if we did not let Putin have is way. I would say that there is a much more legitimate case to boycott the event now then in the lead up to Sochi.

Why would Russian king-makers want the games in London?

Wait...never-mind. Forgot about the investments many Russians have in the English capitol. But it still makes no sense, why not have them in Moscow? They were in the running.

Moscow was never seriously considered. They were fortunate to get on the short-list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're missing the point. These are separate issues. This is a country who had a bunch of their civilians blown out of the sky for no good reason. At least with the example you cited, there was a mutual conflict between those nations. The Dutch had a bunch of their citizens randomly killed, unprovoked, due to the negligence of the host nation. How can you possibly send a soccer team to play in the country that was responsible?

And the issue won't be several years old. The World Cup in Russia won't take place generations and decades removed from the incident. It will still be pretty fresh in the minds of the Dutch people. In addition, qualification for the World Cup starts next year, much closer to the events than the actual tournament. Ultimately, it will come down to whether the Dutch FA treats it as just a football tournament, and an opportunity to hoist the World Cup. They may even go to "stick it" to Russia. It'd be pretty awesome to see the Dutch smother Russia in a game. But with all this being said, I see the downing of the Malaysian Airlines flight as too big of an issue to ignore, and I can't see how the Dutch FA wouldn't seriously weigh their options.

No, I don't think I'm missing the point. Boycotts of sporting events happen for larger issues than this, not isolated incidents. I'm not trying to minimize the scope of what happened here (and let's not forget this isn't the first time something like this has happened.. tell me there were Koreans who refused to compete in the Soviet Union following the Korean Airlines incident, which I believe today is the anniversary), but I ask again, do you honestly think that is going to result in the Netherlands refusing to send their national team to play at the World Cup in Russia? What exactly are their options? Do you think by them playing in Russia, somehow they're doing a disservice to those killed on the Malaysia Airlines flight? What happened with that is not an 'issue.' Russia invading Ukraine is an issue. This was a 1-time incident that shouldn't demand a response, particularly one where the only people that lose out after the Dutch football players who did nothing wrong. Like you said, they should try and "stick it" to Russia and win on their turf.

1 other thing worth noting. The World Cup is NOT the next major sporting event to be held in Russia. That would be next year's FINA World Championships held in Kazan. By your logic, any and all Dutch swimmers should refuse to compete there. Do you think that is going to happen? I'm certainly not expecting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's missing the WHOLE point. The point is do we let a big, aggressive nation, fomenting a rebellion next door and destabilzing a neighbor that was once part of its territory, get away with its bully actions by still letting it stage a prestigious int'l event? So what if they've built a dozen new stadia? It's NOT like there are NO other countries who can quickly take over and stage the tournament with only 26 months' notice. Do you let the big schoolyard bully who kicks sand in the face of the smaller kids, get away with such behavior? One shouldn't, and if you do, then you are complicit in the actions of the bully which are WRONG and you let the misdeeds perpetuate themselves.

Who is 'we' though? FIFA awarded Russia the World Cup. They're the only ones who can take it away. This isn't a boycott where a leader like Jimmy Carter could stand up, say he refused to send his country's athletes, and then other nations followed. The only people that are complicit in Russia actions with regard to the World Cup are FIFA. If you want to make the case that anyone who participates on Russian soil is complicit, I'll give you that. But it's not like you or I could call up FIFA and get them to re-consider. I'm not sure any leader out there, be it political or of a sport-related organization has the ability to convince them otherwise.

Once again, I agree with you that Russia does not deserve the honor of hosting the World Cup. But the only way that can change would be for FIFA to make the decision to take it away from them. Given what a corrupt organization FIFA are themselves, I'm not holding my breath for that one to happen, and it would be the same if they weren't concurrently trying to deal with the mess they made out of 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Quaker.

Also, what Good does a boycott do for the individual? Nothing. If You boycott, the Host Nation still gets the profit, the attention and the experience. The individual still misses out on the experience, the attention and the medals. As much as I think Russia should never Host again, I don't think a boycott is the solution. The solution is, is that the whole Football World comes together and demands Russia has their Hosting Rights taken away, before we get near to the 2018 Fifa World Cup and 2017 Fifa Confederations Cup. If nothing is sorted by then, then a boycott won't help, because it's too late IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news agenda moves on and the MH17 disaster seems like a long time ago already. I wonder what the feeling in Holland is right now though, and I wonder what the feeling is amongst the playing squad. Forced boycotts from the top-down are normally not effective and only harm the athletes, but players boycotting through their own choice could happen here depending on strength of feeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole athlete-schmathlete syndrome in that they are such special creatures that a wrong gust of wind will knock them down is soooooo WRONG and overblown. Athletes are among the MOST SPOILED people on the planet. To think that good vs. bad has to be put aside 'because of the athletes' is really abhorrent and such hopeless thinking. When things aren't hunky-dory, they should step down from their pedestals, get a day job and pull their own weight like the rest of us. There are bigger issues and stakes than an athlete's career. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news agenda moves on and the MH17 disaster seems like a long time ago already. I wonder what the feeling in Holland is right now though, and I wonder what the feeling is amongst the playing squad. Forced boycotts from the top-down are normally not effective and only harm the athletes, but players boycotting through their own choice could happen here depending on strength of feeling.

That's what I've been thinking. Is there animosity on the part of the Dutch towards Russian or would it be some contrived excuse amongst the Dutch national team to make a stand. I just don't see what it would accomplish. To that end..

This whole athlete-schmathlete syndrome in that they are such special creatures that a wrong gust of wind will knock them down is soooooo WRONG and overblown. Athletes are among the MOST SPOILED people on the planet. To think that good vs. bad has to be put aside 'because of the athletes' is really abhorrent and such hopeless thinking. When things aren't hunky-dory, they should step down from their pedestals, get a day job and pull their own weight like the rest of us. There are bigger issues and stakes than an athlete's career. :rolleyes:

What would a boycott of the World Cup accomplish though? Athletes may be spoiled, but it's because they have a special talent that people pay a lot of money to see. So I can forgive them for exploiting that, particularly where there are people (teams and advertisers and the like) willing to pay them millions of dollars for it. It's not about putting good vs. bad aside or stepping down off their pedestals.. would anything change if nations en masse decided to skip the World Cup?

I'm asking a legitimate question here because I'm curious to hear your opinion.. did the U.S.-led boycott of the Moscow Olympics or the Soviet-led boycott of Los Angeles (not to mention the `76 boycott by the African nations) do anything to further the cause they were supposed to be fighting against? Did anything change in either country as a result of athletes not participating in their Olympics? The only time I can think of where a boycott might have gotten some notoriety would be if the United States had refused to participate in the 1936 Olympics and hadn't bought into the propaganda that told them that everything was fine in Germany.

Athletes had a choice to not participate in this year's Winter Olympics. I know everyone's saying the issues with Russia have gotten worse since then, but for all the news with the LGBT laws and the like, it's not like there wasn't cause back then to take a stand. I'm sure some will argue that Russia by having the Olympics may have empowered them in their misdeeds, and there's probably a little truth to that.

I get what you're saying that these athletes should use their fame and fortune to take a stand on principle because Russia's actions are that abhorrent. I just don't know if that's going to accomplish anything. Short of FIFA stripping Russia of their hosting rights (and I don't see that being a realistic possibility), would a mass boycott do anything to change Russia's ways? If I thought it did, maybe there would be something there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would a boycott of the World Cup accomplish though? Athletes may be spoiled, but it's because they have a special talent that people pay a lot of money to see. So I can forgive them for exploiting that, particularly where there are people (teams and advertisers and the like) willing to pay them millions of dollars for it. It's not about putting good vs. bad aside or stepping down off their pedestals.. would anything change if nations en masse decided to skip the World Cup?

I'm asking a legitimate question here because I'm curious to hear your opinion.. did the U.S.-led boycott of the Moscow Olympics or the Soviet-led boycott of Los Angeles (not to mention the `76 boycott by the African nations) do anything to further the cause they were supposed to be fighting against? Did anything change in either country as a result of athletes not participating in their Olympics? The only time I can think of where a boycott might have gotten some notoriety would be if the United States had refused to participate in the 1936 Olympics and hadn't bought into the propaganda that told them that everything was fine in Germany.

Athletes had a choice to not participate in this year's Winter Olympics. I know everyone's saying the issues with Russia have gotten worse since then, but for all the news with the LGBT laws and the like, it's not like there wasn't cause back then to take a stand. I'm sure some will argue that Russia by having the Olympics may have empowered them in their misdeeds, and there's probably a little truth to that.

I get what you're saying that these athletes should use their fame and fortune to take a stand on principle because Russia's actions are that abhorrent. I just don't know if that's going to accomplish anything. Short of FIFA stripping Russia of their hosting rights (and I don't see that being a realistic possibility), would a mass boycott do anything to change Russia's ways? If I thought it did, maybe there would be something there.

I'm NOT thinking a boycott. Scrap the whole darn thing with Russia. ANd if it has to start from the players' ranks, then so be it. But I bet they are such wusses and wimps, they won't. Yeah, gov'ts had better lean on that whore of an organization called FIFA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm NOT thinking a boycott. Scrap the whole darn thing with Russia. ANd if it has to start from the players' ranks, then so be it. But I bet they are such wusses and wimps, they won't. Yeah, gov'ts had better lean on that whore of an organization called FIFA.

The lords of football giveth and so too can they taketh away. But it has to go through them. And the problem, like you noted, is that they're a sleazy, corrupt organization. Would enough pressure being put on them be enough to convince them to piss off the Russians? Again, your argument is based in 'should.' I just can't see the entire footballing world (and that's what it would take for anything to get done here) to rise up together and take a stand against Russia. Call them wussies and spoiled millionaires if you want, but it's wishful thinking to believe that the 2018 World Cup will be held anywhere other than Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In doing some research, just came across this article from back in April..

FIFA turns down U.S. request to ban Russia from hosting the 2018 World Cup

The Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) has turned down a request by U.S. senators to ban Russia's national team from participating in the World Cup in 2014 and strip Russia of its right to host the world soccer championship in 2018.
In early March, Senators Mark Kirk and Dan Coats sent FIFA a request to suspend Russia's membership in the organization. According to them, in Crimea, Russia violated Article 3 of the FIFA statutes on discrimination based on racial, political or other grounds.
It was unlikely from the beginning that the senators would receive any answer to their appeal. At FIFA, as well as UEFA, they frown on outsiders who try to meddle in their affairs, especially when they try to mix soccer and politics.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

/\/\ That was April; this is September. The Allies are meeting in Wales this week. Russia isn't backing down.

The Allies will know how to squeeze FIFA if they want to.

And this is international organisation we are talking about, not just senators from one country.

European Commission meets tommorrow discussing further sanctions. They'll fail obviously, but UN still can do something, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...