|
A Winner is Jew posted:Corruption and bribery are felonies so yes they can be charged and arrested if Blatter has dirt on them accepting payments and they will absolutely serve time for that poo poo. This would be the perfect time for Obama's 12th dimensional chess game to finally come to a close, hauling away certain republican senators and governors in vulnerable swing states.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:09 |
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:This would be the perfect time for Obama's 12th dimensional chess game to finally come to a close, hauling away certain republican senators and governors in vulnerable swing states. If the FIFA investigation takes out a healthy chunk of American corruption as well that would be astonishing. I would probably walk around with my mouth open in stunned silence for an entire day. People would ask me what was wrong and all I could manage would be  EDIT: For as long as Blatter's been president, what are the odds of him having influenced a US lawmaker?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
Probably not very much unless you count the whole "well we'd like to put a game in Chicago but we can't unless the stadium is upgraded..." type of talk. And since that isn't criminal here there's no problem with that. And even beyond that that would be more of a USSF and CONCACAF thing than a FIFA thing. edit: You'd be much more likely to have them involved with those Russian mobsters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:If the FIFA investigation takes out a healthy chunk of American corruption as well that would be astonishing. I would probably walk around with my mouth open in stunned silence for an entire day. People would ask me what was wrong and all I could manage would be IOC seems more likely. Hopefully they're next? Seems unlikely, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Part of the reason why this investigation's going on at all is because FIFA's influence hardly touches the States, at least compared to what they swing in the rest of the world. Rolling on to the Olympics or hunting for connections to American government corruption is incredibly risky business politically, and god help us if there's even a whiff of partisanship about the thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
Dolash posted:Part of the reason why this investigation's going on at all is because FIFA's influence hardly touches the States, at least compared to what they swing in the rest of the world. Rolling on to the Olympics or hunting for connections to American government corruption is incredibly risky business politically, and god help us if there's even a whiff of partisanship about the thing. If it goes that far there doesn't need to be a even a whiff of partisanship for people to claim that it's partisanship though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 12:57
|
|
|
If obama has any say in this at all they won't go near the IOC since an investigation into that would very likely turn up in his power base.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:If obama has any say in this at all they won't go near the IOC since an investigation into that would very likely turn up in his power base. explain
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:explain Obama was very active in lobbying to get the 2016 Olympics in Chicago, so that might be what they're referring to, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Bizarro Watt posted:Obama was very active in lobbying to get the 2016 Olympics in Chicago, so that might be what they're referring to, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:And you know Mitt Romney and the Mormons and the South Lake City games. Then there is also the whole cold war madness, so you can be sure there are probably some crazy blackmail and skullduggery stories to tell about the LA and Moscow games. Finally, the story that will bring down the Reagan legacy facade.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
No one is going to go looking into IOC unless something major happens, both parties are probably involved in various bribes and such. If they get a whiff of an investigation we might actually see both sides cooperate to shut it down. And I doubt there's going to be many US politicians involved, because none of them really care enough to spend their bribe money on soccer as compared to other internal things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
It's the Daily Mail so be appropriately critical but if this is true it's one hell of a headline: Germany sent rocket-propelled grenades to Saudi Arabia to swing 2006 World Cup vote as fresh letter emerges implicating South African officials in $10m bribe scandal
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jun/05/jack-warner-bribe-vote-egypt-world-cup So it turns out FIFA was too corrupt even for the Mubarak regime. quote:The latest allegations of corruption to hit Fifa are coming from Egypt, who lost the bid to the 2010 World Cup to South Africa. According to an Egyptian sports official, the country refused to pay a $7m bribe to the former Fifa vice-president Jack Warner to help the north African state win.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:explain The people who bid for Olympics tend to be big-city mayors, and big-city mayors tend to be Democrats. Edit: speaking of the IOC, I suspect the current decision between Beijing or Almaty, Kazakhstan for the 2022 Winter Olympics is shaded by the current FIFA case. Namely, they're probably thinking that if they pick Almaty the whole world will think the Kazakhs paid them off. Patter Song fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:It's the Daily Mail so be appropriately critical but if this is true it's one hell of a headline: Germany sent rocket-propelled grenades to Saudi Arabia to swing 2006 World Cup vote as fresh letter emerges implicating South African officials in $10m bribe scandal This has actually been known for years now. There were also a lot of German companies investing in countries with seats in the executive committee. Also Martin Sonneborn, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:The people who bid for Olympics tend to be big-city mayors, and big-city mayors tend to be Democrats. The decision is more shaded by the fact that apparently no one but countries desperate to prove something want to host the winter olympics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:The people who bid for Olympics tend to be big-city mayors, and big-city mayors tend to be Democrats. The reason the US hasn't gotten an Olympic game since SLC is tied up in the fact that we don't have government funding for our bids AND anti-US feelings on the IOC. The IOC is totally corrupt, but its not as blatant as FIFA. Also -- the only two official bids for Olympics from the USOC in the last decade have been NYC for 2008 which was at the time governed by Rudy and Chicago for 2016 -- which obs we didn't go hard enough for since we didn't get. Boston is going to make a bid for 2024 and will likely get it. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:The reason the US hasn't gotten an Olympic game since SLC has is tied up in the fact that we don't have government funding for our bids AND anti-US feelings on the IOC. I'm sure the anti-IOC feelings in the US, especially as of late, haven't helped either. Still laughing about Boston's bid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:The reason the US hasn't gotten an Olympic game since SLC is tied up in the fact that we don't have government funding for our bids AND anti-US feelings on the IOC. To be fair the US has hosted the most Olympic Games of any country during the period of the modern Olympics, 4 summer and 4 winter. The next most is France with 2 summer and 3 winter, and then Japan with 2 of each.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:To be fair the US has hosted the most Olympic Games of any country during the period of the modern Olympics, 4 summer and 4 winter. The next most is France with 2 summer and 3 winter, and then Japan with 2 of each. There's a reason for that. GlyphGryph posted:I'm sure the anti-IOC feelings in the US, especially as of late, haven't helped either. Still laughing about Boston's bid. Boston will likely get them. Asia's out since they will have hosted three Olympics in a row from 2018-2022; and the European cities bidding are Paris, Rome and Munich. It will have been over two decades since the US last hosted the games of either type, one of the longest droughts. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I'm sure the anti-IOC feelings in the US, especially as of late, haven't helped either. Still laughing about Boston's bid. What's up with Boston's bid?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
I was under the distinct impression Boston's bid was very unlikely to succeed as it was basically "we'll dump you guys in the various college stadiums around here, we ain't building poo poo". Since when has it become likely?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
RPZip posted:What's up with Boston's bid? It's just weird because Boston is like the most bleh city of the ones who expressed and interest and they have to build a real stadium to host it. evilweasel posted:I was under the distinct impression Boston's bid was very unlikely to succeed as it was basically "we'll dump you guys in the various college stadiums around here, we ain't building poo poo". Since when has it become likely? Since Kraft and Romney got involved and started pledging money for a stadium downtown. Also that a lot of cities thinking about bidding aren't now. Paris has waffled on it, Hamburg (not Munich) is likely the best shot Europe has because Rome would be a giant cluster gently caress. Also that Europe had Sochi and London. Also not having to build poo poo is one of the thing the IOC has said is good after the cluster that has been Athens, Sochi and almost certainly Rio. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Thinking about trying to plan an Olympics in the Boston traffic pattern gives me the heebie-jeebies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
RPZip posted:What's up with Boston's bid? It's opposed, fiercely, by a very large portion of the cities population. The majority of the population oppose it overall, in fact. Only 40% of the population offer even tentative support for the bid, and that only in the circumstances where the city doesn't have to pay a dime to actually host it. There are regular well attended protests against the bid, and the local news runs more stories about the people opposing it than they do about the people pushing it. The mayor has said the games would need 70% support to move forward, and that is not going to happen. There's now going to be a referendum over forbidding the city to host the olympics. From what I understand, the IOC likes to see 80% support before considering a city.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Since Kraft and Romney got involved and started pledging money for a stadium downtown. Also that a lot of cities thinking about bidding aren't now. Paris has waffled on it, Hamburg (not Munich) is likely the best shot Europe has because Rome would be a giant cluster gently caress. Well that's interesting - wonder what they're thinking of using the stadium for afterwards. Maybe Kraft wants somewhere to put his MLS team when it's done?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Well that's interesting - wonder what they're thinking of using the stadium for afterwards. Maybe Kraft wants somewhere to put his MLS team when it's done? Yeah, Kraft wants to put his MLS team there after the games. Which clicks a button for "ooo reusable stadium, we're being cost conscious!" BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:How deep does this loving rabbit hole go? There is always more, and it is always
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:It's opposed, fiercely, by a very large portion of the cities population. The majority of the population oppose it overall, in fact. Only 40% of the population offer even tentative support for the bid, and that only in the circumstances where the city doesn't have to pay a dime to actually host it. This. In addition, the city itself is much too small to hold all the assorted venues, and the surrounding municipalities are also staunchly against the Olympics coming to town.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:From what I understand, the IOC likes to see 80% support before considering a city.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:From what I understand, the IOC likes to see 80% support before considering a city. Looks like they're not going to be any cities hosting them then since neither Paris, Rome or Hamburg are anywhere close to that kind of support. And those are literally the only cities with any kind of plans to bid for 2024.  WugLyfe posted:This. Boston, too small to host an Olympics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Boston, too small to host an Olympics. I think what he's (correctly) pointing out is that "Boston" as we think of it includes a lot of surrounding towns that are legally distinct and don't have to go along with what Boston says and the city of Boston itself doesn't control nearly enough land to pull it off alone. The mayor of Boston can't force the mayor of Cambridge to do a drat thing, even though everyone basically considers Cambridge part of Boston. That's different from, say, New York which still controls a much larger part of what we consider "New York" as part of the official city.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I think what he's (correctly) pointing out is that "Boston" as we think of it includes a lot of surrounding towns that are legally distinct and don't have to go along with what Boston says and the city of Boston itself doesn't control nearly enough land to pull it off alone. The mayor of Boston can't force the mayor of Cambridge to do a drat thing, even though everyone basically considers Cambridge part of Boston. That's different from, say, New York which still controls a much larger part of what we consider "New York" as part of the official city. Eh, I get that, but the only things they actually have to build (Stadium, Olympic Park, bike arena, aquatics arena) can go in Boston proper.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Boston, too small to host an Olympics. Boston itself is way too small, even after you bulldoze the poor neighborhoods. The Boston metro area is huge, but only a small portion of that is actually under the control of Boston city government; most of it is under the control of surrounding municipalities which would inevitably be impacted by an Olympics bid
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Wouldn't an Olympic stadium be too big for a permanent MLS home? Would they build it with a planned downgrade in size later on? It would make more sense to move the Patriots out of Foxboro but that doesn't make sense either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
The southern limits of the city - Dorchester, Roslindale, West Roxbury, Hyde Park and Mattapan together aren't exactly small, but what are they going to do? Put a velodrome in the arboretum? Go West End 2.0, west-end harder?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:Wouldn't an Olympic stadium be too big for a permanent MLS home? Would they build it with a planned downgrade in size later on? It would make more sense to move the Patriots out of Foxboro but that doesn't make sense either. The same thing London is doing with theirs. It would be about 20-30k after. Buffer posted:The southern limits of the city - Dorchester, Roslindale, West Roxbury, Hyde Park and Mattapan together aren't exactly small, but what are they going to do? Put a velodrome in the arboretum? Go West End 2.0, west-end harder? If I remember from what they've talked about so far, and I'd have to look, the only thing that would be built that isn't already that wouldn't be somewhere that they can more or less get to go along with it (UMASS Boston for the Olympic Park and uh, I want to say Harvard for Aquatics) is the Velodrome in Dorchester. ALLLL OF THAT SAID -- Dallas was reportedly somewhat interested and we should have let them do it because it would have been loving hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:Wouldn't an Olympic stadium be too big for a permanent MLS home? Er, how so? Soccer fields are pretty big, and it's not like there's many Olympic sports that require a stadium greatly exceeding the size of one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:09 |
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Er, how so? Soccer fields are pretty big, and it's not like there's many Olympic sports that require a stadium greatly exceeding the size of one. Olympic Stadiums have to be around 80k -- which is bigger than Gillette and bigger than anything that any team in Boston would ever draw for (both Harvard and Boston College have facilities in the 40-ish range). Which is why it wouldn't be "perm" seating for 80k --which is what they did with London and Atlanta. The only reason Rio and Tokoyo aren't doing this is because its their national stadiums.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 21:08
|
|