The Russkies dun gone an 'alf-inched it [Archive]

al Roumi

12-02-2010, 17:44

So, the perfidious (that should explain to any why I've put this in the backroom) Russians have stolen the 2018 Football World Cup from Spangul and England (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9250585.stm).

I predict many stories of how "it was a stitch up between dem corrupt Russians and dat corrupt FIFA wot done it" etc etc in the Britrish press. Not that either state or sporting organisation (if you count mass inebriation as a sport and a bureacracy larger than the Maldives' as a country) isn't [probably] corrupt, but anyway.

The British media got its knickers in a twist again and somehow got all hopeful. Maybe it was just because of David Beckham and Will Wales being in the same room in fashionable winter clothing somewhere.

I am actually disapointed, despite this veneer of scornful sarcasm. Football should be coming home dammit!

gaelic cowboy

12-02-2010, 17:55

Strike For The South

12-02-2010, 17:56

QATAR

al Roumi

12-02-2010, 18:03

QATAR

Yeah, one fo the funny things in their pitch was "4 billion people within 4 hrs flying time" (or somehting like that). This must be basicaly because of India and some of China -not all of whom (lets face it) are going to actually be in the position to fly to Qatar for the world cup...

gaelic cowboy

12-02-2010, 18:03

QUOTE=Strike For The South;2053232546]QATAR[/QUOTE]

I know I was looking forward to visiting my cuz in Iowa now FIFA has gone an kyboshed an Irishmans hopes again

gaelic cowboy

12-02-2010, 18:05

Yeah, one fo the funny things in their pitch was "4 billion people within 4 hrs flying time" (or somehting like that). This must be basicaly because of India and some of China -not all of whom (lets face it) are going to actually be in the position to fly to Qatar for the world cup...

There havin a laugh with Qatar really

al Roumi

12-02-2010, 18:06

I know I was looking forward to visiting my cuz in Iowa now FIFA has gone an kyboshed an Irishmans hopes again

The last time was surely that tart Thierry Henry, never mind FIFA saying the (crap, blatantly out-of-date) rules are the (crap, blatantly out-of-date) rules.

al Roumi

12-02-2010, 18:10

There havin a laugh with Qatar really

At least they've got resources and are likely to put an event on with less sense of impending GBH than Russia, never mind being actually able to afford staying there... Surely the prices in Moscow will only increase now (http://www.mercer.com/costofliving)...

rory_20_uk

12-02-2010, 19:54

Great news! Now, we just need to ensure the fans don't come back.

Quatar was a good choice. They are prepared to spend billions on the games which except for dictatorships no one else can afford.

~:smoking:

HoreTore

12-02-2010, 20:11

England will have to realize that it is far from the best football nation in the world, they are top16.

For me personally, I've always had a thing for choosing nations who haven't held event X before. So to me, Russia is a fine choice, while England and Spain would be a bad one.

But in all seriousness....

QATAR???
WHAT THE HELL????

I've got just one thing to say: Bribes well spent.

Sarmatian

12-02-2010, 20:44

I love the quote from FIFA that Russia's bid was supposedly "High Risk" and the UK bid was "Medium to Low Risk" and they still went with the country with hardly any stadiums, hotels etc etc

I suppose wikileaks will be posting some big bribe story soon

I suppose that 2.4 billions Russia will invest compared to 1.4 England was offering to invest had nothing to do with it :inquisitive:.

I suppose that the fact Russian football is on the rise and the fact that Russia has never hosted a WC had nothing to do with it.

Beskar

12-02-2010, 21:08

I am glad England didn't get it. We have the Olympics next year as it is. Be nice and share.

gaelic cowboy

12-02-2010, 21:50

I suppose that 2.4 billions Russia will invest compared to 1.4 England was offering to invest had nothing to do with it :inquisitive:.

I suppose that the fact Russian football is on the rise and the fact that Russia has never hosted a WC had nothing to do with it.

Sure UK could hold the World Cup tomorrow with almost no effort, everyone knows that the decision is political not practical.

HoreTore

12-02-2010, 21:52

I suppose that 2.4 billions Russia will invest compared to 1.4 England was offering to invest had nothing to do with it :inquisitive:.

I suppose that the fact Russian football is on the rise and the fact that Russia has never hosted a WC had nothing to do with it.

Russia is a new market, a world cup in England is highly unlikely to attract any new fans.

gaelic cowboy

12-02-2010, 21:56

Russia is a new market, a world cup in England is highly unlikely to attract any new fans.

Then the World Cup would have gone to China instead.

Most of these decisions are generally shall we say morally dubious like when the World Cup went to South Africa and loads of people connected to FIFA enriched themselves on the back of it.

Ronin

12-02-2010, 21:58

QATAR

no booze and no looking at the ladies.....

the england fans are gonna have a jolly old time over there.

...that is if they qualify!

Then the World Cup would have gone to China instead.

too much of a time-zone difference to the main TV markets for the event.

HoreTore

12-02-2010, 22:14

Then the World Cup would have gone to China instead.

Most of these decisions are generally shall we say morally dubious like when the World Cup went to South Africa and loads of people connected to FIFA enriched themselves on the back of it.

As far as I know, China didn't enter a bid.

EDIT: And everyone knows that England just wanted the cup so that they'd qualify automatically.

Louis VI the Fat

12-02-2010, 23:41

Western Europe ought to protest. All of the television money, all of the quarterfinalists are Western European. A World Cup is a European Championship with Brazil and Argentina. Just host the thing every eight years in Western Europe. 2006 was awesome, the best ever. As was 1998. Spaintugal, the Benelux or England would've been great.

We can't compete with the bribes anymore. I mean, Moscow has got both the former German chancellor and the current Italian Prime Minister on its payroll. Never mind what they can do with a simple football respresentative from Tonga or Mali.

Not that Russia doesn't have a legitimate claim to host a WC, mind. Russia can reasonably claim it's their turn, and despite the bribery and all that it is well deserved. Should be good.

Qatar by contrast is a joke. A circus. Fifa's having a laff'.

Furunculus

12-02-2010, 23:53

it's football, MEH!

if we had to have an event, it might as well be the Olympics.

HoreTore

12-03-2010, 00:32

it's football, MEH!

if we had to have an event, it might as well be the Olympics.

"Sports; that's what the people who didn't succeed in football do" ~Rune Bratseth

Sarmatian

12-03-2010, 00:41

Qatar by contrast is a joke. A circus. Fifa's having a laff'.

There's also another fact to consider, namely other bids.

1. USA - held in 1994
2. Japan - held in 2002
3. Korea - held in 2002
4. Australia - good chance, I'm sad that they didnt get it but realistically they're too far away from potential fans, namely Europe and Americas which in turn means time zone problems. Also, not densely populated, great distance between population centers and consequently, stadiums. Travelling from one coast to another is big problem for teams and fans...

Qatar is immenselly rich, it invests a lot in football infrastructure, gonna build great stadiums for WC, no big time zone differences, relatively close to Europe etc...

Let's face it guys, from now on we're gonna have every third WC in Europe, not every other...

Rhyfelwyr

12-03-2010, 01:03

it's football, MEH!

if we had to have an event, it might as well be the Olympics.

Does anyone actually watch them/care about them/know anything abotu what they are?

Husar

12-03-2010, 01:31

I think they're great choices, european countries already get the euro cups every other two years, maybe not as prestigious but if football really is what many say it is then sharing it with others is the best thing we can do, the people of Russia and Quatar seemed very happy about the decision from what I heard about it on the radio.

Louis VI the Fat

12-03-2010, 01:51

the people of Russia and Quatar seemed very happy about the decision from what I heard about it on the radio.What people of Qatar?

There's not half a million of them. Who just happen to sit on a lot of oil, more money than God. What to do with all that cash? Why not buy a world cup and organise it in the world's largest fridges while outside it is an average of 45 degrees.

Strike For The South

12-03-2010, 02:43

rory_20_uk

12-03-2010, 10:24

Although I don't think that England should have got it anyway, the outcries about bribery didn't help either...

Bribery discovered:

UK "Bribery? How dare they!"
Qatar "Bribery? How much?"

Qatar are also going to send the stadia to Africa which is a way of spreading wealth. They are also going to build them on time with their "no nonsense" approach to work projects.

~:smoking:

Banquo's Ghost

12-03-2010, 10:26

The most corrupt sporting body goes to two of the most corrupt regimes. It's all win.

England should be grateful to avoid the costs, frankly.

Anyone who has dark skin might be best advised to skip Russia and see the World Cup in Qatar. At least there you will be mistaken for a housekeeper rather than kicked within an inch of your life amongst the splendour of St Petersburg's architecture. I'd also advise fans planning to go to Russia to set aside a large amount for daily bribes. The police will allow foreigners to accompany them to a nearby cash machine for withdrawals, but you don't want to be caught without any money at all.

I'm thankful that these places don't play rugger. The worst I'll have to put up with at the World Cup is enthusiastic sheep (not unlike the home life of our own dear Queen). :beam:

Sarmatian

12-03-2010, 11:28

Yeah, it must have been bribery. I mean how on earth could it have been anything else. In fact, the only way to be sure there was absolutely no bribery and corruption was for England to get the world cup organization.

The hypocrisy of some people is astonishing indeed... Livin' in their own little world, with their own little rules, sad because the days when they could enforce those rules on the rest of the world are gone. The saddest part I guess is that they refuse to see it and cry foul when something doesn't go according to their wishes...

rory_20_uk

12-03-2010, 11:38

Sarmatian

12-03-2010, 11:46

Are you being intentionally obtuse? Stating that highlighting bribery was present didn't help is not saying otherwise the UK would have won.

There are many reasons that the UK should not have got it - starting with they've already had it and football is already played.

~:smoking:

And you know bribery was present? You were there? You have inside information? You're 100% sure there was bribery? You'd be willing to stake your life on it?

The fact that Russia has never organized it and England has nothing to do with it? The fact that a WC in Russia is going to do wonders for football infrastructure overall and for football overall has nothing to do with it?

No, we know that it was bribery.

rory_20_uk

12-03-2010, 11:51

when the News, Panorama (leading to 3 investigations and subsequent dismissals, and 5 new allegations) and an official involved who then resigned over his comments say there's bribery it's going to piss people off. And as I've already alluded to, 3 members were removed. So the evidence was sufficient for that to happen.

~:smoking:

Louis VI the Fat

12-03-2010, 12:19

Yeah, it must have been bribery. I mean how on earth could it have been anything else. In fact, the only way to be sure there was absolutely no bribery and corruption was for England to get the world cup organization. Now you're having a laugh. One can well think Russia is due to organise a WC, without having to twist reality to suit that thought.

Russia is a mobster state, the FIFA the world's most corrupt organisation around. The election committee's members are on video simply stating their price.

The hypocrisy of some people is astonishing indeed... Livin' in their own little world, with their own little rules, sad because the days when they could enforce those rules on the rest of the world are gone. The saddest part I guess is that they refuse to see it and cry foul when something doesn't go according to their wishes... No, the rest of world has shown it will tolerate bribery, corruption and autocracy in exchange for some bread and circusses.

The West has shown it prefers fair play and transparancy. Sadly, we must accept that the West is waning.

In particular the British press deserves praise* for not only managing to expose FIFA for what it is, but for publishing it even at the expense of England's chances. (Two votes for England, one by England itself, the other by squaky clean Japan. That's nonsense.) Together with England's perennenial number one position on the fair play list of the game itself, shows that the inventor is still the gentleman of the world's number one sports. All WC's ought to be held in England from now on, this game is theirs and after 150 years the the rest of the world still hasn't caught up.

*But not Cameron, who lambasted the British press for it. Come on Dave, you're not Vladimir.

Husar

12-03-2010, 12:24

I'm so glad that the UK government didn't get the chance to spy on millions of foreigners with their CCTV, this kind of oppression should not be tolerated by an international sports organization.

Louis VI the Fat

12-03-2010, 12:32

I'm so glad that the UK government didn't get the chance to spy on millions of foreigners with their CCTV, this kind of oppression should not be tolerated by an international sports organization.This is reminiscent of those people who insisted in the 1970s that West and East Europe were both equally dictatorial. (Never answering why people only fled one way over the wall, and were only shot at from one side)

In Russia, those BBC reporters would risk a severe beating, if not worse.

Just because the West is imperfect, often a sad and sorry excuse for a clean democracy, does not mean that one should descent into full relativity. A few CCTV's* do not an autocracy make.

*well four million.

HoreTore

12-03-2010, 13:10

You want an untapped footie market?

THE UNITED STATES IS THE PERFECT COMBONATION OF UNTAPPED AND WEALTHY

I am pissed off, I will not see a WC game on my own soil until Im at least 40

We're America damnit we shouldn't lose to bloody Qatar at anything, even bribery.

1994 was supposed to kick-start american football.

It did not.

I don't see why a second one will do any better. No, the US shouldn't get the world cup again until they've got their league running properly.

Russia is a mobster state, the FIFA the world's most corrupt organisation around. The election committee's members are on video simply stating their price.

.....And english politicians are not corrupt as all hell...?

Sarmatian

12-03-2010, 13:11

Now you're having a laugh. One can well think Russia is due to organise a WC, without having to twist reality to suit that thought.

IMO, Russian bid was the best. It offered most investment in football, we haven't seen a WC in eastern Europe EVER. It's gonna do wonders for football there. Concerning on what principles WC host nation is selected in the past, there's nothing wrong with choosing Russia. I see no need to cry foul when the best bid wins. Simple as that. If it weren't for that, if the worst bid won for example, I may be more inclinced to believe something else was afoot, but in this particular case, I need more proof than media gossip.

Russia is a mobster state, the FIFA the world's most corrupt organisation around. The election committee's members are on video simply stating their price.

And South Africa and Brazil are perfect examples of equality and social justice, with no crime and corruption? Please...

No, the rest of world has shown it will tolerate bribery, corruption and autocracy in exchange for some bread and circusses.
Look at my earlier posts

The West has shown it prefers fair play and transparancy. Sadly, we must accept that the West is waning.

In particular the British press deserves praise* for not only managing to expose FIFA for what it is, but for publishing it even at the expense of England's chances. (Two votes for England, one by England itself, the other by squaky clean Japan. That's nonsense.) Together with England's perennenial number one position on the fair play list of the game itself, shows that the inventor is still the gentleman of the world's number one sports. All WC's ought to be held in England from now on, this game is theirs and after 150 years the the rest of the world still hasn't caught up.

Yes, you're right. 1999/2000 season, Real wins CL but fails to qualify for CL from La Liga. Zaragoza, placed 4th in La Liga, loses its CL spot because of the rule that there may not be more than 4 teams in CL from any nation. They didn't bitch and moan, they figured rules are rules, it was that simple. Rules were rules until it came to English clubs. Than the same English press you're so complimentary of created chaos with "proofs" that not allowing Liverpool to compete as the fifth English club in CL is really all about UEFA hating English clubs, conveniently forgetting about Zaragoza case. And so they were allowed... And what of stupid Zaragoza, playing by the rules? Nothing...

Fair play my behind, supporting their own more likely...

Furunculus

12-03-2010, 13:35

"Sports; that's what the people who didn't succeed in football do" ~Rune Bratseth

ah, you're changing your game at least, the last time i criticized football you claimed i was too lazy/unfit to play sports, at which point i gave you three links to me 'doing' stuff............... to which there was no reply.

now you say that i am too rubbish to do a real 'mans' sport, why are you so defensive about football? :mellow:

rory_20_uk

12-03-2010, 13:39

Thanks for explaining your bias. I see it was far more hostility against anyone who doesn't think that Eastern Europe / Russia deserved it than anything else.

~:smoking:

Louis VI the Fat

12-03-2010, 13:54

IMO, Russian bid was the best. It offered most investment in football, we haven't seen a WC in eastern Europe EVER. It's gonna do wonders for football there. Concerning on what principles WC host nation is selected in the past, there's nothing wrong with choosing Russia. 'Russia' in an abstract sense is due a WC. This Russia, Putin's Russia, should not be allowed to host an international sporting event. Russia is run by autocrats and mobsters, a mafia state, controlled by violence, bribes and patronage.

Poland and the Ukraine host Euro 2012. That's good, despite both the political and infrastructure problems in the Ukraine.

Louis VI the Fat

12-03-2010, 14:08

Who the hell does England think it is? Such insolence can not be tolerated. You tell 'em, Blatter!

Andy Anson, the chief executive of the failed England World Cup 2018 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/world-cup-2018) bid, has said there is no point in the country bidding for the tournament again until Fifa (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/fifa) changes. He also said that Sepp Blatter, the Fifa president, had spoken to members of the executive committee about the "evils of the media", just before they voted on the hosting of the 2018 and 2022 events. Russia will host the first tournament and Qatar the second.

England were knocked out in the first round of voting in Zurich yesterday, having gained two votes. Some Fifa members are blaming the BBC's Panorama programme and a Sunday Times investigation into corruption for a backlash against England. Anson said such media activity was referred to by Blatter in his final speech to the 22-man executive committee, just before the vote.Not since prince Andrew has anybody engaged in such a tirade against 'the :daisy: press and their outrageous exposure of corruption'. :sneaky:

In a separate development this morning, the minister for sport and the Olympics, Hugh Robertson, told Talksport radio that a rumour in Zurich suggested only three members of the Fifa executive committee had asked to see the technical report on the English bid.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/dec/03/world-cup-fifa-sepp-blatter
Dear oh dear...
FIFA's members did not even bother to keep up any pretence anymore once the British press had exposed Fifa's corruption.

And that's just England being flushed down the toilet by this world's corrupt little sports autocrats. The Benelux and Iberia had a great bids too.

Husar

12-03-2010, 14:08

This is reminiscent of those people who insisted in the 1970s that West and East Europe were both equally dictatorial. (Never answering why people only fled one way over the wall, and were only shot at from one side)

In Russia, those BBC reporters would risk a severe beating, if not worse.

Just because the West is imperfect, often a sad and sorry excuse for a clean democracy, does not mean that one should descent into full relativity. A few CCTV's* do not an autocracy make.

*well four million.

The sense of entitlement in this thread rivals that of the lower classes in the UK, which just shows that the UK hs a class system and not everyone is seen as equal, they're just as bad as Russia. The US should never get a FIFA cup, they would host a FISA cup, and that's why they shouldn't get it.

Besides, if the decision is supposed to be of a political nature, then they still did the right thing because nobody ever talked about all the problems that everybody finds links to all of a sudden now. Basically FIFA may be responsible for the improvement of peoples' lives in Russia and Qatar. At least until two weeks after the cup(optimistic measurement) when everybody forgets about it again anyway.

Sarmatian

12-03-2010, 14:23

Thanks for explaining your bias. I see it was far more hostility against anyone who doesn't think that Eastern Europe / Russia deserved it than anything else.

~:smoking:

That is my opinion, I'm sorry if it doesn't conform to what you think. I have no problems with people thinking that England's bid was better. My issue is with people saying that since Russia got it and England didn't, it must have been a bribe. But I get your position, it's far easier to think it's bias than to actually consider the facts that don't go in your favour.

'Russia' in an abstract sense is due a WC. This Russia, Putin's Russia, should not be allowed to host an international sporting event. Russia is run by autocrats and mobsters, a mafia state, controlled by violence, bribes and patronage.

Poland and the Ukraine host Euro 2012. That's good, despite both the political and infrastructure problems in the Ukraine.

Until Ukraine aligns its politics more closely with Russia, that is. Then media will suddenly remember that Ukraine is a mobster state run by autocrats and kleptocrats...

Louis VI the Fat

12-03-2010, 14:32

'I would much rather have a free press than stage a World Cup' - Roy Keane.

You tell 'em, Keano! :thumbsup:

That great Man Utd team of the 90s' boasted more great philosophers than that Monthy Python team...

rory_20_uk

12-03-2010, 14:37

That is my opinion, I'm sorry if it doesn't conform to what you think. I have no problems with people thinking that England's bid was better. My issue is with people saying that since Russia got it and England didn't, it must have been a bribe. But I get your position, it's far easier to think it's bias than to actually consider the facts that don't go in your favour.

That would wash except for one small point: I am PLEASED England did't get the World Cup. I Loathe football. A game for gentlemen played by thugs. I like Rugby.

So, I don't care whose bid was better. I've not looked at any of the bids, nor was present at any of the presentations (apparently you were, as this is was the level of evidence you required over the bribery...) You clearly don't "get" my position, but on this issue I really don't care.

~:smoking:

naut

12-03-2010, 15:03

Qatar was always going to get it. They wouldn't give it to Japan, SK or USA, they all already have hosted. Australia has an unfortunate geographical location and it's size is a hindrance. Qatar is conveniently located and has the money to host.

Russia is more of a strange decision, no doubt in my mind it'll be one of the worst WC in history especially considering it will have to live up to Brazil 2014.

al Roumi

12-03-2010, 16:45

That is my opinion, I'm sorry if it doesn't conform to what you think. I have no problems with people thinking that England's bid was better. My issue is with people saying that since Russia got it and England didn't, it must have been a bribe. But I get your position, it's far easier to think it's bias than to actually consider the facts that don't go in your favour.

Exactly what I was expecting in the OP, last night -BBC2 Newsnight (flagship News programme in UK), started off exactly on these lines. The point is, FIFA wanted to spread football to places it isn't already established -with a certain balance of hosting by "established" locations. But FIFA doesn't communicate what it wants so people go running off providing a package which fits a different bill. In a sense, England's bid was lost when Germany won the bid to host the 2004 WC...

Strike For The South

12-03-2010, 17:11

1994 was supposed to kick-start american football.

It did not.

I don't see why a second one will do any better. No, the US shouldn't get the world cup again until they've got their league running properly.

Why follow the crap MLS when EPL games are broadcast nationally?

The problem with Americans is we play soccer but still follow football.

al Roumi

12-03-2010, 17:37

Why follow the crap MLS when EPL games are broadcast nationally?

The problem with Americans is we play soccer but still follow football.

What is EPL? Is this something which has no need of an acronym, but has been given one?

Strike For The South

12-03-2010, 17:39

What is EPL? Is this something which has no need of an acronym, but has been given one?

English Priemer Leauge

al Roumi

12-03-2010, 17:43

English Priemer Leauge

(I know, I was being facetious) but why not just "The Premier league". Surely it needs no qualification!

/hubris

HoreTore

12-03-2010, 18:01

Why follow the crap MLS when EPL games are broadcast nationally?

The problem with Americans is we play soccer but still follow football.

EPL and CL are broadcast here as well, but 10% of my towns population still shows up for every home game in the bottom of the Norwegian second tier....

It's about the passion, man! Being at a stadium can't be compared to watching a game on TV.

Strike For The South

12-03-2010, 19:02

EPL and CL are broadcast here as well, but 10% of my towns population still shows up for every home game in the bottom of the Norwegian second tier....

That just means there's nothing to do in your town.

It's about the passion, man! Being at a stadium can't be compared to watching a game on TV.

I'm well aware of this

HoreTore

12-03-2010, 20:23

That just means there's nothing to do in your town.

Well you got me there.......

Strike For The South

12-03-2010, 20:27

Well you got me there.......

<3.

Banquo's Ghost

12-03-2010, 22:07

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v695/aslanngrae/Coffeegrump.jpg

Right gentlemen, the thread has been sent to the laundry and returned, if not pristine, then at least wearable.

This is a subject dear to many hearts, and deserves a discussion that is free of personal insults, baiting, bad language and hostility. Several of you are on yellow cards, and now that the game is underway again, this particular official will not hesitate to send transgressors off for a lengthy ban.

Thank you kindly.

:bow:

Banquo's Ghost

12-04-2010, 12:27

The point is, FIFA wanted to spread football to places it isn't already established -with a certain balance of hosting by "established" locations. But FIFA doesn't communicate what it wants so people go running off providing a package which fits a different bill. In a sense, England's bid was lost when Germany won the bid to host the 2004 WC...

I consider this a well-made point and one that has been repeated widely in response to FIFA's defence that they wish to bring football to new places.

It's an admirable aim which should have been clearly stated. If Spain/Portugal and England had no chance because the policy was to award the World Cup to a new nation, regardless of risk, then say so - and save everyone from spending lots of money in futile and doomed attempts to secure the competition.

quadalpha

12-05-2010, 02:51

Husar: The argument about CCTV is quite mindblowing. Does anyone else see this or is it just me?

Conflating with the "FIFA is corrupt" thread. Draw your own conclusions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/dec/05/fifa

Highlights:

Former ExCo member Viacheslav Koloskov – greeting the publication of the bids' expensive technical reports in November: "I know from my own experience that ExCo members work with little information. The inspection reports are enormous, so no one reads them."

October – Russia's sports minister Vitaly Mutko attacks the British press for "obsessive" analysis of Russia's racism record. Also that month: Russian football agent Vladimir Abramov gives an interview to Sport.ru about how Nigerians ruin Russian cities with "their drugs, and ultimately, their Aids". Abramov: "Teams shouldn't have more than one dark-skinned footballer. When there's more than one they are aggressive"; plus: "I am very respectful towards blacks, but Russia isn't ready for them." FIfa's view: "Racism will not be taken into account in the bidding process … It is not an operation matter".

Mutko again, on why attention from the English press left him exasperated. "No matter what we say we are portrayed by them as a hotbed of corruption. It is not true." Later that week: Russian authorities launch a criminal investigation into alleged fraud at Mutko's ministry, including Mutko's own expenses claim for 97 breakfasts eaten during a 20-day trip to Vancouver.

former ExCo member Ahongalu Fusimalohi, also caught in the Sunday Times sting, warning that England must offer bribes. "England don't strike deals. It's sad but it's true." Fusimalohi explained: "It is corrupt – but only if you get caught."