No shortage of hypocrisy in the FIFA scandal

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/phil-jo ... 05566.html

Staggering hypocrisy from the English FA and media..

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I laughed at the mp claiming in the commons that fifa is filled with red rape and corruption.

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Er, but that's not the point being made in the article. I'm suggesting that FIFA should have the book thrown at them but I'm also clear that the English FA portraying themselves as white knights riding to the aid of world football is hypocritical considering the culture of greed that is endemic within the premier league - which they administer!

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Er, but that's not the point being made in the article. I'm suggesting that FIFA should have the book thrown at them but I'm also clear that the English FA portraying themselves as white knights riding to the aid of world football is hypocritical considering the culture of greed that is endemic within the premier league - which they administer!

The FA, as the National Governing Body of football in England, has the responsibility for sanctioning competition rules and on field matters and absolutely nothing else. The Premier League, like many other leagues, negotiates it's own TV and other media rights and it's the members of that league which decides how the monies are distributed.

As I say to suggest the FA are responsible for any actual or perceived culture of greed within the Premier League or that they have been in anyway hypocritical is absurd.

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Er, but that's not the point being made in the article. I'm suggesting that FIFA should have the book thrown at them but I'm also clear that the English FA portraying themselves as white knights riding to the aid of world football is hypocritical considering the culture of greed that is endemic within the premier league - which they administer!

The FA, as the National Governing Body of football in England, has the responsibility for sanctioning competition rules and on field matters and absolutely nothing else. The Premier League, like many other leagues, negotiates it's own TV and other media rights and it's the members of that league which decides how the monies are distributed.

As I say to suggest the FA are responsible for any actual or perceived culture of greed within the Premier League or that they have been in anyway hypocritical is absurd.

With respect that's nonsense. The FA have the ultimate power of veto on both the appointment of the chief exec and chair of the PL. They could change the culture of greed within the PL and ensure football 'trickle down economics' if they saw fit. They absolutely have the ability to intervene. The fact that they've chosen not to do so speaks volumes as to where their priorities lie.

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Er, but that's not the point being made in the article. I'm suggesting that FIFA should have the book thrown at them but I'm also clear that the English FA portraying themselves as white knights riding to the aid of world football is hypocritical considering the culture of greed that is endemic within the premier league - which they administer!

The FA, as the National Governing Body of football in England, has the responsibility for sanctioning competition rules and on field matters and absolutely nothing else. The Premier League, like many other leagues, negotiates it's own TV and other media rights and it's the members of that league which decides how the monies are distributed.

As I say to suggest the FA are responsible for any actual or perceived culture of greed within the Premier League or that they have been in anyway hypocritical is absurd.

With respect that's nonsense. The FA have the ultimate power of veto on both the appointment of the chief exec and chair of the PL. They could change the culture of greed within the PL and ensure football 'trickle down economics' if they saw fit. They absolutely have the ability to intervene. The fact that they've chosen not to do so speaks volumes as to where their priorities lie.

Your right that the FA does have the power to veto any proposed appointment of the Chairman & CEO, as they do with other affiliated leagues and through the "Fit and Proper Person Test" any director of any club of any affiliated league. But their power over the Premier League in respect of the administration of that company ends there.

The Premier League was founded on the basis that the company could negotiate it's own broadcast and sponsorship rights and has had complete independance, from day one, on how the revenue earned from these rights are distributed amongst it's member clubs. The FA has absolutely no say in these matters.

It is interesting that the then head of London Weekend Television, Greg Dyke, was one of the big players in advocating setting up the Premier League , because the wanted more of the then "Big 5" teams (Arsenal, Manchester United, Everton, Liverpool & Spurs) because he believed LWT would benefit from more of the top 5 clubs on TV each week. As we know he is now Chairman of the FA with responsibility for the Governance of the game in England and looking after the best interest of ALL County Associations, Leagues and member clubs and not just 5 of them. Is that hypocritical

But as I have said the FA has NO authority to impose restrictions on any independent business on how spend their money, not without the agreement of that business as with FFP.

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Er, but that's not the point being made in the article. I'm suggesting that FIFA should have the book thrown at them but I'm also clear that the English FA portraying themselves as white knights riding to the aid of world football is hypocritical considering the culture of greed that is endemic within the premier league - which they administer!

The FA, as the National Governing Body of football in England, has the responsibility for sanctioning competition rules and on field matters and absolutely nothing else. The Premier League, like many other leagues, negotiates it's own TV and other media rights and it's the members of that league which decides how the monies are distributed.

As I say to suggest the FA are responsible for any actual or perceived culture of greed within the Premier League or that they have been in anyway hypocritical is absurd.

With respect that's nonsense. The FA have the ultimate power of veto on both the appointment of the chief exec and chair of the PL. They could change the culture of greed within the PL and ensure football 'trickle down economics' if they saw fit. They absolutely have the ability to intervene. The fact that they've chosen not to do so speaks volumes as to where their priorities lie.

Your right that the FA does have the power to veto any proposed appointment of the Chairman & CEO, as they do with other affiliated leagues and through the "Fit and Proper Person Test" any director of any club of any affiliated league. But their power over the Premier League in respect of the administration of that company ends there.

The Premier League was founded on the basis that the company could negotiate it's own broadcast and sponsorship rights and has had complete independance, from day one, on how the revenue earned from these rights are distributed amongst it's member clubs. The FA has absolutely no say in these matters.

It is interesting that the then head of London Weekend Television, Greg Dyke, was one of the big players in advocating setting up the Premier League , because the wanted more of the then "Big 5" teams (Arsenal, Manchester United, Everton, Liverpool & Spurs) because he believed LWT would benefit from more of the top 5 clubs on TV each week. As we know he is now Chairman of the FA with responsibility for the Governance of the game in England and looking after the best interest of ALL County Associations, Leagues and member clubs and not just 5 of them. Is that hypocritical

But as I have said the FA has NO authority to impose restrictions on any independent business on how spend their money, not without the agreement of that business as with FFP.

Once again, I'm afraid I have to disagree. The role of the FA in relation to the EPL is not dissimilar from that of central govt and It's many local authorities to whom power is almost entirely devolved but the power of veto is still in place so that the govt can intervene if a local authority chair or chief exec is negligent or the local authority is significantly under performing in certain areas.

The point of my article is that under successive chairs and chief execs, the FA have allowed the EPL to become a greedy money making machine that has seen many ordinary supporters priced out of watching their team and not enough of the multi billion pound TV money filtering down through the 'football family.' If you are happy with that situation, fair enough. Personally, I think the lack of intervention (and remember they do have the power of veto...) from the various heads of the FA over the years as the EPL has got greedier and greedier is an indictment of the way they run the organisation.

To be fair, Dyke is not the only one who is positioning the English FA as this white knight to solve FIFA's problems, the English media are taking a very superior tone too. As I wrote in the piece, there is definitely more than a touch of "we invented the game, we should still be bloody running it" coursing through the media and English football hierarchy at present. It is that pervasive sense of entitlement that annoys me, hence the article.

I don't like the high ticket prices or high wages in the PL but there's nothing illegal or unethical about it, it's supply and demand.

It's not even remotely the same thing as what was going on at FIFA.

I don't like the high ticket prices or high wages in the PL but there's nothing illegal or unethical about it, it's supply and demand.

It's not even remotely the same thing as what was going on at FIFA.

To reiterate an earlier point, I'm not accusing the FA of corruption. As far as I'm aware there is no evidence of this. I was at pains to make that very clear in the article.

I do take issue with you re: there's nothing "unethical" about the ticket prices and high wages in the PL. You really believe that??

The latest PL TV deal is worth £5.1bn over three seasons. That's a 70% increase on the previous deal. Premier League ticket prices continue to be the highest in Europe. Contrast rip off English top flight prices with those in Germany and the difference is stark.The average cost of the cheapest adult season ticket in the Bundesliga is just over £200. Less than half of the price of its English premier league equivalent. It's a similar story in Spain too, where the lowest priced La Liga adult season ticket is also less than half that of the cheapest English one.

It has nothing to do with supply and demand, it has everything to do with price fixing and greed. I'm staggered that some football supporters still can't see this!

I don't like the high ticket prices or high wages in the PL but there's nothing illegal or unethical about it, it's supply and demand.

It's not even remotely the same thing as what was going on at FIFA.

To reiterate an earlier point, I'm not accusing the FA of corruption. As far as I'm aware there is no evidence of this. I was at pains to make that very clear in the article.

I do take issue with you re: there's nothing "unethical" about the ticket prices and high wages in the PL. You really believe that??

The latest PL TV deal is worth £5.1bn over three seasons. That's a 70% increase on the previous deal. Premier League ticket prices continue to be the highest in Europe. Contrast rip off English top flight prices with those in Germany and the difference is stark.The average cost of the cheapest adult season ticket in the Bundesliga is just over £200. Less than half of the price of its English premier league equivalent. It's a similar story in Spain too, where the lowest priced La Liga adult season ticket is also less than half that of the cheapest English one.

It has nothing to do with supply and demand, it has everything to do with price fixing and greed. I'm staggered that some football supporters still can't see this!

It's business and whilst people are prepared to pay it they are entitled to charge it. I wish they were lower and it would be a fabulous thing if they deliberately dropped the prices but they don't have to do it.

It would be lovely if many things were made more affordable but just because they're not doesn't make anyone unethical.

It's everything to do with supply and demand. If people stopped buying tickets and stopped subscribing to Sky you would find prices coming down rapidly.

Its not that I'm indifferent to the points raised against the F.A.but the two are not similar or comparable in my view.Its your average football fan thats willing to pay for sky tv and silly money for season tickets that makes it all possible.

I agree to compare the manner in which FIFA has been deciding which countries hold the WC Finals to Premier League TV deals is absurd. On the one hand the process for winning the right to hold the WC Finals has been shown to have little of the principle of equal treatment to ALL countries applying, but more to do with which countries were prepared to make backhanded payments of £m's to those making the decision against the way in which the PL holds it's bidding process for TV rights.

In my opinion the only hypocrisy lies in the corrupt organisation FIFA has become under the control of Sepp Blatter.

Er, but that's not the point being made in the article. I'm suggesting that FIFA should have the book thrown at them but I'm also clear that the English FA portraying themselves as white knights riding to the aid of world football is hypocritical considering the culture of greed that is endemic within the premier league - which they administer!

The FA, as the National Governing Body of football in England, has the responsibility for sanctioning competition rules and on field matters and absolutely nothing else. The Premier League, like many other leagues, negotiates it's own TV and other media rights and it's the members of that league which decides how the monies are distributed.

As I say to suggest the FA are responsible for any actual or perceived culture of greed within the Premier League or that they have been in anyway hypocritical is absurd.

With respect that's nonsense. The FA have the ultimate power of veto on both the appointment of the chief exec and chair of the PL. They could change the culture of greed within the PL and ensure football 'trickle down economics' if they saw fit. They absolutely have the ability to intervene. The fact that they've chosen not to do so speaks volumes as to where their priorities lie.

Your right that the FA does have the power to veto any proposed appointment of the Chairman & CEO, as they do with other affiliated leagues and through the "Fit and Proper Person Test" any director of any club of any affiliated league. But their power over the Premier League in respect of the administration of that company ends there.

The Premier League was founded on the basis that the company could negotiate it's own broadcast and sponsorship rights and has had complete independance, from day one, on how the revenue earned from these rights are distributed amongst it's member clubs. The FA has absolutely no say in these matters.

It is interesting that the then head of London Weekend Television, Greg Dyke, was one of the big players in advocating setting up the Premier League , because the wanted more of the then "Big 5" teams (Arsenal, Manchester United, Everton, Liverpool & Spurs) because he believed LWT would benefit from more of the top 5 clubs on TV each week. As we know he is now Chairman of the FA with responsibility for the Governance of the game in England and looking after the best interest of ALL County Associations, Leagues and member clubs and not just 5 of them. Is that hypocritical

But as I have said the FA has NO authority to impose restrictions on any independent business on how spend their money, not without the agreement of that business as with FFP.

Once again, I'm afraid I have to disagree. The role of the FA in relation to the EPL is not dissimilar from that of central govt and It's many local authorities to whom power is almost entirely devolved but the power of veto is still in place so that the govt can intervene if a local authority chair or chief exec is negligent or the local authority is significantly under performing in certain areas.

The point of my article is that under successive chairs and chief execs, the FA have allowed the EPL to become a greedy money making machine that has seen many ordinary supporters priced out of watching their team and not enough of the multi billion pound TV money filtering down through the 'football family.' If you are happy with that situation, fair enough. Personally, I think the lack of intervention (and remember they do have the power of veto...) from the various heads of the FA over the years as the EPL has got greedier and greedier is an indictment of the way they run the organisation.

To be fair, Dyke is not the only one who is positioning the English FA as this white knight to solve FIFA's problems, the English media are taking a very superior tone too. As I wrote in the piece, there is definitely more than a touch of "we invented the game, we should still be bloody running it" coursing through the media and English football hierarchy at present. It is that pervasive sense of entitlement that annoys me, hence the article.

The role of the national association, in this case the FA, is quite clear and that is the governance of football AT ALL LEVELS within their boundaries, they are responsible for ensuring that FIFA Rules and Statutes are applied and contained within the rules of each and every competition that they sanction.

The are responsible for ensuring that the laws of the game are applied at ALL LEVELS and for controlling the disciplinary process for on field indiscretions within the professional game. They have absolutely no authority or responsibility over the marketing or commercial rights negotiations let alone how the monies raised are distributed of any sanctioned competition like the Premier League. They have absolutely no authority to impose ticket prices on individual competitions, other than the FA Cup in matches they control, like the semi finals and final but not over earlier rounds.

To compare the FA to parliament, the offices of state and how government policy is applied down to local authority is absurd and this perceived power of veto over all things simply doesn't exist, today or at anytime in the past.

Are ticket prices high, yes, should the money received from the commercial agreements of the various Leagues like the Premier League, Football League etc be used to reduce ticket prices, again the answer is yes. But I don't think clubs like any of the top 5 or 6 clubs would take any attempt at setting prices sitting down. The matter would be straight into court and the FA would lose hands down because any attempt to do so would be outside both their authority and the scope of their rules.

And thats the reality.

I don't like the high ticket prices or high wages in the PL but there's nothing illegal or unethical about it, it's supply and demand.

It's not even remotely the same thing as what was going on at FIFA.

To reiterate an earlier point, I'm not accusing the FA of corruption. As far as I'm aware there is no evidence of this. I was at pains to make that very clear in the article.

I do take issue with you re: there's nothing "unethical" about the ticket prices and high wages in the PL. You really believe that??

The latest PL TV deal is worth £5.1bn over three seasons. That's a 70% increase on the previous deal. Premier League ticket prices continue to be the highest in Europe. Contrast rip off English top flight prices with those in Germany and the difference is stark.The average cost of the cheapest adult season ticket in the Bundesliga is just over £200. Less than half of the price of its English premier league equivalent. It's a similar story in Spain too, where the lowest priced La Liga adult season ticket is also less than half that of the cheapest English one.

It has nothing to do with supply and demand, it has everything to do with price fixing and greed. I'm staggered that some football supporters still can't see this!

It's business and whilst people are prepared to pay it they are entitled to charge it. I wish they were lower and it would be a fabulous thing if they deliberately dropped the prices but they don't have to do it.

It would be lovely if many things were made more affordable but just because they're not doesn't make anyone unethical.

It's everything to do with supply and demand. If people stopped buying tickets and stopped subscribing to Sky you would find prices coming down rapidly.

Respect your opinion but I totally disagree. I don't subscribe to the sort of uber free market outdated dogma espoused by Thatcher and Friedman etc that you clearly do.

Of course it's totally unethical to exploit peoples loyalties in the way PL club's do. If we lived our lives solely by market forces we'd still be sending kids up chimneys.

Castleblue, we are simply not going to agree on this one. I do agree with on all you say about the key functions of the FA apart from the one fundamental which is the unarguable fact that the FA most certainly do have the power to decide what sort of chairman and Chief Exec they want in charge of the premier league and, as a consequence what direction the PL will take on key policies. That fact is not even up for debate. The FA's power of veto in that matter is in the premier leagues constitution.