You get the brushes, I'll get the whitewash.

No, not another post about the shenanigans going on at LPUK.

It seems like only a couple of days ago that I posted about the corruption investigation going on at FIFA.

Mainly because it was only a couple of days ago that I posted about the corruption investigation going on at FIFA.

Well, I'll give Bin Hammam 10/10 for havoc raising, but 0/10 of originality.

You see, Mohamed Bin Hammam, the head of the Asian Football Confederation is standing for election as the President of FIFA next Wednesday. The current incumbent, Swiss Sepp Blatter takes a dim view of this. Since Joao Havelange, the previous President and part-time Jabba the Hutt impersonator unseated the old gent, blazer and general duffer, Sir Stanley Rous in 1974, it has sort of been an unwritten rule that whilst there is a Presidential election once every four years, you don't stand unless the incumbent announces his intention to toddle off. Even then it appears to be more of an annointing (usually with Adidas boot-oil*) than a proper election.

Bin Hammam has broken a golden rule and Blatter obviously decided to punish it for him by bringing in the 'Ethics Committee', an anti-corruption force with such a poor reputation that even OLAF point at them and piss themselves laughing.

Jack Warner has been pulled into it as well. He's a thoroughly unattractive man, just look at his record at how he blows hot and cold towards the FA and the UK in general.

Not to be outdone it appears that Bin Hammam has pulled the same trick on Blatter now.

As far as I can make out all three of them are as corrupt as each other. The whole organisation is lousy with corruption. I find as I grow older my love for the game diminshes, not just because of the corruption amongst the blazers, but also because of the antics of the players and managers, both on and off the pitch. I still get a little angry at the naked feathering of nests, at the end of the day football is only a game and you have a very easy choice to consume or not, but it is the world game - and at the risk of sounding like a FIFA promo video, it really can be a force for good. The sport and its supporters deserve better.

Quite how any election can go ahead now on Wednesday and have even a pretence of credibility is beyond me. There may well be a third man sat in the wings, thanking his lucky stars that things have turned out so well, make no mistake Blatter, bin Hammam and Warner are hugely powerful people in the organisation.

From what I can see this is a problem to a lesser or greater extent with administrators in most sports, they seem to be the only class who are more venal and corrupt than politicians, or perhaps because of a lack of accountability and that because at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter, they just aren't as polished as hiding it as politicians.

It is unfortunate that it is easy to tar them all with the same brush. I feared the worst when Michel Platini, a sublime player and half-way sensible chap took on the top job at UEFA (Union of European Football Associations), it remains to be seen what sort of administrator he'll turn out to be. However, the use of the patented Wolfers Trophy Test is good indicator. To his credit, Platini has gone on record to say he prefers a Wembley style affair where the victorious team in a final climbs to a balcony rather than an on-pitch stage, this simplifies matters no end, but watch an administrator handing a trophy to a winning captain. If they get out of the bloody way before the captain raises the trophy skywards and the confetti goes off, it is a good thing, if he strives to keep a grubby mitt on it whilst the captain initiates the celebrations, this is a bad thing and shows how desperate he is to be part of the action.

Platini seems to be in the former camp. But he is one of the very few world class players who has been that man with the trophy in his hand on his own merit, to move into administration. One can only question why the likes of Beckenbauer (although he has been active in the DFB), Charlton R, Van Basten, Zoff et al haven't made the move as well. Perfectly intelligent and capable people, could it be they view the administrators with the same disdain and don't want to get involved?

One thing is for sure, this whole affair promises to make the Salt Lake olympics scandal look like a storm in a teacup. At least there there was no cash changing hands. I think for the good of the game it would be best if the whole show at FIFA was laid waste and the organisation started over. Unfortunately I think the whole thing will be a whitewash, the message will have been sent out by Blatter that if you want a career at FIFA, you don't stand against him.

If you're interested in the ongoing story, I can heartily recommend 'Foul' by Andrew Jennings, a real jaw dropper. Jennings is not a well liked man at FIFA, so he must be doing something right.

*Blatter is very much an Adidas man, the sportswear company have enormous power in the organisation, no-one else gets a look in.

My, that's convenient.

Mohamed Bin Hammam and vice president Jack Warner have denied wrongdoing after Fifa opened disciplinary proceedings against them following bribery allegations.

 Blimey, FIFA sorting their house out at last?

Executive committee member Chuck Blazer has passed a report to Fifa alleging that the men attempted to bribe members of the Caribbean Football Union to secure votes for Bin Hammam in the presidential election a week today. 

Ah, I see.

So that'll be a no then. Funny isn't it, how Blatter runs this just a week before he's due to stand for re-election? Funnier still that the accused is his opponent in the election.

Don't misunderstand me, they're all as corrupt as each other, but just when you think FIFA and Blatter's stock couldn't get any lower...

Stalin would be proud if it weren't so painfully transparent.

Leave it to the governing bodies.

For what it is worth, I think the ICC got it spot on with the suspensions handed down to the three Pakistani cricketers who indulged in a bit of spot fixing during their tour of England over the summer. Had the three (and the agent) been involved in fixing the outcome of the match, then I would have expected to see life bans handed down.

It is very easy to criticise the governing bodies of sport, it is also usually justified. The governing body of cycling, the UCI, have been pretty ineffective in tackling the performance enhancing drug abuse which seems to be running rampant through the sport. Alberto Contador, who won le Tour last year, is the latest high profile case to fall foul of the doping regulations, with the usual claims of accidental contamination. Another big name from the sport, Floyd Landis, who has held his hands up to the offence has also implicated the absolute biggest name in the history of the sport, Lance Armstrong in the same.

I'm not about to defame Contador here, it may be that his protestations of innocence are credible, certainly from the amounts declared it would appear that if you want to be a top class athlete you also need to be a food scientist.

The football world in the UK is scratching its head at the fine of £25,000 imposed on Blackpool for fielding a 'weakened' team in a match against Aston Villa in the Premier League in November. Blackpool's entertaining manager, Ian Holloway, said at the time that if the club were fined for making ten changes to their team, then he'd resign. The situation is a farce. At the start of the season, each Premier League club is instructed to submit a squad of 25 players for registration in the competition (excluding players under the age of 21, who can be, but do not have to be registered). One would have thought that having submitted that squad, each manager is then free to pick whichever 11 players he sees fit. So Holloway has registered his squad, picked his eleven, all from the registered squad and has seen his club fined by some administrators who obviously think that they are more qualified to pick his team than he is. The irony is that the 'big' clubs, the Manchester Uniteds and Chelseas of the league will regularly make large changes to teams in the games immediately before Champions League fixtures, when facing smaller opposition in the FA cup and will stick out a team comprised completely of reserve, youth team and very occasional first team players in the League Cup. Has the FA ever fined them? No. They wouldn't dare.

It is an unfortunate truth that the ICC have marked themselves out as being the exception rather than the rule. In most other sports, the governing bodies quake at the thought of rapping the big clubs and names over the knuckles, and as a result sanctions that they hand out are uneven and inconsistent. By handing out 5 year bans to Butt and Asif, the ICC have shown no such fear in the face of two of the most established stars in the game.

But there's a problem, sport is popular, so the authorities can't help getting involved in it. Just because it is popular, they make the mistake of thinking it is important. So we see stories like this:

The Football Association say there is "no justification'' for direct Government intervention into the governance of the game and have warned their organisation could face FIFA sanctions if politicians overstepped the mark.

The comments, made in written evidence from the FA to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee inquiry into football governance, follow comments from sports minister Hugh Robertson, who described football as the "worst governed'' sport in Britain.

Which is kind of like Charlie Kennedy berating the pub industry for taking one or two too many drinks. There simply is no justification for politicians to get involved here, and given the track records of politicians any intervention from them would increase costs, expand red tape and ensure the sport is even worse governed. It is what politicians do.

It is also the CPS getting involved as well.

Prosecutors in Britain announced on Friday that batsman Butt and seamers Amir and Asif would face criminal charges over their part in last year's alleged spot-fixing scandal, specifically over their actions in the fourth Test at Lord's.

Why? No-one has been injured here. The result of the match was unaffected and the noises about spot fixing in the game in the sub-continent have been running for so long that any punter who stuck a few quid on anything beyond the final result is a fool or in on it. Likewise the bookies who took such a bet need to take a look at themselves for being so credulous.

The three Pakistani cricketers are in Pakistan, a country we have no extradition treaty with, so any attempt to get them back to the UK if they don't surrender themselves would be very expensive and probably fruitless, that, coupled with the expense of trial and imprisonment, means that surely a prosecution just isn't in the public interest.

The ICC have shown that governing bodies are perfectly capable of administering their own kingdoms without 'help' from the politicians or apparatus of state. The politicians would do well to realise this and back off. We need to cut back areas of life where they are involved, not to increase them. 

For The Death Of The Game.

I've been a bit slack recently. I've been doing mental gymnastics for the last couple of weeks. The axe has finally fallen, thankfully I've been spared, this time. What does not make it comfortable for me is that some good people will lose their jobs and in close proximity for me. Whilst I'm relieved that my execution has been stayed for the present, it is tinged with the very real sadness that when the process is completed some people for whom I have a good deal of respect and admiration will be gone. It sucks, but that is the situation and nothing will change that, I say this in the knowledge that one day, and that day may come soon, I may be amongst their number. This is not sanctuary, it is merely temporary respite.

It is not bad news, however. My office has been reorganised and our remit and way of working completely overhauled. It is going to be challenging, and there's a lot of new stuff to learn, but I'm looking forward to it.

I mention this to explain my recent silence on here. I've not had the drive to do anything for the last few days, all my mental energy has been taken up trying to understand the lie of the land in my Brave New World.

I'm directing my attention to the big story of the week, even if a number of you will reject it as an irrelevance. We've had a former MP pleading guilty and waiting to see what his future will be, another has been stripped of his seat and banned from standing for election, the students continue to demand that money be taken from other people and given to them and some odd people have decided to superglue themselves to a clothes store in London, because they don't hand over more money than they have to. Probably because they'll see it disappear into the pockets of students.

But let's be frank, the big story has been the awarding of the world cup finals tournaments to Russia and Qatar.

The spilling of bile over this in the British media has been quite surprising, yet at the same time utterly predictable. My reaction has been to prickle at the lack of transparency and yet to remain stoic about the situation.

I can't get too animated about it as FIFA are a private club, they do not take any of my cash. However I know corruption and injustice when I see it.

Sepp Blatter, the FIFA president has now done his job, he's been the power in the game since he was FIFA Secretary General and playing nominal second fiddle to the equally repulsive Joao Havelange, the man whom he subsequently replaced as President. He is, without doubt, an Adidas placeman and has delivered on his promise to take the World Cup to places it has never been before. We only need to look at his record since his star began the rise to its zenith and where the World Cup has set up camp:

1994 - USA
1998 - France
2002 - Japan/South Korea
2006 - Germany
2010 - South Africa
2014 - Brazil
2018 - Russia
2022 - Qatar

He's always been about taking the tournament to new territories, and with the exception of France (who had not hosted the tournament since 1938) and Germany (who hosted in '74) the tournament is breaking new ground. Brazil may be an established footballing power, but it is a power base which has existed in the European leagues for the last 40 years, domestically the league is a disaster with crumbling stadia, poor attendence figures and last minute rule changes to the already labyrinthine relegation system to prevent the big names from suffering the drop. Brazil may have hosted the tournament in 1950, but it is a very different world now, and recent gun battles between a very eager police force and exceptionally violent drugs gangs highlight what a dicey place Brazil can be if you don't have serious cash to hide behind. I have yet to see any evidence that Brazil has the infrastructure to host the tournament.

The tournaments held in the US and Japan/South Korea were logistically excellent tournaments. Football is the only show in town in Korea, as evidenced by their continued qualification since the 1986 tournaments, but one would hardly call them a powerhouse. Football is far from the sport of choice in the US and Japan, and yet both have stable, successful and credible leagues which hold their own. The legacy of the tournaments being held in those three countries can be reasonably called a success.

Then we come to South Africa. Thankfully the disasters which were predicted never materialised, (and they may not also materialise in Brazil), but one wonders what the legacy of the tournament will be. One may always associate South Africa with the money rich white sports of rugby union and cricket, but football is massive in South Africa, but the national team has a patchy to poor record and their club sides, whilst attracting enormous support, do not have the same pedigree as their rivals in Egypt, Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. It will always be the lot of African clubs to see their brightest talents head over to Europe at the first opportunity. I don't see how the legacy of the tournament will change South African football in any meaningful sense. However, Blatter was elected on the back of a strong African vote, and having pretty much gone back on his promise to gift the finals to Africa in '06, it would have been political suicide to have them go anywhere else, and to be fair, where else in Africa could they have gone?

Blatter had hitched his wagon to a World Cup world tour, and now the increasingly bizarre circus has to follow the pattern. This is how we find ourselves looking towards Russia in 2018, no world cup in Eastern Europe thus far, so off they go. Given that Russia has recently been (unsurprisingly) described as a mafia state in the wikileaks story, you can only imagine what happened behind closed doors and hotel bars (incidentally, IOC members can no longer even accept a drink from a campaign team following the reformation in light of the Salt Lake City vote rigging scandal) to secure the tournament's journey eastwards. Abramovic was involved, and nothing he's involved in can be described as transparent.

Then we have the utterly ridiculous decision to award the tournament to Qatar in 2022. Qatar, who have never qualified for a major tournament, who have a domestic league populated by a parade of creaking hasbeen superstars making one last massive payday, who have a landmass 100 miles by 50 miles and an average summer temperature that will fry an egg in three minutes. The options are, play at 6am, play at 10pm, play in nothing but air-conditioned indoor stadia, or as has been suggested, play the tournament in January and February.

Herein lies the very dangerous game Blatter and his 23 chums are playing with their own positions, let alone the future of the sport. By choosing Russia, they've ridden roughshod over not only the English, but also the Portuguese, Spanish, Belgians and Dutch. Granted the Sunday Times and Panorama stories did not help (but then would we moan if the papers had broken the story of MP's expenses two days before the election? No, of course we wouldn't), but there is only so much the established European powers will take. Suggesting holding the world cup in January and February, slap bang in the middle of the European season (when a number of the leagues will only just have come out of an inconvenient winter break) will cause uproar, and if Blatter is trying to annoy the national federations in Europe, then he's going the right way about it.

Similar for the 2022 award, Australia had by far the best bid, and of course the world cup has never been to Oceania (yes, pedants, I know the Aussie federation is part of the Asian Confederation, but still, Australia is in Oceania), and one only has to look at Sydney's handling of the Olympics, Melbourne's Commonwealths and the regular rugby and cricket world cups to understand that the Aussies are probably the best in the world at putting this sort of thing on. To award the tournament to the Qataris in the face of this, and perfectly credible bids from the US, Japan and South Korea (bidding individually this time round) was a slap in the face to four of football's most dynamic and fastest growing markets. There is no good reason, sporting, economic, logistical or in terms of intangible 'legacy' to award the tournament to Qatar, none whatsoever, and if anything this decision is more perverse than the decision to go to Russia. I am more angry for Australia's injustice than I am for the one perpetuated against England, and get the impression that some serious money has changed hands.

So, if FIFA is so corrupt, and I believe it is (read Foul! by Andrew Jennings), and if they piss off the European powerhouses of England, Italy, Spain and Germany, and if they piss off the emerging markets of Australia, USA, Japan and South Korea, how much will it take for those federations to sit down around a table together? How difficult would it be for them to call Argentina and Brazil and form a footballing G10? How difficult would it be for them to say to FIFA 'actually, we won't be entering your world cup, we're starting our own?' How long would it take for pretty much every other federation to follow them? How long would it take for Nike, Pepsi and Burger King or Pizza Hut to come in and supplant the domination of Adidas, Coca Cola and McDonald's in FIFA?

Of course FIFA would lash out, they'd ban players, not just at international level, but also at club level. Rebel? UEFA will ban you as well, no Champions League for you. Listen to the clubs revolt, look at the sponsors leaving UEFA in droves.

The result? The death of football. We'd go from a corrupt, money grabbing and unaccountable organisation, to a corrupt, money grabbing and unaccountable organisation which would be smaller and exclude all those who don't bring anything to the table. Do you think Manchester United want to be playing Wigan, that Barcelona want to be playing Osasuna? Of course not. Do England want to play qualifiers against Montenegro? Do Brazil really want to go Peru? Not a bit of it.

They'll organise their own show, and it'll be skewed for them. It'll be every two years. It'll be on pay-per-view, and the revenues will be astronomical. The small clubs will die, the small nations will be excluded. And the death of the game will be complete.

It will all be down the corruption and self-serving attitude of those who claim to act 'for the good of the game'.

The One That Can't Be Arsed. . .

I was going to blog about how Prescott is going to be made Lord Prescott of Melton Mowbray or whatever, but to be honest what's the point?

I was going to blog about David Laws' piss taking over expenses and the accompanying sob story about how it isn't his fault, it's because he's gay.

Here's a newsflash David, we don't care if you like to put it up another man's bottom, believe me, it really isn't that important, I get as animated about homosexuality as I do about people who like the novels of Dick Francis or enjoy eating spinach, it's an irrelevance.

I'm guessing that most people who vote Lib-Dem are similarly unconcerned about a bit of bum fun as well.

What I do get animated about is you using your sexuality as an excuse for the way you've claimed these expenses.

I give up, I really do. Of course new politics was bullshit, of course Labour would look after their own (and the Tories, I see Howard is now Count of Transylvania or whatnot). I'm at a loss as to what the solution is.

I'm not even angry to be honest.

What's the fucking point?

The One That Is Being Pithy. . .

One thing's for sure, when we do get the chance to see Jim Devine in court, if he presents like this he'll be more fucked than a lone chamber maid walking into a room full of England footballers.

If this is the best in debating skills that someone who has sat in the house since 2005 can muster, then the mother of parliaments really is a bloody joke.

I hope the judge hasn't sent his black cap to the dry-cleaner, I've a funny feeling he'll need it come sentencing day.

The One That Is Abso-bloody-lutley Delighted. . .

Four out of six ain't bad.

Scared are we?

Theft, false accounting, 2 charges Elliot Morley MP.

Theft, false accounting, 3 charges David Chaytor MP.

Theft, false accounting 2 charges Jim Devine MP.

Theft, false accounting, 6 charges Lord Hanningfield.

Lord Clarke of Hampstead gets off.

One case still under consideration.

Let the games begin. Perhaps we can hire the O2 and hold the trials in there?

The One That Is Disgusted. . .

I was going to write about Kent police admitting that their actions at the Kingsnorth climate demo were illegal. I've not much time for the ecomentalists, but they were treated in a shocking fashion that sets worrying trends for demonstrations of any ilk in the future. Will anyone be held to account? Doubt it.

I could have mentioned the suspension of the issue of student visas in northern India, Nepal and Bangladesh, but to be honest, that's like barring the windows on your house when your front door is painted blue with gold stars and hanging off its hinges.

What I am writing about connects to a posting I made the other day about Togo's withdrawal from the African Cup of Nations; the final of which is to be played tomorrow evening.

As previously stated, football is a game I love, and I have been dipping in and out of the tournament. It has been an odd affair, some superb football, quite the worst pitches I can remember seeing in a major tournament in years, some terrible refereeing and some equally poor lapses in discipline from the players coupled with crowds that some English 4th division clubs (I still work in old money) would be disappointed with.

African football is a riddle, and it is easy to be patronising about it. For many the zenith will be the memories of Cameroon's incredibly entertaining squad making the quarter-finals at Italia '90 before a couple of poor defending decisions allowed England to eliminate them. They were certainly a very popular side; the tournament began in Milan with them causing a huge upset by defeating the defending champions Argentina, although their tackling was brutal, including what amounted to an assault by Benjamin Massing on Claudio Caniggia. He got a standing ovation for it, and his second yellow of the match.

The European press were cooing about them, talking about their positive, attacking and care-free football. What they really meant was tactical naivety and them being an entertaining sideshow, as long as they didn't really hurt the established nations. It was almost as if they were the warm up act for the real footballers. African football was fun, but it was disorganised and should know its place.

Twenty years on, and things have changed a great deal. Those Cameroon players of 1990 were journeymen, in the main earning their living on the fringes of France's first and second divisions. No African had really, really made the grade, Eusebio being the exception who had left Mozambique as a youngster for Lisbon and represented Portugal. Now African players are amongst the leading stars of the leading clubs. It is hard to imagine Barcelona's recent success without Samuel Eto'o (now at Inter Milan), or Chelsea without Didier Drogba, Jon Obi Mikel, Michael Essien. These are accomplished professionals at the top of their game and the envy of other clubs and other professionals around the world.

And yet, something seems to happen when the Cup of Nations rolls around every two years, there's always one or two events which gives the tournament an element of farce. A little switch goes off which seems to make those involved think, 'Ahhh yes, Zaire vs Brazil 1974, that's what we need more of.'

It's a shame, because African football deserves better than that. But is it any wonder that this clowning, this reverting to stereotype happens when the African games is run by the biggest clowns of all?

At the time of the attack on the Togolese bus my immediate reaction is that they were right to pull out of the tournament, that the tournament should have been pulled and that it was madness to host it in Angola in the first place. To be honest, the fact that the tournament happens every two years devalues the tournament (as it does with the Copa America, where many of the European based players stay at home) as does the fact that it is held in the middle of the season, taking the players away from the clubs that pay them an awful lot of money to do their job.

However, the game's governing body, CAF have acted in a very shoddy manner by announcing that Togo will be banned from the next two tournaments as a result of withdrawing from the ACN because their bus was attacked by some nutter with a machine gun, resulting in fatalities.

It leaves me almost speechless, it is amazing that having been put in very serious danger and paying for it with their own blood, that they are then punished. Togo's government (more of which in a moment) are understandably pretty bloody un-chuffed and are talking about legal action. The European clubs will be delighted, it means they'll not lose so many players at the busiest time of the year, watch the value of Togolese players sky-rocket if this ban sticks.

And here's the rub, from the early days of players in England travelling in third class whilst the directors sat in the first class carriages on the trains to games, to now when the administrators feel that their decisions, their tournaments and their incomes are more important than the players and supporters and their safety; football, not just in Africa, is in danger of eating itself.

FIFA will probably not be happy with CAF's actions. What they will be less happy with will be Togo's government getting involved, FIFA hate this. Any intereference from the government in the national federation of any country means instant suspension, getting FIFA to abide by any court decision is very difficult, even the international court of arbitration for sport. They view their grip on the game as absolute, they will tolerate no dissent, but football is too important for that. Battles between the EU and FIFA/UEFA have been avoided thus far, but it is inevitable.

The next big one will be the issue of TV rights, and clubs, rather than leagues, owning the rights to sell coverage. It is a foregone conclusion. The clubs will win, it is them after all that people want to watch, not a committee of old men in blazers. The relationships between companies like Adidas and Nike (the latter pretty much own the Brazilian national team, whilst the former are so closely integrated into FIFA as to be almost symbiotic, Sepp Blatter is an Adidas man through and through), the confederations and clubs is an interesting one, but when push comes to shove, clubs pay the players and people watch the clubs.

When the TV debate is won by the clubs, then football as we know it will be dead within ten years. The administrators can't see it. The club shareholders don't care. The fans won't realise until too late. Competition and player development will die as the clubs who cannot sell their rights, or generate sufficient income from the sales will die out. With that so will the sport, except in one country - the USA.

The American Major League Soccer has very shrewdly followed the plan set out by the most succesful sporting franchise model in existence - the NFL. American football follows some very anti-American practices to ensure its business is sound, its advertising revenue is strong, its TV packages equitable and most importantly that its league is competitive and fair. The Superbowl is next weekend, at the start of the season, no-one knew who would be going to Miami, it could have been any one of the 32 teams, and the same will hold true next season (except the Cleveland Browns, who are always, always terrible, I don't know how they do it).

When football collapses, the MLS/NFL model and the Americans will take over the football world. It'll be a huge shock, but will probably be for the better.

The One That Wishes They'd Make Sensible Decisions . . .

I try to avoid writing about sport, especially football. I love the game, but realise there are many more important things going on. Sport in general and football specifically are little islands of calm for me, something I can plug into and just watch without continually deconstructing and wondering about hidden agenda.

I will say that as I've got older, my love for football has diminished. That doesn't mean I don't still love football, but we've now got past that intense first stage of the relationship where you now realise your beloved's imperfections and bad habits. I'm still helplessly in love though.

However, to stretch the metaphor to breaking point, football and I would have had a massive barney this weekend, one of us would have been sleeping on the sofa.

I'm talking of course about the events surrounding the national team of Togo in the lead up to the African Cup of Nations. I was speechless at the time when the Confederation of African Football announced that Angola were to host the tournament. Even by African standards, Angola is a disaster, mentioned in the same breath as Somalia and Eritrea.

What on Earth were the CAF thinking when they awarded the tournament to this very definition of a failed state? Not only was the situation of a team bus being attacked forseeable, it was probably a given. For the tournament to be awarded with the promise of matches taking part in Cabinda is even more ridiculous. Cabinda, an 'exclave' seperated from the rest of the country by a corridor of D.R. Congo (formerly Zaire) jutting out into the Atlantic is very rich in oil and almost completely lawless.

It's not often you'll hear me agreeing with politicians on here, but the Prime Minister of Togo, Gilbert Fossoun is spot on when he demands the team return home from Angola as a result of this attack. Without doubt, professional footballers are spolit bunch, individuals often act in a fashion which portrays the profession in a very poor light, but no-one going to play football in a major tournament should be put in the situation where they are being peppered with bullets.

Part of the problem as I see it is that whilst Africa's golden children have grown up and gone to study at the great European footballing universities, the game's administrators on the continent are naive and foolish at best and grasping and corrupt at worst. One wonders how much cash changed hands in the process to select Angola as the host nation. The African players have grown up but the African game hasn't. A more unsuitable choice than Angola to host a major tournament it is hard to imagine, beyond Somalia and Eritrea. And it isn't as if the CAF don't have form in this area, the play-off between deadly rivals Egypt and Algeria for the last remaining African slot at the World Cup this summer, a match that was always only ever going to be explosive, was held in Sudan.

Yes, that Sudan, big place, lots of people very keen on killing people because of their religion, ethnicity or politics, Darfur and all that. With two of Islam's biggest footballing powers set to face off, they sent them to a country riven with religious violence. Nice one. It could have ended very, very badly indeed, it didn't, but one has to wonder what the supporters of these teams had going through their heads as they boarded planes and busses to the country. What are the supporters of all the other teams thinking as they sit in or en-route to Angola now? If they attack a team bus, offing a few foreign supporters won't even make the 'in brief' sections of the media.

The only conclusion I can draw is that nobody could be that stupid, so it can only be avarice and corruption. It gives me no pleasure to say it, but alongside road-race cycling and boxing, no sport is more corrupt than global football, we have bizarre decisions like this, investigations into huge match fixing ring in Eastern Europe, no doubt fuelled by shady bookies in the far-east and a litany of other examples.

Football is in danger of eating itself through its greedy business partners and amateurish administrators and it damn near breaks my heart.

Another sport which I am very fond of is the American version of football, it is superbly run with robust rules that are enforced with complete impartiality, albeit rarely, because people understand they are in a very privileged situation and don't want to do anything to attract the attention of the game's administrators who really do act 'for the good of the game' (that is FIFA's slogan). I take solace from the fact that Major League Soccer, the USA's initially much derided FIFA recognised national championship is run along the same robust yet egalitarian lines as grid-iron and is enjoying something of a golden period at present. Should global football collapse, as it may, make no mistake, Corporate America is ready and waiting with a tried and tested business and sporting model, and it would be no bad thing.

To read a damning document on the corruption and venality of football, I heartily recommend 'Foul!' by Andrew Jennings. It's quite an eye opener.

The One That Wonders If You Can Hear It Too. . .

Just for a moment. Sit back, close your eyes and let your ears filter out all the background noise and chatter.

There. Yes, that's it.

That is the sound of 646 sphincters twitching, shifting uneasily in their seats as they realise that one of theirs has been sent down.

For two years.

After pleading guilty.

For the want of £39,000.

OH has put it best:

Fucking ACE, coppers. Now get down to the House of Commons, your work has just begun.

Should we be calling Crimestoppers?

The One That Thinks We've Not Been Clear. . .

It is the only conclusion I can come to.

This, to which my attention has been drawn by OH elsewhere today.

David Wilshire, the disgraced Conservative MP, has compared the treatment of politicians over their expense claims to the plight of Jews in Nazi Germany.

A voter who emailed to protest at Mr Wilshire’s behaviour received the reply in which Mr Wilshire compared MPs whose claims were exposed during the expenses scandal to Holocaust victims.

Right, bollocks to it, I've had enough of this shit now.

Firstly - In Nazi Germany the Jews were, after a period of restrictions on their liberties, rounded up, transported en masse and then put into a programme of systematic extermination.

Secondly - MP's have not had this treatment meted out to them.

Thirdly - Jews are an identifiable religious and socio-ethnic group.

Fourthly - MP's are not an identifiable religious and socio-ethnic group.

“The witch hunt against MPs in general will undermine democracy. It will weaken parliament - handing yet more power to governments. Branding a whole group of people as undesirables led to Hitler's gas chambers.”

Right, let's deal with that.

Firstly - In a good Democracy, constituents would be able to look at a venal, money grabbing MP and recall him or her, due to their complete loss of trust in his or her abilities or motives.

Secondly - It is all 646 of you who have weakened parliament. It is your governments who have stripped power from the individual and made them subordinate to the State. Do you mean to tell us that you sitting on your excessively well fed and expensively clothed arse syphoning cash off makes for a strong democracy? Do you think I'm stupid? Well, fuck you mate, your excessively well fed and expensively clothed arse is history.

Thirdly - Yes, the branding of a whole group of people as undesirables did indeed lead to Hitler's gas chambers. Those who would smoke, those who would drink, those who would eat, those who would be free of thought, those who would see us leave the EU, those who would go for a walk down the street, those who go for a walk in the park with their dog and forget to take a plastic bag, those who leave their bin fractionally open, those who would attempt to do their recycling like a good citizen but find the bins are full, those who would question the 'settled science' behind global warming/climate change, those who do what they can to get their kids into the best school available, those who stand at the Cenotaph and read out the names of the lads who have lost their lives on active service, those who would take a photograph of a public space, those who would take a photograph of a public servant, those who would have their friends look after their children, those who would show a bit of fucking humanity and pick up a child who has fallen and cut their knee, those who would drive a car, all have been branded as undesirables.

I could go on, but I fear I would lose the will to live. Funnily enough, MPs would not appear on that list, not even right at the bottom. You see, David, what MPs have done is bring it on themselves. What the people on the list above have had happen is have it forced on them by you and your mates.

No doubt you would dismiss all this as having happened under Labour. But you know what? I don't think you'd be any different. Is it just our money you want, David? I'm betting not, I'm betting you want our money and our obedience.

Still, let's see what else you've been doing.

Earlier this month, The Daily Telegraph disclosed that he had paid £105,000 from his office expenses to Moorlands Research Services, a firm owned himself and his girlfriend.

Doubtless your research firm are world leaders and provided excellent value for money. Even if that is the case, it is the perception of the thing. How could you be so stupid, so arrogant? Did you think we wouldn't find out, or did you just think we'd do as we were told when you stood in the way and told us to mind our own business? Your lot have been nosing around in our lives for years, now the spotlight has been switched. Not very nice is it?

He told his constituents that he had been “attacked” by the Telegraph, but was writing: “with a clear conscience”.

Well good for the Telegraph. It's nice to see something approaching investigative journalism these days. And no, you did not write with a clear conscience, in order for the conscience to be clear there has to be a conscience there in the first place. From where I'm sitting, MP's aren't shamefaced (although I'm struggling to think of one who is ashamed) because they've done wrong, they are angry because they've been caught. They are angry because the report talks about retrospective measures. Well, it's fucking good enough for us, isn't it? Have some of your own medicine, you fat old trougher.

he said: “It is in accord with the rules.”

Well yes. And who made those rules?

The destruction of Jewish businesses was within the rules (hey, you started this comparison, lard-arse), denying the Jewish housing was within the rules, turning Jews into slave labour was within the rules, hoarding the private belongings of the Jews was within the rules, sending Jews to concentration camps was within the rules.

Well, that was until the rest of the world got together in Nuremburg after the war and decided that it was all very much against the rules. How many of the old Nazis got uppity and huffy at the trials, David? Did they sound like you?

In his letter, the MP complained of being the victim of “false allegations” and insisted that his company was “a properly constituted business”.

He added: “This use of allowances to help an MP do his/her job is completely within Parliament’s rules.”

Again, who made these rules?

We are the world as far as you are concerned, David. And for all of you in the house, the General Election will be your Nuremburg.

646 of them. 60 Million of us.

I'm looking forward to my stroll on Thursday.

The One That Can't See The Difference. . .

So this is how one brings about the 'post-democratic' age then.

The Electoral Complaints Commission, responsible for overseeing the Presidential election in Afghanistan has thrown out ballots from 210 polling stations after uncovering what it claimed was 'Clear and convincing evidence of fraud'.

I can't say I'm surprised. It was all so predictable. The ballots thrown out now mean that Karzai has only a 48% share of the vote, so a run-off with the imaginatively named Abdullah Abdullah is sure to take place.

You can bet your arse that electoral fraud will be perpetrated again. No doubt the commission will get involved again, no doubt people who have voted properly will get their papers thrown out again, no doubt some kangaroo court in Afghanistan will have its say, no doubt American troops will be stood outside the courthouse as deliberations go on.

To make it even less democratic, these elections are being held with foreign troops running around and people not turning out because some nutjob has threatened to kill them if they do, assuming that is, that the same nutjob hasn't blown up the polling station the night before.

This is hardly a democratic process. It isn't going to work. It was never going to work. It will never work as long as other countries are propping up and dictating to the regime in 'power' and Taleban fighters are running around the country.

'Well, we tried' will be the refrain, if it isn't drowned out by whichever cheating vote rigging bastard happens to do enough to influence the result of this election being held up as a convincingly and resoundingly elected President given a mandate from the masses.

More to the point if this fraud has been carried out by any of the parties and politicians involved, then why the hell aren't they under lock and key, or at least barred from standing for election ever again?

This is ridiculous.

Democracy? Don't make me laugh, it is a pretence, there will never be democracy whilst we are in Afghanistan (or Iraq for that matter) as there will be this mortal fear that people will vote the 'wrong' way, just as the Palestinians did with Hizbollah. You can be certain they wouldn't have won if American or British troops were on the ground there.

The problem being that the people we want them to elect are self-serving, venal, money-grabbing, corrupt toads out to grab what they can with the big boy standing behind them scaring people off if they want to make something of it. Whereas the people they might want to elect are self-serving, venal, money-grabbing, corrupt toads out to grab what they can whilst putting the fear of God into everyone.

Looks like a lose-lose situation to me.

The One That Thinks They've Got It The Wrong Way Round. . .

Britain has imposed direct rule on the Turks and Caicos Islands after an inquiry found evidence of government corruption and incompetence.

Stones.

Glass houses.

That is all.

The One That Is Delighted. . .

It's all kicking off!

The Torygraph has bought the CD and published the first lot of expenses for MPs starting with the Cabinet.

Pass the popcorn, this will be really good fun!

The One That Is Ticking Off His Checklist: 'Popcorn, Cider, Ciggies, Camcorder'. . .

A tip of the hat to Mr. E for flagging up this article from the Daily Fail:

Three Labour MPs are said to be terrified that the release of their expenses claims will expose them as adulterers and financial cheats.

Four ministers are also understood to have warned party whips they might have to resign for abusing the system, when MPs' receipts are published before the summer recess in July.

The three unnamed backbenchers are said to have been placed on 'suicide watch' by Labour whips, who fear they might break down when the details of their excesses come out.

Two are understood to have had extra-marital affairs with other members of Parliament.

Now can we just be absolutely clear about what 'suicide watch' means? Are they worried that some MPs may get a bit blubby, or are they wanting people to watch and make sure they really do top themselves?

If it is the latter, I will selflessly put myself forward for the task. Perhaps I can offer some words of consolation like 'You screwed who? How will you like sleeping in the shed you claimed for, you adulterous venal wankstain?' and 'Oh, man, you should see the crowds outside your constituency home's front door, I didn't think you could still get pitchforks, and I was convinced the manufacture of flaming torches was a dead art.' or 'Gordon's going to make you Home Sec.'

We need to make sure these useless bastards can do something properly.

It is going to be monumentally entertaining. I'll be compiling a highlights DVD, which I can watch on General Election night during that odd post-dinner - pre-polling station closing window.

The One That Fails To See Why They Don't Understand. . .

And so it continues. This morning it is Hoon up to his bollocks in shit, with a story about how he claimed expenses for his constituency home whilst living in a grace and favour flat and letting out his London home.

Hoon has defended the story by saying it was within the rules.

Look, you stupid bastard, if the rules said that I had carte blanche to piss through my neighbour's letterbox and run down the cats on my street in my car, it wouldn't make it right would it? If I did those things, it wouldn't make me any less of an arsehole.

What you, and all the other snout-troughing venal arseclowns have done may (or may not) be within the rules. If it is within the rules, it is still wrong. Saying it is within the rules and then being given the all clear doesn't make us think you are OK. We still think you are a corrupt fucker stealing money from us, acting like a wanker when you get all upset over scans of expenses being touted around the media makes you look even more stupid.

This whole story about the scans being touted for £300k is an interesting one. The way the politicians have acted has been shameful. I don't blame whoever it is who has these scans trying to make a few quid, after all £300k is about two years' expenses for an MP.

Are they complaining about this chap making some cash? If so, cut the ground out from underneath him, publish and be damned. No? Didn't think so. For all the protestations about leaks and theft and ethics, the fact of the matter is that there are 646 people who are desperate to prevent anyone getting any info on their expenses. We're all told it's to do with security. Yeah, right. Well, a bit, because every time these expenses are leaked, the MP concerned is worried about a mob descending on his/her home with pitchforks and flaming torches. These itemised expenses records should be a matter of public record, right from the off.

MPs are like the smart-arsed prick at school no-one could stand. Spotty, greasy, shabby, no friends and a little weed. Who then decides to make smart-arsed remarks to the year's hard-nut and then wonders why he gets a smack in the chops for it.

STOP STEALING OUR BLOODY MONEY, THEN WE MAY NOT TAKE SUCH A CLOSE INTEREST IN HOW YOU SPUNK IT AWAY.

The One That Wants To Know What It Is He Is Supposed To Have Done. . .

Reports all over the local media yesterday and this morning that LimpDem Councillor on Canterbury City Council, Roger Matthews has been arrested following an 'anti-corruption probe' by Kent Police and subsequently charged and bailed to appear before Maidstone magistrates on March 26th. I look forward to the outcome with relish, hopefully he'll be remanded in custody before appearing in Crown Court.

The thing is, that neither Pravda nor the local media, actually detail what it is he is supposed to have done. Well why is this? Any other case with local or national interest would carry details of the allegations, so why is it different here?

In this article, he gives a direct quote:

"I cannot see why it would affect my day-to-day council duties.

"I don't see why it should."

And that, dear reader, is what is wrong with the political class in this country. If a policeman were charged with armed robbery, would you expect him to continue in his job whilst awaiting a trial? What if a teacher were accused of doing inappropriate things to his charges, would the line 'I cannot see why it would affect my day-to-day teaching duties' hold any water? I don't think so.

It is all very well Alex 'Porky' Perkins (a worse example of LimpDem simpering, holier-than-thou, preachyness it is hard to imagine) saying that 'we would urge people to remember that in this country you are innocent until proven guilty.' But I would expect to be suspended from duty at least if I found myself in this sort of pickle. It would happen in pretty much any other job from brain surgeon to road sweeper, so again, why is it different here?

If the arrogant and (alleged) corrupt old bastard won't do the decent thing and step back until what is bound to be portrayed as an 'honest mistake' or 'a moment of madness/weakness' is cleared up, then his party could at least withdraw the whip. Unfortunatley the anger on the inside in this case is not directed towards Matthews for doing whatever it is he is supposed to have done. Only a slither will be directed at him for getting caught doing whatever it is he is supposed to have done. A little bit more will be directed to the media for reporting it. Most of the anger will be reserved for Joe Soap for daring to ask what is going on here.

As far as they are concerned, they are our masters. I've said it a number of times, don't vote for the Big 3, vote for anyone, anyone other than these people who belittle us, cheat us, lie to us, use us as chattels and serfs, feather their own nests at our expense and show us nothing but total and complete contempt.

Vote Libertarian, vote for the Indie who wants a hedgehog underpass, vote UKIP, vote Natural Law Party, hell even vote BNP if you feel you must. Just make sure that these venal fuckers know that you're screaming 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE.'

The One That Will Help Pick The Curtains . . .

The House's Standards Commissioner, John Lyon has expressed his intention to look into the subject of Jack Boot Smith's 'second home' fiasco. I reckon she's right at it, but no doubt Lyon will decide that nothing untoward has gone on, or that something is a little queer, but it has all been down to a 'misunderstanding'. Ministers owning up by saying 'oversight' or 'mistake' when it comes to trousering large amounts of our cash, contrasts starkly with how these people never, ever make a mistake when it comes to policy. Funny, eh?

Of course this whole situation could easily be avoided, mainly by shooting anyone who decides to submit a form for their nomination for election to the office of MP, but I appreciate that some people may not find this an agreeable policy.

So perhaps a more moderate solution is the following, find a building (perhaps kicking RBS out of their London pad, we're paying the rent anyway) and fit it out with 646 little flats, standard one bedroom apartments, with a standard bed, desk, chairs, sofa, TV, radio, internet connection, decor and shower room. Actually, not 646, there's no need for the London MPs or any MP living within an hour's train journey of central London to have one. I'm thinking Travelodge or similar budget hotel, not Claridge's, not a cardboard box under the Hammersmith flyover and certainly not a free bloody house.

These will be owned by the taxpayer and will be available to the MPs for the duration of their tenure as a sitting MP, lose your seat, lose your flat. To get a second home, wherever, paid for by me purely because a group of people were silly enough to put an X next to your name, frankly is taking the piss. Especially as you still own it when everyone else has decided you aren't to be trusted and kicks you out of office.

It doesn't really matter what John Lyon finds or decides, it'll either be a whitewash or another example of how these people are regulated by a system designed to ensure that they will never be penalised or held to real account.

Jacqui Smith, MP for Redditch. Cash spunked on second home: £116,000. Constituency majority: 2,716. I know which of those stats is likeliest to be taken back from her. If only it were both.

The One That Says It Is Not Bloody Good Enough. . .

The original story of council housing officers kicking elderly people out of their houses and then moving in council staff at much reduced rents was covered in some depth all over the blogosphere and we now have the pay-off. Kristine Reeves has been dismissed, as is good and proper although no doubt she'll start bleating about how she should get a bloody great big pay-off, even though she has been proven to be incompetent, corrupt and deceitful, because, well, that's what happens in the Public Sector isn't it? Senior Managers who aren't up to it get paid off and move on to destroy another Public Sector Department.

Interestingly there's another player in this story, Suzanne McBride, the former 'Strategic Director' and line manager for Kristine Reeves who was made redundant before the story broke. I'm assuming she'd been redundant for some time (in its purest sense - sitting around with fuck all to do) before she was shown the door. Anyhow she stands by the decision and says:

"With hindsight I should have taken the decision formally to elected members so there would be a clear audit trail of the discussion [. . .] There was full, open and frank discussion. I recall a meeting with Kris Reeves and Julie Westmacott, the executive member responsible for housing, where we discussed all of the options for what to do. I had regular meetings with Ms McBride and have absolutely no recollection of being told that the empty accommodation was being offered to all council staff, I would not under any circumstances at all have agreed to this course of action"

It also appears that she is pointing the finger at a senior Labour councillor. Well, no surprise there, then.

The thing is this, I'm willing to bet that McBride is sitting at home counting a generous redundancy package and thanking her lucky stars she remains peripheral to the event, and that Reeves is sitting at home in a real sulk, incredulous that she's been treated this way and experiencing genuine shock that anyone had the gall to hold her to account.

So a question; Why has Reeves not been arrested? Wherefore the collection of Norfolk Police's finest knocking on her door, rifling through her personal effects and feeling her collar under suspicion of conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office?

It was good enough for Damian Green, who let's face it, didn't really do anything wrong, so why not this grubbing corrupt little harridan? Let's look at the two major parties on Norwich City Council:

Labour (15 seats), Greens (13 seats).

Ahhhh, that'll explain it then. And which one of the 15 Labour Councillors aided, abetted, counselled or procured this misconduct in a public office? I think the good people of Norwich deserve to find out so he or she can be marched from the City Hall to Carrow Road football ground whilst they are pelted with turnips just dug up from the frozen earth.

The One That Thinks He Should Have His Hands Chopped Off. . .

A corrupt, theiving, unprincipled bastard, with no shame or concern for anyone but himself, earlier today.

It would appear that in this modern age of politicians lording it over us and treating us with disdain as if we were irrelevant serfs, you can still go too far.

And Densmore 'Den' Dover, the Conservative MEP for North West England is to be given his marching orders after spunking £500,000 of taxpayer's cash (that cash was taken from me and you, by the way) on his family and being ordered to repay it.

Obviously a cool half mil is too much to laugh off or sneer off.

What a twat, look at him there in that fucking awful suit with that shit eating grin. That, my friends, is a face that the house brick was invented for.

You'd have thought he'd have done the decent thing and resigned. Actually, no, you wouldn't, it probably didn't even occur to the unprincipled fucktard, he's probably trying to find a way to reclaim it on expenses.