A gift from one mafia to another

So, against all expectations after Vladimir Putin refused to fly in, Russia won the right to host the 2018 World Cup and along with Qatar in 2022, Sepp Blatter secures his ‘legacy’ after the South African World Cup. In the end, England had no divine right to host it and media coverage probably counted against it, along with the inevitable politicking and tactical voting.
On Russia Today, the TV channel, a Slavic journalist analysing the result said what the British media did would never happen in Russia. The media of our island would counter that we are actually a free press, unlike in the lands ruled by the Kremlin. Moscow could retort that its media are genuinely patriotic (in contrast to its pettifogging British equivalent) and really backed their own bid. If you wanted to bring disaster to a World Cup hosting attempt, the efforts of the British media could not be faulted. One Sunday rag stung the head of the FA, forcing Lord Triesmann to resign in embarrassment, leaving the organisation leaderless, after his deputy had quit just weeks before. Another Sunday journal and the BBC then went and got suspended or alienated the other members of the Executive Committee. Short-term personal gain for long-term national pain. Of course, FIFA are corrupt to the core and it would be best for global footy if it was torn down and everything begun afresh. But when they have the whip-hand over the bids, it is ludicrous. Do your exposes when they no longer pose a threat to England’s chances. In this climate, the fans of Birmingham City invading the pitch after beating Aston Villa in the League Cup was a sideshow, just reinforcing what many still think about English hooliganism, however erroneous – it would have been a shrug of the shoulders and “what’s new?”
If Russia was kind of the least worst choice after England (a bankrupt Iberia would have had to impoverish its own people to bring about the World Cup and the Low Countries would have been a bit too low-key for a World Cup extravaganza, not withstanding Blatter’s edict that, after South Korea-Japan, joint bids would not be favoured), then Qatar, which will tear down it stadiums after the event, is a joke. The absurdity of such a tiny country just across the Persian Gulf from a bellicose Iran staging the World Cup appeals to my sense of the absurd. Monty Python would have been hard pressed to come up with better. Moreover, to cope with the stifling summer heat all the stadiums will have to have roofs to accomodate air-conditoned comfort. Sapporo's ground in 2002, despite being the scene of an England victory over Argentina, did not go down well with many fans. To compound this air of the ridiculous, Qatar has never qualified for the World Cup finals and not even had the near miss of its neighbour Bahrain. South Africa can now expect a companion to share its shame at being eliminated at the first round. Who knows, a war in the region might mean the Qatar contract comes to nothing, which could spell meltdown for FIFA faster than an Iranian nuclear reactor.
All in all, it will now be 2026 before England gets another chance to bring football back to the mother country. But in context, France had to wait a similar three score years between hosting and Italy 56 long years. And look at Brazil, one of the world’s most popular and certainly its most successful, all five of its World Cup triumphs happening abroad. It last hosted the event back in 1950. It now gets the chance to do it in 2014, the aggressive slum clearance in Rio de Janeiro demonstrating its commitment. If England suffered the same fate as this great footballing country, then 2030 would be its year.