By Andrew Warshaw
November 14 – Qatar’s 2022 World Cup organisers insist they were right to be exonerated from any corruption allegations as reaction continues to pour in, most of it negative, following the controversial summary of Michael Garcia’s report into the entire bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 tournaments.
The Qataris are taking their time to digest the full ramifications of the verdict before saying too much but Hassan Al Thawadi, who led the bid and runs the organizing committee, says FIFA ethics judge Hans-Joachim Eckert’s verdicts proved the Qataris broke no rules.
“We have been consistent in our view that any neutral investigation would exonerate us. Today’s report was confirmation of that,” said al-Thawadi.
A earlier statement from Qatar’s Supreme Committee for Delivery & Legacy added: “As we have noted in the past, we cooperated fully with the Ethics Committee’s investigation and continue to believe that a fair and appropriate review will demonstrate the integrity and quality of our bid.
Russia, like Qatar, were cleared of any major wrongdoing yet there was some consternation that the reason their victorious World Cup bid team did not fully cooperate with FIFA’s investigation was because their computers containing relevant information had been handed back.
Eckert’s summary into the award of the next two World Cups highlighted the lack of evidence provided by the Russians “which was explained by the fact that the computers used at the time by the Russia bid committee had been leased and returned to their owner after the bidding process.”
“The owner has confirmed the computers were destroyed in the meantime. The bid committee also attempted to obtain access to the Gmail accounts used during the bidding process from Google USA. However, the Russia bid committee confirmed Google USA had not responded to the request.”
The head of Russia’s 2018 organising committee, Alexey Sorokin, told Sky there was nothing suspicious or untoward in what happened.
“We rented the equipment, we had to give it back, then it went back – we don’t even know where it went – to some sports schools, so quite naturally other people used it,” said Sorokin.
“Whatever we could supply, everything we could supply to the investigation we did. But we have to bear in mind that four years have passed since then, so some of the information we could just forget, naturally.”
None of this was viewed by Eckert as being sufficient to warrant Russia being seriously reprimanded. Nor was the fact that rival contenders Spain and Portugal appear to have been even less co-operative with investigators. “With regard to one specific bid team the report noted that the relevant federation was particularly uncooperative in responding to [our] requests,” Eckert noted.
Conversely, England’s 2018 bid and 2022 contenders Australia received a severe and reputation-damaging slap over the knuckles, prompting both to cry foul.
Australia’s football chief denied any wrongdoing while an Australian politician described FIFA’s investigation a “sick farce” and demanded its money back.
Federation Football Australia (FFA) chief Frank Lowy released a statement rejecting criticism of Australia’s campaign tactics.
The Australian government invested A$43 million ($37.43 million) on a bid that received just one solitary vote. “I made it clear to all involved in our bid that we would run a clean campaign and I stressed this objective at every opportunity,” Lowy said.
The report summary said Australia’s bid had funded development projects around the world and “helped create the appearance that benefits were conferred in exchange for a vote.”
The FFA was also accused of making payments to CONCACAF which “appear to have been commingled, at least in part, with personal funds” of then CONCACAF president Jack Warner.
The third main allegation was that the bid had tried “to direct funds the Australian government had set aside for existing development projects in Africa toward initiatives in countries with ties to FIFA Executive Committee members.”
But Lowy countered that Australia had been encouraged by FIFA to “take every opportunity to demonstrate Australia’s commitment to football, especially in developing regions.”
“It’s clear that this led us to be misled in particular relating to a payment made to CONCACAF which was later revealed to have been misappropriated,” he added.
“In hindsight, there are many things we might have done differently and we remain disappointed by our experience of the World Cup bidding process.”
The FFA said they would await advice on the next steps in the process given “the apparent dispute between chairmen of the FIFA Ethics Committee’s Adjudicatory and Investigatory chambers” – a reference to Garcia’s decision to appeal against the findings of a report he himself compiled.
Australian senator Nick Xenophon said the investigation was a “whitewash” and a “sick farce”. He called on FIFA to refund the money Australia had spent on the bid, saying they had been “absolutely ripped off”.
The English FA were equally dismissive of Eckert’s summary, saying it was clear that those countries who had been the most transparent were the ones unfairly targeted.
Eckert’s summary claimed England’s conduct had “damaged the integrity of the ongoing bidding process.” The English were accused of, among other things, currying favour with disgraced former FIFA vice-president Jack Warner.
But the FA hit back saying it does “not accept any criticism regarding the integrity of England’s bid or any of the individuals involved”.
Former England 2018 chief operating officer Simon Johnson dismissed the conclusions as a “politically-motivated whitewash.”
“I am not sure how we can have confidence in the outcome of this report,” he said. “The headlines today end up being about the England bid when it should be about how it has exonerated Qatar. In relation to England’s bid, I was satisfied at all times that we complied with the rules of the ethics code. We also gave full and transparent disclosure to the investigation, which many others did not do.”
English transparency can sometimes be an interesting concept though (see http://www.insideworldfootball.com/fifa/14824-exclusive-ex-fifa-gensec-points-to-serious-ethics-violation-by-bidder?highlight=WyJ6ZW4iLCJydWZmaW5lbiIsInplbiBydWZmaW5lbiJd)
Greg Dyke, the current FA chairman, said he could not “take the report seriously” following Garcia’s decision to appeal against the findings of his own 430-page file.
“It has undermined the whole process,” said Dyke. “That’s pretty serious for FIFA. It now seems the interpretation of the Garcia report is not a fair one, according to Garcia himself.”
Lord David Triesmann, who was head of the FA at the start of the English bid and was thoroughly discredited in the report, speaking to the BBC, seemed to have as his only defence that the report “reflects the fact that in FIFA there is a great dislike of England and that has come through.”
An interesting ‘fact’ to use in defence of the facts that critics of the report say do not go deep enough.
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1734791632labto1734791632ofdlr1734791632owedi1734791632sni@w1734791632ahsra1734791632w.wer1734791632dna1734791632