comment by Baz tard - ineos your face (U19119)
posted 10 minutes ago
You are coming off like an utter tw@t Plumpy.

—

Not like him at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------

He can't help himself.

comment by Red Russian
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 46 minutes ago
52, please can you explain this statement:

"What a fecking disgrace the world cup is going there."

😊
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article explains it far better than I can. But it is corrupt, they have absolutely no footballing history,
their human rights record is appalling.
It's solely for money that they will have it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you measure Saudi Arabia's corruption compared to, say, the UK? Are you referring to official metrics, or are you relying on perception as a basis for comparison? I'm intrigued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Official metrics do, of course, conclude that Saudi Arabia is considerably more corrupt than the UK. And these metrics are confined to looking at corruption in a narrow sense. They are not assessing things like the absolute ruler facing no investigation or domestic media exposure, let alone prosecution, after being exposed internationally as the murderer of a dissident.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

By his own admission, 52 was relying on perception rather than metrics, much like many who make careless, throwaway comments about the Middle East. For context, the UK is ranked 20th for corruption. While it’s far from Saudi Arabia’s level, it is still not immune to corruption. The point about state-sponsored killings is valid, and justice for Jamal Khashoggi remains overdue.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 46 minutes ago
52, please can you explain this statement:

"What a fecking disgrace the world cup is going there."

😊
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article explains it far better than I can. But it is corrupt, they have absolutely no footballing history,
their human rights record is appalling.
It's solely for money that they will have it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
the Saudi League preedate the EPL bye 18 yrs

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the UK 4.3 million children live in "relative poverty." How can we allow such inequality to take hold while taking the moral high ground over the Middle East regarding alleged breaches of safeguards? We simply can't. Our history reveals far greater failures, the stance by some on JA is therefore highly hypothetical and disappointing but not surprising!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not sure this particular line of argument works given that child poverty in Saudi Arabia is likely far greater than in the UK.

All countries have economic issues that result in things like child poverty and such like. There’s no doubt that Saudi’s internal human rights record is awful, and there’s no real comparison between that and our own internal human rights record. Where the discussion does get muddied is as I described several posts back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While protections may be greater here, the fact that child poverty persists in 21st Century UK is even more damning. Those quick to throw around accusations of safeguarding failures in other regions often fail to recognise, perhaps out of ignorance, the inequality in their own country. This reflects the common tendency to view the UK or the West as a perfect model, when, as you suggest, every country has room for improvement. Acknowledging our own inequalities is the first crucial step in addressing them. If we are aware of own inequalities we tend to throw around casual comments far less. As I mentioned to RR, my view is that ethics should not be used as a way to shut down discourse, but rather to make it more engaging.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

By every metric that *you* have raised (poverty, corruption etc), it’s undeniable that Saudi Arabia is orders of magnitude worse than the UK or Western Europe.

There’s really no comparison between the internal issues found in Saudi Arabia & the UK, and if baffles me you’re running this lien of argument.

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 46 minutes ago
52, please can you explain this statement:

"What a fecking disgrace the world cup is going there."

😊
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article explains it far better than I can. But it is corrupt, they have absolutely no footballing history,
their human rights record is appalling.
It's solely for money that they will have it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you measure Saudi Arabia's corruption compared to, say, the UK? Are you referring to official metrics, or are you relying on perception as a basis for comparison? I'm intrigued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Official metrics do, of course, conclude that Saudi Arabia is considerably more corrupt than the UK. And these metrics are confined to looking at corruption in a narrow sense. They are not assessing things like the absolute ruler facing no investigation or domestic media exposure, let alone prosecution, after being exposed internationally as the murderer of a dissident.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

By his own admission, 52 was relying on perception rather than metrics, much like many who make careless, throwaway comments about the Middle East. For context, the UK is ranked 20th for corruption. While it’s far from Saudi Arabia’s level, it is still not immune to corruption. The point about state-sponsored killings is valid, and justice for Jamal Khashoggi remains overdue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vengeance, do you believe that the world cup was given to Saudi because they deserved it, or that it would be financially better.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 46 minutes ago
52, please can you explain this statement:

"What a fecking disgrace the world cup is going there."

😊
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article explains it far better than I can. But it is corrupt, they have absolutely no footballing history,
their human rights record is appalling.
It's solely for money that they will have it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you measure Saudi Arabia's corruption compared to, say, the UK? Are you referring to official metrics, or are you relying on perception as a basis for comparison? I'm intrigued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Official metrics do, of course, conclude that Saudi Arabia is considerably more corrupt than the UK. And these metrics are confined to looking at corruption in a narrow sense. They are not assessing things like the absolute ruler facing no investigation or domestic media exposure, let alone prosecution, after being exposed internationally as the murderer of a dissident.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

By his own admission, 52 was relying on perception rather than metrics, much like many who make careless, throwaway comments about the Middle East. For context, the UK is ranked 20th for corruption. While it’s far from Saudi Arabia’s level, it is still not immune to corruption. The point about state-sponsored killings is valid, and justice for Jamal Khashoggi remains overdue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vengeance, do you believe that the world cup was given to Saudi because they deserved it, or that it would be financially better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no idea, 52, but I would hope the process was open and fair, that's for FIFA to prove! Perhaps the bidder with the best facilities won, though who knows what else might have played a role (😏). Why can't we see the game as a vehicle for positive change in the country? Why do we always assume that, because it’s a Middle Eastern country, every process must be underhanded?

Things were so much better when Sepp Blatter was in charge. No corruption. Nothing underhand. All the countries that were awarded the tournament got it on merit. What a golden era of honesty and integrity it was.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 46 minutes ago
52, please can you explain this statement:

"What a fecking disgrace the world cup is going there."

😊
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article explains it far better than I can. But it is corrupt, they have absolutely no footballing history,
their human rights record is appalling.
It's solely for money that they will have it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you measure Saudi Arabia's corruption compared to, say, the UK? Are you referring to official metrics, or are you relying on perception as a basis for comparison? I'm intrigued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Official metrics do, of course, conclude that Saudi Arabia is considerably more corrupt than the UK. And these metrics are confined to looking at corruption in a narrow sense. They are not assessing things like the absolute ruler facing no investigation or domestic media exposure, let alone prosecution, after being exposed internationally as the murderer of a dissident.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our MPs regularly get away with whatever they want too, at least Saudi are brazen about it.

Corruption aside, I just hate the idea of a World Cup in a desert state, with no history. I understand the argument football is the worlds sport, but no need to go to the ME twice when so many great hosts are available.

No history of the game is not a reason not to have it - in fact the opposite by FIFA objectives to promote the sport. However, we all know it is really for the money. If we could see that money being spent really improving the game in deserving / poor countries that might be fine but I suspect it will just fund increased largesse amongst the main stakeholders.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 5 hours, 2 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 35 seconds ago
Why is it a disgrace?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The biggest disgrace is that by 2038 the UK will not have held a World Cup for 72 years,

Given that one thing the UK is very good at is hosting these kinds of events.

Sadly the UK isn't good at being as corrupt as FIFA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure if you are at the wum but of course the UK has never held the WC, only England. As it is Westminster torpedoed Manchester getting the Olympics to ensure London remained top dog. As per.

comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 4 hours, 2 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 6 minutes ago
Would they not consider a winter world cup similar to Qatar?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it’ll be the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summer temperatures range between 28 and 43 degrees celsius. During winter, it's been 8 and 29 c.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PL have already said they’ll challenge a winter World Cup, which at the very least suggests they believe that’ll be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

And that will be that, since the PL is the centre of the known universe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, after the Saudi WC all those empty stadiums - who'd bet against them offering the EPL to play ALL their games in them, buy the whole fckn caboodle, chuck £10bn a season at it.

The Saudi league idea has bombed pretty spectacularly so yeah, the next step will be to entice the worlds biggest clubs to spend time in Saudi instead.

A Euro super league is a guarantee and Saudi may play a part in that eventually happening.

comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 4 hours, 2 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 6 minutes ago
Would they not consider a winter world cup similar to Qatar?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it’ll be the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summer temperatures range between 28 and 43 degrees celsius. During winter, it's been 8 and 29 c.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PL have already said they’ll challenge a winter World Cup, which at the very least suggests they believe that’ll be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

And that will be that, since the PL is the centre of the known universe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, after the Saudi WC all those empty stadiums - who'd bet against them offering the EPL to play ALL their games in them, buy the whole fckn caboodle, chuck £10bn a season at it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Wasn't there an article that cited the number of injuries clubs had to deal with due to the World Cup being held in Qatar during the winter? Clubs want the event in the summer.

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the UK 4.3 million children live in "relative poverty." How can we allow such inequality to take hold while taking the moral high ground over the Middle East regarding alleged breaches of safeguards? We simply can't. Our history reveals far greater failures, the stance by some on JA is therefore highly hypothetical and disappointing but not surprising!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not sure this particular line of argument works given that child poverty in Saudi Arabia is likely far greater than in the UK.

All countries have economic issues that result in things like child poverty and such like. There’s no doubt that Saudi’s internal human rights record is awful, and there’s no real comparison between that and our own internal human rights record. Where the discussion does get muddied is as I described several posts back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While protections may be greater here, the fact that child poverty persists in 21st Century UK is even more damning. Those quick to throw around accusations of safeguarding failures in other regions often fail to recognise, perhaps out of ignorance, the inequality in their own country. This reflects the common tendency to view the UK or the West as a perfect model, when, as you suggest, every country has room for improvement. Acknowledging our own inequalities is the first crucial step in addressing them. If we are aware of own inequalities we tend to throw around casual comments far less. As I mentioned to RR, my view is that ethics should not be used as a way to shut down discourse, but rather to make it more engaging.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re using the ‘yeah but’ argument which seems to be the standard these days. But if I choose to criticise another country then it’s pretty irrelevant what the country I was born in and reside in are doing or have done. The average person has no influence on matters such as child poverty, foreign policy etc, so why should they always add that caveat when criticising elsewhere? People are criticising the regime, not the general population.

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the UK 4.3 million children live in "relative poverty." How can we allow such inequality to take hold while taking the moral high ground over the Middle East regarding alleged breaches of safeguards? We simply can't. Our history reveals far greater failures, the stance by some on JA is therefore highly hypothetical and disappointing but not surprising!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not sure this particular line of argument works given that child poverty in Saudi Arabia is likely far greater than in the UK.

All countries have economic issues that result in things like child poverty and such like. There’s no doubt that Saudi’s internal human rights record is awful, and there’s no real comparison between that and our own internal human rights record. Where the discussion does get muddied is as I described several posts back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While protections may be greater here, the fact that child poverty persists in 21st Century UK is even more damning. Those quick to throw around accusations of safeguarding failures in other regions often fail to recognise, perhaps out of ignorance, the inequality in their own country. This reflects the common tendency to view the UK or the West as a perfect model, when, as you suggest, every country has room for improvement. Acknowledging our own inequalities is the first crucial step in addressing them. If we are aware of own inequalities we tend to throw around casual comments far less. As I mentioned to RR, my view is that ethics should not be used as a way to shut down discourse, but rather to make it more engaging.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re using the ‘yeah but’ argument which seems to be the standard these days. But if I choose to criticise another country then it’s pretty irrelevant what the country I was born in and reside in are doing or have done. The average person has no influence on matters such as child poverty, foreign policy etc, so why should they always add that caveat when criticising elsewhere? People are criticising the regime, not the general population.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Lerts not have any of that common sense here please

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the UK 4.3 million children live in "relative poverty." How can we allow such inequality to take hold while taking the moral high ground over the Middle East regarding alleged breaches of safeguards? We simply can't. Our history reveals far greater failures, the stance by some on JA is therefore highly hypothetical and disappointing but not surprising!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not sure this particular line of argument works given that child poverty in Saudi Arabia is likely far greater than in the UK.

All countries have economic issues that result in things like child poverty and such like. There’s no doubt that Saudi’s internal human rights record is awful, and there’s no real comparison between that and our own internal human rights record. Where the discussion does get muddied is as I described several posts back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While protections may be greater here, the fact that child poverty persists in 21st Century UK is even more damning. Those quick to throw around accusations of safeguarding failures in other regions often fail to recognise, perhaps out of ignorance, the inequality in their own country. This reflects the common tendency to view the UK or the West as a perfect model, when, as you suggest, every country has room for improvement. Acknowledging our own inequalities is the first crucial step in addressing them. If we are aware of own inequalities we tend to throw around casual comments far less. As I mentioned to RR, my view is that ethics should not be used as a way to shut down discourse, but rather to make it more engaging.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re using the ‘yeah but’ argument which seems to be the standard these days. But if I choose to criticise another country then it’s pretty irrelevant what the country I was born in and reside in are doing or have done. The average person has no influence on matters such as child poverty, foreign policy etc, so why should they always add that caveat when criticising elsewhere? People are criticising the regime, not the general population.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great comment Term.

comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 46 minutes ago
52, please can you explain this statement:

"What a fecking disgrace the world cup is going there."

😊
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article explains it far better than I can. But it is corrupt, they have absolutely no footballing history,
their human rights record is appalling.
It's solely for money that they will have it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you measure Saudi Arabia's corruption compared to, say, the UK? Are you referring to official metrics, or are you relying on perception as a basis for comparison? I'm intrigued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Official metrics do, of course, conclude that Saudi Arabia is considerably more corrupt than the UK. And these metrics are confined to looking at corruption in a narrow sense. They are not assessing things like the absolute ruler facing no investigation or domestic media exposure, let alone prosecution, after being exposed internationally as the murderer of a dissident.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our MPs regularly get away with whatever they want too, at least Saudi are brazen about it.

Corruption aside, I just hate the idea of a World Cup in a desert state, with no history. I understand the argument football is the worlds sport, but no need to go to the ME twice when so many great hosts are available.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Typical abject cynicism from you, Busby

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 4 hours, 2 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 6 minutes ago
Would they not consider a winter world cup similar to Qatar?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it’ll be the same
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summer temperatures range between 28 and 43 degrees celsius. During winter, it's been 8 and 29 c.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PL have already said they’ll challenge a winter World Cup, which at the very least suggests they believe that’ll be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

And that will be that, since the PL is the centre of the known universe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, after the Saudi WC all those empty stadiums - who'd bet against them offering the EPL to play ALL their games in them, buy the whole fckn caboodle, chuck £10bn a season at it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Wasn't there an article that cited the number of injuries clubs had to deal with due to the World Cup being held in Qatar during the winter? Clubs want the event in the summer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then they'd complain about heat exhaustion leading to different injuries. And the games might be at walking pace - Mexico was murder viewingf.

werent the 2 wurld cuppas held in Mexico 2 of the bessed ever?

comment by #4zA (U22472)
posted 1 minute ago
werent the 2 wurld cuppas held in Mexico 2 of the bessed ever?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yip and when they host the 2026 with US and Canada Mexico will hav ehosted more World cups than other other nation

Mexico 86 was supposed to be Colombia 86 but for an earthquake

comment by Samus (Isle of) Arran (U22669)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by #4zA (U22472)
posted 1 minute ago
werent the 2 wurld cuppas held in Mexico 2 of the bessed ever?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yip and when they host the 2026 with US and Canada Mexico will hav ehosted more World cups than other other nation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbf they only hoast in 86 becuse Brazil n Colombia had too pull out n in 2026 they only halve a phew! games

It hink Mexico actually had the earthquake a year before the tourny but got through it. Colombia were just broke.

Yep it is a disgrace. FIFA seem intent on destroying international football with this kind of shiiiiiite.