Quote:
|
Originally Posted by demonrail666
Yes, the answer's in the details, on both sides. The truth is that FIFA has a very individual agenda and a very awkward relationship with European football as a consequence. The most pressure that FIFA receives within the game is for what the more established countries see as its over-committment to promoting football in developing countries. For better or worse, FIFA is committed to that. It's problems have come from the fact that sport in Africa is far more politicised than it is elsewhere (besides maybe in parts of S'th America). As such, FIFA continually finds its non-political stance compromised when dealing with these nations, and has to make decisions there that it doesn't have to elsewhere. There really is a clear difference between Sarkozy demanding to see Henry and the Nigerian prime minister threatening to dissolve the national team. I agree that FIFA's relationship with African football is a problematic one butnot one with a negative agenda.
|
truth. I can see both sides, I just wish FIFA would cut Africa some slack and let the African teams and nations catch up, because futbol means a lot to africans, it is truly their only international and even national sport, and if anything what Africa needs today is a rallying cry and a source of pan-African unity. What FIFA did to Ethiopia was demoralizing, Ethiopia is like the US, they will NEVER overcome the climate and culture of political corruption, but they do have a chance to develop themselves for African futbol, being the oldest independent nation and the home of the AU in Addis..
FIFA fucking with Nigeria just put another bad taste in my mouth is all..
thanks for the intelligent conversation btw, I haven't been having so many here the past week
