The Football Association has been urged to lobby UEFA for a European boycott of the next World Cup - unless FFIA implements meaningful reform. Which, they're obviously not going to because they're run by thieves and criminals. Former FA chairman David Bernstein said it was time for 'drastic action' against football's world governing body. 'England on its own cannot influence this,' he said. 'If we tried something like that, we'd be laughed at.' He says that a World Cup would be weakened without Europe's top teams and that a boycott would have public backing. 'If I was at the FA now, I would do everything I could to encourage other nations within UEFA - and there are some who would definitely be on side, others may be not - to take this line,' he added. 'At some stage, you have to walk the walk, stop talking and do something.' Bernstein said that he also wanted FIFA's president, the odious Sepp Blatter, to step down but described him as 'formidable, very shrewd, very smart', conceding it would 'not be easy' to bring his reign to an end. In an interview, the seventy one-year-old also said: FIFA is 'a totalitarian set-up' which reminds him of 'the old Soviet empire' and is 'beyond ridicule'; that the credibility of football is 'suffering enormously' under the current FFIA regime and that choosing Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup was 'one of the most ludicrous decisions in the history of sport.' Bernstein chose to speak out after a report into the bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups cleared Russia and Qatar of any wrongdoing but was critical of England, accusing the FA of 'flouting bid rules' in its failed attempt to win the right to stage the 2018 event. Yet less than four hours after the document's release, it was questioned by Michael Garcia, the man who conducted the two-year investigation into corruption claims. 
The furore surrounding the report is the latest controversy to hit football's world governing body, which has been riddled with allegations of corruption in recent times. Now Bernstein, who led the FA for three years from January 2011, wants FIFA to change its ways or face a challenge it finds impossible to ignore. When asked again if he was calling for the FA to unite with UEFA to boycott the World Cup, he replied: 'Unless [FIFA] could achieve the reforms that would bring FIFA back into the respectable world community, yes I would. It sounds drastic, but, frankly, this has gone on for years now. It's not improving, it's going from bad to worse to worse.' He said that there were fifty four countries within UEFA and described Germany, Spain, Italy, France and Holland as 'all powerful.' He added: 'You can't hold a serious World Cup without them. They have the power to influence if they have the will.' Similar views have been expressed over the weekend by German Football League president Reinhard Rauball, who suggested UEFA could leave FIFA if the findings of the two-year investigation into corruption claims are not published in full. As for criticism of England by the FIFA report, Bernstein accused football's world governing body of 'trying to deflect attention' from its own failings. 'I don't think much to these accusations,' he said. 'I don't think we should get away from the real issue. The real issue is FIFA governance and trying to achieve real change. But it won't happen easily. FIFA is sort of a totalitarian set-up. Bits of it remind me of the old Soviet empire. People don't speak out and if they do they get quashed.' Bernstein also described the decision to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, where blistering summer temperatures means the event could be switched to winter, 'as one of the most ludicrous decisions in the history of sport.' He added: 'You might as well have chosen Iceland in the winter. It was like an Alice in Wonderland sort of decision. The attempt to change the timing is also absolutely wrong.' He felt the decision to choose Qatar as 2022 hosts could come under further scrutiny. 'There's also a background of political, social and employment issues that keep emerging and I think there's a danger that FIFA and football might be embarrassed by what emerges in the coming years,' said the former Sheikh Yer Man City chairman. 'It's certainly not sour grapes. England didn't lose to Qatar, we lost to Russia. Qatar is clearly a totally unsuitable place to hold a World Cup.' Bernstein also revealed he has quit FIFA's anti-discrimination taskforce. He described it as 'ineffectual' and wishes to end his ties with FIFA. Explaining his decision to leave the taskforce, which was introduced in 2013, Bernstein said: 'I've resigned for two reasons. Firstly, the body has been pretty ineffectual. I've been on it for more than a year and we only had one meeting. Secondly, because frankly I don't wish to be personally associated with FIFA any further. FIFA sets up these things - and we've seen it with their regulation - that look good in theory but don't seem to do very much in practice.'
In calling for the organisation he used to lead to unite with UEFA and lead a boycott of the World Cup - as well as a breakaway from FIFA - Bernstein has dared say what many have no doubt been thinking. After all, if the FA are so outraged with the world governing body's handling of the investigation into the bidding for the next two World Cups - and, they damn-well should be - then why not take drastic action and salvage some dignity by voting with one's feet? Sadly for the FA, there are plenty of reasons and, most of them are financial. Firstly, with two hundred and sixty seven million smackers of debt still to pay off for the seven hundred and fifty seven million knicker Wembley Stadium, the FA simply could not afford to lose the revenue that comes with hosting World Cup qualifiers, not to mention the sponsorship that results from contesting one of the world's most fabled sports events. Breaking away from FIFA would have major ramifications, too. A place on the International Football Association Board - the game's law-making body - would be sacrificed, for instance, while England representative teams at every age group would be unable to compete in their respective world championships. As Bernstein himself suggests, the FA would never dare to go it alone. It would need the support of UEFA. But there are encouraging signs on this front. Over the past weekend, the president of the German Football League warned that UEFA's fifty four member nations could quit FIFA if Michael Garcia's full report into the 2018 and 2022 World Cups is not fully published. Certainly, at a time when European football is already furious with Sepp Blatter - for standing for a fifth term as FIFA president after promising not to and for being expected to entirely rearrange its calendar to accommodate a winter World Cup in Qatar - you may think a breakaway has never been more likely. After all, Europe has the Champions League and the European Championships, which attracts the best of the global talent pool. Then there is the Nations League, which, from 2018, will attempt to make international friendlies more significant. But it's unlikely that this new format will be extended to fill the vacuum left if European countries refused to take part in the World Cup. With Russia hosting the next World Cup, it is hard to see them feeling the need to join a European rebellion. As for Spain and Portugal, they have no problem with the report into allegations of World Cup corruption, not after they were cleared of any wrongdoing over their bid for the 2018 World Cup. Then there is UEFA president, oily little glake Michel Platini. Having voted for Qatar as 2022 World Cup hosts, it is not easy to see why he would back a boycott. And if UEFA is so upset with Blatter, why isn't it putting up a credible challenger to him? Why, for example, is Platini himself not standing? It's hard not to take the view that UEFA will try to use FIFA's current meltdown, not to turn its back on football's world governing body, but to strengthen its power and influence, especially when it comes to the presidential election next year and negotiations over 2022 scheduling. Which, in and of itself, isn't an entirely healthy option. The FA knows this and that is why its plan is to bring about change from within. Next year, it hopes to get its vice-chairman David Gill - already a member of UEFA's executive committee - on to the FIFA executive committee as the home nations representative. If the FA was to suddenly agree with its former chairman Bernstein and call for a boycott on moral grounds, it would stand accused of hypocrisy. After all, according to FIFA ethics judge Hans-Joachim Eckert, Garcia found that England's own twenty one million quid bid for the 2018 World Cup was guilty of breaking a few bidding rules. And let us not forget that, as recently as 2010, the English FA's bid team ludicrously attacked the BBC as 'unpatriotic' over a Panorama programme which looked into allegations of FIFA corruption - more or less exactly the same allegations that the FA is now voicing itself - such was its grovelling desperation to land the game's show piece event. Would Bernstein and the man who replaced him as FA Chairman Greg Dyke be this outraged by FIFA if England had won the vote? And would there by quite so much current media scrutiny of the 2022 World Cup hosts if Australia or the USA had won, rather than Qatar? Almost certainly not. Given all this, how easily could the FA claim the moral high ground? One can understand why the FA feel hard done by following the FIFA report into World Cup corruption. Much of it is simply inexplicable. Why, for example, was the English 2018 bid criticised when it was so obviously more open and transparent about what it did than the 'highly uncooperative' Russians, for instance, whose computers were destroyed along with any potential e-mail chains? How can England be admonished for their thirty five thousand dollars sponsorship of a Caribbean Football Union gala dinner in the hope of gaining the support of the odious Jack Warner when Qatar got away with a $1.8m sponsorship of the CAF Congress in Angola shortly before the 2010 vote? Why did Eckert take it upon himself now - before Garcia has even had the chance to open proceedings against individuals suspected of wrongdoing - to recommend there was 'no need' for any kind of re-vote? Why was the evidence from alleged whistleblowers dismissed so readily? Why - short of crass and brown-tongued arse-licking was Blatter praised in Eckert's concluding sentences? And what exactly is it about Eckert's summary that Garcia has such a problem with? These questions have left FIFA in apparent meltdown, the credibility of its landmark investigation - something that was meant to restore faith and trust in a scandal-plagued organisation - in tatters. Its next move will be interesting, but football's world governing body will no doubt come under increasing pressure to publish the full Garcia report. Nevertheless, thanks to FIFA's 'Financial Assistance Programme' - the hundreds of millions of pounds that it hands out to regional confederations and national associations in the form of 'development' payments - Blatter knows he has solid support in Africa, Asia and South America. A European breakaway would simply be portrayed as a selfish (possibly racist or colonialist) move by the wealthiest region in the sport. Blatter will not lose any sleep over what his old adversary Bernstein says. Or about current FA chairman Greg Dyke calling the Eckert report 'a joke.' Rumours coming out of the United States that the FBI are keen to press ahead with their own investigation into senior FIFA officials, however, should concern him far more. So should the fact that Dubai-based airline Emirates recently ended its sponsorship deal with FIFA, with South Korean electronics giant Samsung expected to follow suit. The continuous loss of the sponsors which generate billions of pounds for FIFA, rather than the threats of former FA chairmen, are what would really rattle Blatter. It's a horrifying thought that one of the few things which would likely cause change at FIFA is if their major sponsor Coca-Cola decided to develop of conscience. And, of course, we all know that's very unlikely to happen. Three years ago, when he was FA chairman, Bernstein made a lone appeal to postpone the unopposed re-election of Blatter in the wake of serious bribery allegations involving FIFA executive committee members Mohamed bin Hammam and the odious Warner. The rebellion failed and left the FA more isolated than ever. Just like then, Bernstein may now win praise for his principles, but this latest stand will almost certainly meet the same fate.
The furore surrounding the report is the latest controversy to hit football's world governing body, which has been riddled with allegations of corruption in recent times. Now Bernstein, who led the FA for three years from January 2011, wants FIFA to change its ways or face a challenge it finds impossible to ignore. When asked again if he was calling for the FA to unite with UEFA to boycott the World Cup, he replied: 'Unless [FIFA] could achieve the reforms that would bring FIFA back into the respectable world community, yes I would. It sounds drastic, but, frankly, this has gone on for years now. It's not improving, it's going from bad to worse to worse.' He said that there were fifty four countries within UEFA and described Germany, Spain, Italy, France and Holland as 'all powerful.' He added: 'You can't hold a serious World Cup without them. They have the power to influence if they have the will.' Similar views have been expressed over the weekend by German Football League president Reinhard Rauball, who suggested UEFA could leave FIFA if the findings of the two-year investigation into corruption claims are not published in full. As for criticism of England by the FIFA report, Bernstein accused football's world governing body of 'trying to deflect attention' from its own failings. 'I don't think much to these accusations,' he said. 'I don't think we should get away from the real issue. The real issue is FIFA governance and trying to achieve real change. But it won't happen easily. FIFA is sort of a totalitarian set-up. Bits of it remind me of the old Soviet empire. People don't speak out and if they do they get quashed.' Bernstein also described the decision to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, where blistering summer temperatures means the event could be switched to winter, 'as one of the most ludicrous decisions in the history of sport.' He added: 'You might as well have chosen Iceland in the winter. It was like an Alice in Wonderland sort of decision. The attempt to change the timing is also absolutely wrong.' He felt the decision to choose Qatar as 2022 hosts could come under further scrutiny. 'There's also a background of political, social and employment issues that keep emerging and I think there's a danger that FIFA and football might be embarrassed by what emerges in the coming years,' said the former Sheikh Yer Man City chairman. 'It's certainly not sour grapes. England didn't lose to Qatar, we lost to Russia. Qatar is clearly a totally unsuitable place to hold a World Cup.' Bernstein also revealed he has quit FIFA's anti-discrimination taskforce. He described it as 'ineffectual' and wishes to end his ties with FIFA. Explaining his decision to leave the taskforce, which was introduced in 2013, Bernstein said: 'I've resigned for two reasons. Firstly, the body has been pretty ineffectual. I've been on it for more than a year and we only had one meeting. Secondly, because frankly I don't wish to be personally associated with FIFA any further. FIFA sets up these things - and we've seen it with their regulation - that look good in theory but don't seem to do very much in practice.'In calling for the organisation he used to lead to unite with UEFA and lead a boycott of the World Cup - as well as a breakaway from FIFA - Bernstein has dared say what many have no doubt been thinking. After all, if the FA are so outraged with the world governing body's handling of the investigation into the bidding for the next two World Cups - and, they damn-well should be - then why not take drastic action and salvage some dignity by voting with one's feet? Sadly for the FA, there are plenty of reasons and, most of them are financial. Firstly, with two hundred and sixty seven million smackers of debt still to pay off for the seven hundred and fifty seven million knicker Wembley Stadium, the FA simply could not afford to lose the revenue that comes with hosting World Cup qualifiers, not to mention the sponsorship that results from contesting one of the world's most fabled sports events. Breaking away from FIFA would have major ramifications, too. A place on the International Football Association Board - the game's law-making body - would be sacrificed, for instance, while England representative teams at every age group would be unable to compete in their respective world championships. As Bernstein himself suggests, the FA would never dare to go it alone. It would need the support of UEFA. But there are encouraging signs on this front. Over the past weekend, the president of the German Football League warned that UEFA's fifty four member nations could quit FIFA if Michael Garcia's full report into the 2018 and 2022 World Cups is not fully published. Certainly, at a time when European football is already furious with Sepp Blatter - for standing for a fifth term as FIFA president after promising not to and for being expected to entirely rearrange its calendar to accommodate a winter World Cup in Qatar - you may think a breakaway has never been more likely. After all, Europe has the Champions League and the European Championships, which attracts the best of the global talent pool. Then there is the Nations League, which, from 2018, will attempt to make international friendlies more significant. But it's unlikely that this new format will be extended to fill the vacuum left if European countries refused to take part in the World Cup. With Russia hosting the next World Cup, it is hard to see them feeling the need to join a European rebellion. As for Spain and Portugal, they have no problem with the report into allegations of World Cup corruption, not after they were cleared of any wrongdoing over their bid for the 2018 World Cup. Then there is UEFA president, oily little glake Michel Platini. Having voted for Qatar as 2022 World Cup hosts, it is not easy to see why he would back a boycott. And if UEFA is so upset with Blatter, why isn't it putting up a credible challenger to him? Why, for example, is Platini himself not standing? It's hard not to take the view that UEFA will try to use FIFA's current meltdown, not to turn its back on football's world governing body, but to strengthen its power and influence, especially when it comes to the presidential election next year and negotiations over 2022 scheduling. Which, in and of itself, isn't an entirely healthy option. The FA knows this and that is why its plan is to bring about change from within. Next year, it hopes to get its vice-chairman David Gill - already a member of UEFA's executive committee - on to the FIFA executive committee as the home nations representative. If the FA was to suddenly agree with its former chairman Bernstein and call for a boycott on moral grounds, it would stand accused of hypocrisy. After all, according to FIFA ethics judge Hans-Joachim Eckert, Garcia found that England's own twenty one million quid bid for the 2018 World Cup was guilty of breaking a few bidding rules. And let us not forget that, as recently as 2010, the English FA's bid team ludicrously attacked the BBC as 'unpatriotic' over a Panorama programme which looked into allegations of FIFA corruption - more or less exactly the same allegations that the FA is now voicing itself - such was its grovelling desperation to land the game's show piece event. Would Bernstein and the man who replaced him as FA Chairman Greg Dyke be this outraged by FIFA if England had won the vote? And would there by quite so much current media scrutiny of the 2022 World Cup hosts if Australia or the USA had won, rather than Qatar? Almost certainly not. Given all this, how easily could the FA claim the moral high ground? One can understand why the FA feel hard done by following the FIFA report into World Cup corruption. Much of it is simply inexplicable. Why, for example, was the English 2018 bid criticised when it was so obviously more open and transparent about what it did than the 'highly uncooperative' Russians, for instance, whose computers were destroyed along with any potential e-mail chains? How can England be admonished for their thirty five thousand dollars sponsorship of a Caribbean Football Union gala dinner in the hope of gaining the support of the odious Jack Warner when Qatar got away with a $1.8m sponsorship of the CAF Congress in Angola shortly before the 2010 vote? Why did Eckert take it upon himself now - before Garcia has even had the chance to open proceedings against individuals suspected of wrongdoing - to recommend there was 'no need' for any kind of re-vote? Why was the evidence from alleged whistleblowers dismissed so readily? Why - short of crass and brown-tongued arse-licking was Blatter praised in Eckert's concluding sentences? And what exactly is it about Eckert's summary that Garcia has such a problem with? These questions have left FIFA in apparent meltdown, the credibility of its landmark investigation - something that was meant to restore faith and trust in a scandal-plagued organisation - in tatters. Its next move will be interesting, but football's world governing body will no doubt come under increasing pressure to publish the full Garcia report. Nevertheless, thanks to FIFA's 'Financial Assistance Programme' - the hundreds of millions of pounds that it hands out to regional confederations and national associations in the form of 'development' payments - Blatter knows he has solid support in Africa, Asia and South America. A European breakaway would simply be portrayed as a selfish (possibly racist or colonialist) move by the wealthiest region in the sport. Blatter will not lose any sleep over what his old adversary Bernstein says. Or about current FA chairman Greg Dyke calling the Eckert report 'a joke.' Rumours coming out of the United States that the FBI are keen to press ahead with their own investigation into senior FIFA officials, however, should concern him far more. So should the fact that Dubai-based airline Emirates recently ended its sponsorship deal with FIFA, with South Korean electronics giant Samsung expected to follow suit. The continuous loss of the sponsors which generate billions of pounds for FIFA, rather than the threats of former FA chairmen, are what would really rattle Blatter. It's a horrifying thought that one of the few things which would likely cause change at FIFA is if their major sponsor Coca-Cola decided to develop of conscience. And, of course, we all know that's very unlikely to happen. Three years ago, when he was FA chairman, Bernstein made a lone appeal to postpone the unopposed re-election of Blatter in the wake of serious bribery allegations involving FIFA executive committee members Mohamed bin Hammam and the odious Warner. The rebellion failed and left the FA more isolated than ever. Just like then, Bernstein may now win praise for his principles, but this latest stand will almost certainly meet the same fate.
