By J Hutcherson - WASHINGTON, DC (Jul 7, 2011) US Soccer Players -- Sorry FIFA, but after reelecting the sitting president unopposed I'm hoping you'll find out the rest of the World doesn't have a lot of stomach for turning the only other candidate into a no-goodnik. That's the scenario currently playing itself out as we await FIFA formally charging suspended Asian Football Confederation and one-time FIFA presidential candidate Mohamed Bin Hammam.
As you probably remember, Bin Hammam was suspended along with now retired CONCACAF president Jack Warner for distributing money to the Caribbean associations in a votes for bribes scandal. CONCACAF's own general secretary brought that to the attention of FIFA and its Ethics Committee, resulting in Bin Hammam's candidacy coming to an end and his own suspension four days before the vote was held.
By that Wednesday vote, FIFA had regrouped around it's current and soon-to-be reelected president Sepp Blatter. Well, all except for England - still steamed about the 2018 World Cup vote - and a few Asian Confederation countries upset that FIFA had removed their president and presidential candidate.
FIFA does a comprehensive job in presenting a public face that simply doesn’t tolerate outliers, agents of change, or anyone else with a differing opinion. Within the room, the executive committee might have its differences. Outside? Well, all you had to do was watch the press conference President Blatter gave right after his reelection. For those that missed it, the point wasn’t one of the oddest elections of a major international governing body in recent memory. It was teaching working journalists from some of the biggest news outlets in the World a lesson in respect.
In summary, going ahead with an election days after removing the only other candidate wasn’t a problem. Directly questioning the FIFA president certainly was.
The fun and games of world soccer's multi-level bureaucracy now shift to what will be done about Bin Hammam. It's a question that would be easier to answer if there weren't a myriad of conflicted interest to sort through. From the outside, it doesn't look like that's keeping FIFA up nights. It's certainly on the mind of the accused, with Bin Hammam addressing it directly on Thursday on what was his campaign for change website.
These proceedings were initiated based on the allegations of vote buying. I hope that, by now, the investigation has identified whether or not there had been attempts by me - directly or indirectly - to buy votes, particularly from those who claimed to have received these monies.
I hope that the decision will be made solely by the members of this committee and based solely on the facts presented and not based on assumptions or the wishes of people outside the committee.
FIFA thinks forward, and in this instance that likely means overlooking the aspects of the Bin Hammam case that would cast a bad light over the entire organization. As an institution, FIFA treats itself as sacrosanct. Individuals up to and including the executive committee and at least one former general secretary are normally not afforded that same courtesy.
In this instance, it's fairly easy to play 'what if.' Had Bin Hammam decided not to run, sitting president Sepp Blatter is reelected unopposed. There's no reason to accuse anyone of attempting to buy off the Caribbean voting block if there's only one candidate. There's also no reason to believe that Bin Hammam was doing anything beyond trying to contest a FIFA election until FIFA presents its evidence.
Even then, there's also no reason to think that what bin Hammam has been accused of is so beyond the bounds of FIFA business as usual. If you've read or seen any of the FIFA exposes, you know that mystery money has a strange way of showing up. To repeat, this is nothing new. Even if the charges are shown to be provable beyond any reasonable doubt, it's not out of the ordinary for FIFA.
So what we have is a spike the ball moment for entrenched authority. The other option? Let this tarnished election and contentious World Cup bidding cycle fade into the background.
What honor is there in stressing the point that only a dirty campaign would even have a chance at unseating the incumbent president? All that does is speak to the sizable credibility problems that FIFA face. These are problems that FIFA is unlikely to shake by demonstrating that the only person to stand with a different vision for the future of FIFA had no chance to win except by paying off voters.
It's the bad actor scenario at full international level, and no one should be buying it.
Comments, questions, solutions to problems that have yet to present themselves. Please, tell me all about it.
