Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • I think the mandatory ad break introduced by FIFA at the World Cup was also too much for most football people, not just fans. Changed too much, broke the dynamics, basically the sport became a game of 4 quarters instead of 2 halves. These two things combined together are just over the top and unacceptable (UEFA already said they won't use these mandatory ad breaks anywhere)

    This is the closest where I can see a future where we have a rugby union / rugby league like schism.

    Oh and guess who is behind the investment group: https://apnews.com/article/world-cup-fifa-investors-kushner-...

    by haunter
  • Why would non-fans even care? It was a 3 minute break, non-fans would not have any idea that you were going for 2 halves to 4 "quarters". I think this is the kind of thing purists care about but most people don't, most don't even know it is new.
    by orangedog
  • Of all the things wrong with the World Cup, the most inconsequential ones - hydration breaks and the final half-time show - have attracted the most griping.
    by triceratops
  • I agree completely with your assessment of the water breaks, but the games were extremely entertaining and I watched as much as I could.
    by jimbokun
  • Somewhere in this fetid swamp of corruption, you just know the trump crime syndicate has its greasy hands on the pie.
    by sizzzzlerz
  • *hands on a peace of the pie
    by verdverm
  • > If approval is granted, Fifa says Thrive Eternal is expected to lead the proposed investor group for FFE.

    > Thrive is an American venture capital firm founded by Joshua Kushner - the brother of US President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared.

    Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c5y67zrrdddo

    by monooso
  • It's only a matter of time before there are sponsors on the Yellow and Red cards...
    by paulbjensen
  • I follow a local team and don’t really follow the larger picture, but injuries are sponsored, i always thought that would produce a perverse incentive.

    EDIT: not sure why i’m getting downvoted, they post up the injured player on the screens with a private medical company prominently displayed.

    by secretsatan
  • “And that’s the second State Farm Yellow Card for Haaland!”
    by khazhoux
  • It'll be nice to have that precedent in place when we finally institute the Hunger Games.
    by andrewflnr
  • The red card for covering your mouth while talking to an opponent is brought to you by Telegram.
    by fred_is_fred
  • “Looks like this is a card. He already has a yellow (sponsored by Qatar Airwaves), and may be looking at his second. YES! he is receiving is second yellow, this time sponsored by Universal Studio, and here is the red card. Sponsored by Red Bull. He is leaving this game and his team mates one down.”

    Second commentator: “It is true, Red Bull gives you wings. In this case, the wings only take you to the shower room.”

    by runarberg
  • Guaranteed slots to the tournaments for patrons
    by coffeebeqn
  • And corporate UX/Design teams are eager to modernize those cards; yes they're already flat, but canary yellow is so last century and some glass effects or abolishing the rounded corners will be the next thing.
    by tzot
  • In the local minor league hockey games near me the power play (the man advantage resulting from a penalty) is usually sponsored by an electric company. The announcers say things like "..and with that cross-check they're on a TXU Energy Power Play!"
    by vel0city
  • I'm so happy to see they care enough to take a stand. The last World Cup was a sh-t show. I expect the LA olympics to be no better.
    by nkg
  • How was it a shit show? I’m genuinely curious. I attended 5 games (Atlanta, LA and Dallas) and was a fantastic experience minus the process to get tickets.
    by dmarcos
  • > As a result of today’s discussion, no UEFA national teams will participate in any FIFA competition for so long as these proposals remain alive, unless this proposal has been abandoned in its entirety and binding assurances have been given that FIFA will never again open its governance or competitions to private ownership.

    This seems to have actual teeth. What's Infantino going to do to save face? No one cares about a world cup without the Europeans.

    by barbazoo
  • About time

    Hard to think of a modern institution as corrupt as fifa. That may not bother too many people because it’s not their government, but I just think it stinks

    by shmuli9
  • > Hard to think of a modern institution as corrupt as fifa.

    <Formula 1 has joined the chat>

    by mrandish
  • The Olympic Committee comes pretty close, maybe even ahead of FIFA.
    by gorbachev
  • > Hard to think of a modern institution as corrupt as fifa

    IOC is about the only organisation that comes close to it I think.

    by maccard
  • FIFA has been monstrously corrupt since at least as far back as the 1970s (Havelange).

    I backslid this year, but did completely boycott watching in 2018 and 2022. Russia is a pariah state and should never have been allowed to host, and Qatar was manifestly unsuitable.

    The only difference this year is that the bribery and political favors were out in the open.

    by t0mpr1c3
  • Why only now? UEFA should boycott the world cup, period. It should have been enough even before the Balogun nonsense. They have the best league and the best teams, they have the know how and could easily host the UEFA World Cup.

    They could host a tournament without the pay-to-win arbitrary overruling of red cards and the clownish half time entertainment. Nobody would care about the FIFA World Cup.

    Fork it!

    by xorcist
  • Before you eulogize UEFA too much (ok, too late, you already did), answer me this.

    Where did Infantino come from? Answer: UEFA

    And for that matter, which continent did his predecessor Sepp Blatter start his football admin career in? Hint: he's not from Asia or Africa

    Probably the most widely admired admin in big-time football right now is al-Khalifa, the head of PSG. A Qatari. You know - those guys who organized by common consent is considered the best World Cup in modern times (during which EUROPEAN teams were ostentatiously protesting on the pitch - while keeping VERY quiet WHEN playing a World Cup in a country who is still facilitating an ONGOING GENOCIDE) .

    And from reports, he doesn't want to touch FIFA with a 10 foot barge pole.

    Europe had managed to keep the lions share of footballs global revenues to itself, while keeping Africa as basically a "football nursery" where teenagers get almost trafiked across Europe before 90% are discarded.

    This is one of the reasons why a (corrupt, mendacious & sly) Infantino had some support across Africa & Asia. Because he played off that imbalance. Rather like one mafioso giving you "protection" against another mafia mob.

    Just saying, Europe & UEFA arent necessarily the angels in any of this ...

    by isr
  • And run it on exactly the same dates as any FIFA matches.
    by hermitcrab
  • UEFA is not an angel, they generate far more money than FIFA from TV rights, sponsorships, and tickets. They also just don't want to ever lose that.
    by smotched

  •     The moment external investors acquire ownership interests in FIFA competitions, football changes forever. Commercial return becomes a permanent obligation. Investor expectations become a daily pressure. From that moment onwards, every decision on the international calendar, every decision on competition formats and every decision shaping the future of football is no longer driven by what best serves the game, but by what best serves shareholders.
    These words apply to any investment. It's worth considering as part of any business, including many of the businesses we're here to watch grow - the moment you have others involved as equity partners, the entire culture has to change. Do it consciously, or not at all.
    by PaulRobinson
  • > Do it consciously

    Yes

    > These words apply to any investment [...] the entire culture has to change

    I think that's fatalistic. There are plenty of people and legal structures that limit the influence of investors to reasonable returns, most famously founders retaining control, or the public benefit corporation (like Veeva) or nonprofit (OpenAI as the counter-example showing how even structures are no guarantee). It's all part of setting up the systems to work with available people, within the business leader's ambit.

    by w10-1