Printable View
There's been reports of a proposal to do it tomorrow - Qatar proposing it, though the only places I've seen it mentioned are Israeli and Arab news outlets
I heard someone from UEFA say "This is different" when asked why Russia are banned and Israel aren't...
Its different because of the backing they are getting from the US, fcukin sickeningQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Infantini is pretty brazen and thats saying something after Baltter. Sitting on 'thrones' beside sheiks, cosying up to any president never mind Trump at the club WC that I watch very little of. Its hardly a surprise that he isnt going to rock many boats less that a year out from a wc in the US. It is outrageous that Israel are not yet excluded. On the very minor matter of their group in the context of the overall situation, expunging results isnt much of a headache/excuse with how results have been.
Funny I did think that the one thing that might see some movement on banning Israel was the airstrikes on Qatar.. they are big mates of FIFA brass and might be able to initiate something.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Looks like UEFA are potentially having a vote on this next week.
You'd imagine that if it went as far as a vote, it'd be hard for it to be defeated. You can put your head in the sand and ignore Israel. But can you vote against action, given the UN have deemed genocide is taking place?
sorry if it is in the link but do you know if it is an open vote or anonymous?
They're getting booted, no question about it. I'd like to think that the FAI were the driving force behind forcing a vote.
Maybe Im projecting, but bar direct politics between the belligerents I think banning a national football association is a major thing. It could be the biggest single decision that focuses attention than all the theatre at the UN. I did see today that Italy and Spain are sending naval vessels in support of the humanitarian flotilla. I reckon that it is to be on standby for rescue if something happens in international waters, but its not an insignificant development either.
I saw another article where a delegate said it was likely to be voted through, but only spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matterQuote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
So on that basis I would guess it could be a closed vote, but that's pure guesswork
Its very hard to think of federations that would vote against bar the usual, or see their voting being at odds with a countries foreign policy on this.
Perhaps unrelated, but I was in Spain the past week on holidays, and the Spanish military were doing training exercises with a whole host of fighter jets, helicopters and war planes, cleverly disguised as a poorly advertised air show around Salou marina. The entire air show was all military planes, and a couple of ex military planes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
My brother was in Lake Garda in Italy last week too and said he saw the same thing happening there.
Israel's Netanyahu apologizes to Qatar for attack on Doha, source says - from Reuters.
Netanyahu seems like the last person in the world to apologise for anything (well, up there with Trump, Putin, etc), so if this is true, then I'd say he's already starting to feel a bit of pressure.
Meanwhile, it looks like Israel's UEFA ban, if voted through, won't extend to the World Cup because that's not a UEFA tournament, and the US (co-hosts of course) have a lot more sway in that regard. But still looks likely they'll be banned from the Euros, the Nations League and from all UEFA club competitions shortly. Not sure quite what that means for Maccabi Tel Aviv in the Europa League groups - removing them would leave eight teams short a match, which is important in the league phase of course. Much easier to remove someone from a round-robin group.
Edit - the Examiner is saying Dynamo Kyiv would be bumped up to replace Maccabi in the Europa League as they lost to them in the playoff round, and then a team would be needed for the Conference League
I can see the vote or the decision being suspended due to recent political developments. I think this is a watershed moment in terms of support, Hamas reject this proposal (even if unplatable to them) then opinion sways again. Not that it will excuse Israels onging war on the Palestinian people as much as Hamas but it will effect the sesne of how some justify the means sadly.
The apology scarily does show how much infludence Trump has - Qatar are part of his in crowd, so he got Netanyho to apologise, someone who just wouldnt under usual circumstances. So an apology is generally a good thing but if you can make these to do the highly unlikely....
Trump's plan summed up. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c70155nked7o
It's doomed on a number of points but hopefully its a starting point kind of document with some room for change. If Hamas reject it outright...
7. Upon acceptance of this agreement, full aid will be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip. At a minimum, aid quantities will be consistent with what was included in the 19 January 2025 agreement regarding humanitarian aid,
Doesnt this basically admit that aid has not been let in to Gaza!? That claims of aid being delivered but have been taken by Hamas are not true. Contradicting a lot of what has been said by the US and Israel. Yeah maybe there is too much hope being placed in this, when whomever put it together is a low IQ individual that doesnt cover tracks.
Kind of seems like a plan from two years ago in fairness.
It should be really really hard to row back from the open (and correct) accusation of genocide without dealing with that fact. Though nothing would surprise me with Israel to be honest.
A Netanyahu written proposal, one that he know Hamas won't accept and thereby he can claim he tried to bring peace but Hams rejected giving him (in his view) the right to continue the genocideQuote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
I wondered if, in the background Netanyahu has tried to receive some assurances for himself and his ghouls that he will get a pass in terms of ICC etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The proposal is actually quite reasonable but it seems nigh on impossible to achieve as it is lofty on ambition but light on tactical detail. I (being the expert in these matters that i am lol) would have broken the deal down into a short term, medium term and long term set of deliverables with assurances - beyond words - to the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, most of them want Hamas gone too. I do think this puts Hamas in a weak spot and that their rejection of the deal would be a betrayal to their people. That said, Netanyahu already rowed back on two of the commitments within 24 hours of standing up in the WH and committing to it. So I wouldnt see it the same as Neish. Makes it easy for Hamas to reject and continue as is and blame Israel. Absolute cretin.
British media reported that the continental body has decided to hold off on a proposed vote following the announcement of US President Donald Trump's plan to end the war in the region.
https://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2025...hould-compete/
FIFA passing the buck!
Its familiar territory with the semantic dance of the GFA - pathway to statehood is not agreeing to statehood/United Ireland or self determination. Decommissioning weapons or permantently putting them beyond use. Disarm or stand down paramilitaries. If the time and effort is taken to see through this differing perspective then you never know but you need committed buy in obviously and neither Hamas or Netanyahu want to end this. They are being forced to look like they want to end it, Netanyahu has advantage because he has 'agreed' first, but what he says will intend for this to fail. Hamas should call bluff and do what Republicans and PIRA did in NI and claim that they brought a militarily massive occupyig power to ceasefire and to the negotiating table. Put their people fist this time!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
Agreed. I don't think either side wants this to end on anything other than their own terms - and cannot find it in them to bring the compromises necessary. On one hand you have a leader that sees the other side as vermin to be occupied, then bullied, then extinguished exacerbated by the victim mindset of the civilians based on the atrocities from decades ago...on the other side, you have another far-right, unelected leadership that is engaging in a war that is justifiable based on the actions of Israel but has eternally been based on the destruction of Israel and welded to Islam. I'd love to think that they might call bluff but I don't think they can see it like that and probably get the blame from Netanyahu and the USA when it fails. I think this is one where the ordinary people on both sides need to find their voice in some meaningful way. Great words to write, no idea how it happens.