
World Cup 2022: Fifa need to conduct “independent investigation” into Qatar bid claims
[ad_1]
Dan Roan, BBC’s Sports Editor
Once again, Qatar’s hosting of the 2022 World Cup is mired in controversy.
Ever since its shock win in the race to stage the event eight years ago, the country has faced questions over how it triumphed, its winter scheduling, and the human cost of building the infrastructure required.
So what will these latest allegations mean?
On the one hand, we do not yet know the explanations of those named in the documents obtained by the Sunday Times. The allegations relate to events several years ago, and some will point out that Qatar’s is hardly the first bid suspected of using private intelligence and covert tactics.
Indeed it has been claimed England’s 2018 bid spied on its rivals. Crucially, Qatar was cleared of corruption by Fifa’s two-year long investigation, headed up by American lawyer Michael Garcia.
However, there is bound to be speculation that if this is found to be a breach of the rules, linked directly to the bid team, and that Garcia was not aware of this new information, then it could increase the risk of Qatar being sensationally stripped of the event.
With the tournament now just four years away and tens of billions of pounds already spent on preparations, that remains unlikely. Fifa would be worried about the threat of being sued if it took such action. However, its new leadership has vowed to regain trust after the years of scandal, so perhaps it will feel it has no choice but to launch a fresh investigation.
Qatar is embroiled in a diplomatic dispute with some of its neighbours, which perhaps explains the timing of this leak. And with Fifa president Gianni Infantino known to be keen on a 48-team 2022 World Cup, this could lead to fresh pressure being applied on Qatar to agree, and to share their tournament with other countries in the region.
But less than two weeks after Fifa hailed Russia’s World Cup, it has not taken long for the governing body – and its next host – to face yet more scrutiny.
[ad_2]
Source link