Photo of Chuck Blazer posing with Mohammed Ali

Chuck exploits brain-damaged athlete

 

Photo of Chuck Blazer posing with Hilary Clinton

The things a woman has to do to get elected

 

Look out Archbishop Tutu!
Chuck’s about to roll on you!

 

Photo of Chuck Blazer's daughter Marci

Thanks for getting me a job at Fifa Dad.
Marci, we’re just keeping it in the family of football

 

Image of a poster advertising Chuck Blazer's appearance at a 2008 Republican National Convention

Did he vote for Sarah Palin?

 

The things they say...

‘Neither FIFA nor its President have anything to hide, nor do they wish to.’

Blatter press release, 28 January, 2003


BBC Panorama Reporter Andy Davies:

‘A one million franc bribe … is it not correct that Mr Blatter asked that it be moved to the FIFA official who was named on the payment slip?’

FIFA Director of Communications Markus Siegler:

‘If you do not stop now, then we call the security and we put you out.’

FIFA Press conference, Zurich, Tuesday, 11 April 2006


‘I am deputy chairman of the finance committee of FIFA. I oversee a budget of US$2 billion and I have never seen one iota of corruption.’

Jack Warner, Trinidad Express 12 December 2004


‘Lying and deception and bad faith are standard operating procedure at FIFA.’

Adam C. Silverstein, a lawyer for MasterCard in their successful action against FIFA, New York, December 1, 2006


‘I do not believe a Jew can ever be a referee at that level (Argentine Premier League) because it’s hard work and, you know, Jews don’t like hard work.’

FIFA senior vice-president and chair of Finance Committee, Julio Grondona, 5 July 2003. Buenos Aires


‘FIFA is a healthy, clean and transparent organisation with nothing to hide. There is huge public interest in FIFA, therefore we have to be as transparent as possible. We will try to communicate in a more open way so the world can believe us and be proud of their federation.’

FIFA General Secretary Urs Linsi, January 2003, on fifa.com


 

It ain’t easy getting answers from Chuck Blazer

 

 

 

 

It’s been a fascinating decade investigating Fifa corruption and, from time to time, delving into the stinking mess that Conacaf  became under the joint leadership of President Jack Warner and General Secretary Chuck Blazer.

 

Television viewers around the world have enjoyed – or alternatively wept – at the grossness of Jack Warner’s animated answers to questions about his industrial-scale World Cup ticket rackets. Spitting and hitting was his preferred response.

 

All this time Chuck Blazer was silent. He made no public criticism of Warner’s rackets and, it appears, was also looting Concacaf and the Caribbean Football Union.

 

Wanna buy some World Cup tickets?

 

Blazer has also been involved in World Cup ticket rackets. The secondary tickets guys say he has been at it since the World Cup in America in 1994. I possess documents revealing some of his deals and if he ever sues me, I will be delighted to present them to the court of his choice. Will Fifa’s Ethics Committee ask me for copies? (stop laughing over there!)

 

MEANWHILE . . . the upheavals at Concacaf after Chuck turned in his pal Jack to the Fifa anti-corruption brigade – no official is immune! (stop laughing over there!) - produced a flow of revelatory documents.

 

Ethical journalism requires reporters to put allegations to individuals before publication. It’s known as Right To Reply – in the trade we call it R2R.

 

July 14, 2011: Email to Chuck Blazer asking him 7 questions about the astonishing information that he trousers 10% of Concacaf’s sponsor and marketing revenues. And that Concacaf’s annual accounts do not make clear that he is the lucky guy. And what does he earn from the organisation? And what on earth was he doing cashing a personal cheque for $250,000 from the Caribbean Football Union?

 

Granularity – you know what he means

 

July 15, 2011: Chuck replies. He never uses 5 words when he can fill a page with hundreds. Chuck also likes us to know that he knows words we don’t. See ‘granularity.’ So he must be cleverer than the rest of us.
He confirms the 10% - then without offering any evidence claims it is consistent with something he doesn’t define – ‘industry standards.’ Chuck dodges the question most of us would like answered – how much does he earn – and won’t say why he is dodging.

Will anybody believe his claim that the $250,000 was a personal loan? He says he is ‘prepared to return’ the money – but doesn’t explain why he took it in the first place. There must be more to this.

 

That story was published here:

 

Jennings is a ‘useless journalist’

 

July 17, 2011: Within hours of publication Chuck is emailing. He thinks its OK to keep Concacaf’s accounts private – even Blatter puts some brief figures online. He claims, ‘You chose to totally ignore the responses we sent.’

That is not true. He replied a day after deadline but I had managed to summarise his admission about the 10%. Towards the end of his blast he mutates from ‘I’ to the Royal ‘We.’ Some might think this evidence of delusions. And he expresses an opinion: ‘You are useless as a journalist.’

 

August 31, 2011: This is out of sequence but Warner eventually addresses Blazer’s claim that the $250,000 was repayment of a personal loan. Warner says that it’s a lie’ – but doesn’t explain why a total of $750,000 was allegedly paid from the CFU to Blazer. Believe what you like.

 

August 9, 2011: Back to chronology. A lot more documents have come my way. I send Mr Blazer 20 specific questions about Concacaf employing his son Jason, some big cheques, offshore bank accounts, properties and an antique Mercedes he keeps garaged in Zurich. And what did America’s taxation authorities, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) know about his offshore assets?

 

August 11, 2011: Chuck replies. He ignores all 20 questions. All he has to say is that it is ‘completely inappropriate’ to question him putting his son Jason on Concacaf’s payroll. Shame I never mentioned him fixing a job for daughter Marci at Fifa. Chuck tosses in an insult that I ‘have little regard for the truth.’

 

Answers still wanted for 20 questions

 

August 12, 2011: Getting near to planned publication deadline so I email Mr Blazer pointing out that he didn’t answer any of the 20 questions.

 

August 12, 2011: On legal advice I send this message to Blazer.

 

August 12, 2011: Blazer replies. He is still not answering any of the 20 questions. He has a dig at Warner which may or may not be justified.

 

August 12, 2011: Blazer’s final response. There’s nothing for the IRS to be concerned about. So that’s alright.

 

August 20, 2011: Chuck waits a week and then responds on his blog. Except he doesn’t answer any of the questions or issues. But he promises we will soon be treated to ‘real information.’