England’s dreams of hosting the 2018 World Cup are all but dead in the water – at least according to the people behind the bid campaign.

In the space of a few short weeks, England have gone from definite favourites to host the world’s biggest sporting event to little more than an outside bet.

The reason, according to the bid team, is down to the English media. More specifically, the article by the British Sunday Times which revealed that two members of Fifa’s executive committee – the decision-taking body – were allegedly prepared to ‘sell’ their votes in return for financial favours.

This has apparently led the rest of Fifa’s executive committee to fear they could all come under eight years of intensive scrutiny by the English media if the bid goes England’s way.

What an absolutely ludicrous situation. I mean, isn’t the real story here that two of Fifa’s most senior people were possibly open to corruption? Forget who broke the story, the fact that doubts have been cast over the entire voting process and the integrity of those involved is the real issue.

There has been lots of whining that the two men in question were trapped by a ‘sting’ operation with journalists from the newspaper posing as lobbyists for the American bid.

And while I don’t particularly like that approach to journalism and would agree it is ethically questionable, in this case it has to be results that count.

Because how the newspaper got the information is considerably less important than the information they got. What they uncovered was most definitely in the public interest and needed to be revealed.

What some Fifa members – led by Sepp Blatter himself – are doing is trying to deflect attention from the revelations themselves by putting the focus on the Sunday Times methodology.

And that cannot be allowed to happen. The only credibility at stake here is that of Fifa, not Fleet Street.

World Cups are not only a source of national pride and prestige, they are also multi-billion-dollar commercial events. The decision on who is given the honour of hosting the tournament has to be based on honesty and integrity, and the Sunday Times article cast serious doubts on both.

What makes me curious is why the rest of the executive committee are so worried about future scrutiny from the English media? Do they have something to hide? Or are they just content with the current situation that allows them to go about their business behind a veil of Fifa secrecy?

The World Cup should go to the country or countries that are best able to organise the event. Personal fears over what the media may or may not do you should not be allowed to intervene.

Instead of jumping on the ethics bandwagon and pointing fingers at the newspaper, Blatter should be taking every possible step to reassure the public that this was a one-off and doesn’t reflect on the committee in its entirety.

Despite the whole fiasco, Fifa have insisted the vote will go ahead at the beginning of December, just a couple of weeks after the organisation’s ethics committee decides on the fate of the two men in question.

The problem is, no matter how the final vote goes, there will be serious questions about its credibility and honesty. And that is a long-term issue Blatter and Fifa need to address before any more votes are cast.

A final thought on this matter: if the rest of the Fifa executive are worried about scrutiny from the English media should England win the bid, what do they think it will be like if they don’t?

If there is one thing you don’t want to do to the English press it is annoy them. You just don’t poke that particular beast. If for one second they feel they are being blamed for England’s bid becoming unwinnable, they will be all over the remaining 22 members of that committee like an ugly rash.

Is there a solution to the situation? Well, the only one I can see is for the voting process next month to be held in public instead of in secret. If each member of the committee says who they are voting for and why, then the public will at least feel the voters are not hiding anything and don’t have ulterior motives.

But coming out from behind its veil of secrecy would be a brave move from Fifa. And we don’t very often see those do we?

Formula for excitement

It’s been a Formula One season to remember for all the right reasons – drama, excitement and thrills galore. And it comes to a head today with the final race in Abu Dhabi with four drivers still in contention for the title.

In points terms, Fernando Alonso has the edge on the Red Bulls of Sebastian Vettel and Mark Webber, while Lewis Hamilton still has a mathematical, if not realistic, chance of taking the crown.

The Spaniard considers himself favourite and has even gone on record as saying he is “100 per cent certain” he will clinch the title.

But is he being overconfident? Yes, it very much looks like he will win the title, and yes, it is pretty much his to throw away. But how many times have we said that about the Formula One crown in the past, only to see the unexpected happen right at the end?

There are so many unpredictable things that come into play in motor racing – the weather, the engines, the track, the opponents. It only takes a puncture, a dodgy gearbox or a minor collision to change the whole complexion of a race.

Added to that is the fact that Alonso’s two closest rivals are from the same team, which means they will be, at least to a certain extent, driving for each other rather than against.

All in all it should add up to a pretty exciting finale this afternoon. My prediction? Webber to win the race, Alonso to win the title.

A vivid imagination

I am truly sick and tired of seeing players – and even the occasional manager – waving imaginary cards at referees. It just has to stop.

The reason they do it is obvious: They believe it will persuade the match official to dish out a yellow or even a red card.

But apart from the fact that it probably never works – and may even work against the waver in the referee’s mind – it is an utterly ungentlemanly thing to do.

Whether or not a player’s name goes into that little black book is entirely at the discretion of the man in the middle, and any attempt to influence his decision is fundamentally wrong.

A referee’s life is hard enough as it is. They essentially have to perform the role of judge and jury on an incident that takes a split-second to occur. And we all know they don’t have the benefit of replays to help them reach the right conclusion.

Having some trumped-up footballer with delusion of righteousness waving pretend cards in his face is anything but helpful. The victim of a foul is rarely in any sort of position to say precisely what happened to him and whether or not it is indeed a bookable offence. And managers too are rarely close enough to the incident to make an informed case for a card.

I would like to see any player who waves an imaginary card be given a card of their own. Managers who do it should be sent to the stands. Let’s make the gesture itself a bookable offence.

Hopefully that will stamp out the practice and make these self-appointed football vigilantes keep their pretend cards in their pretend pockets next to their pretend halos.

sportscolumnist@timesofmalta.com