Latest Shame Just Another CONCACAF Embarrassment

It seems that Jack Warner, the confederation president who's part neighborhood gangster and part outlandish James Bond villain, is refusing to pay promised bonuses to the Trinidad and Tobago players who qualified for the 2006 World Cup (Warner negotiated the bonuses and is a high-ranking member of the country's parliament). And Warner and his yes-men at the Trinidad and Tobago Football Federation are refusing to pay despite repeated rulings requiring them to do so.

According to this story from the Trinidad and Tobago Express and this piece from The Observer (London), both the international Sport Dispute Resolution Panel and the Port of Spain High Court have ruled that the TTFF owes more than $3 million in promised bonuses and legal costs to at least 13 Soca Warriors. Perhaps even more troubling for Warner, the TTFF has been told it must open its books to an independent auditor.

The federation has appealed again as it continues to dig for a legal loophole.

"It's shocking that any national football federation can behave like this. FIFA members are governed by a code of ethics and not paying your debts is generally considered unethical," the players' attorney said. "Yet all they have ever done since they made that commitment is avoided paying, using every delay tactic they can think of."

Ethics, and the law, have never been a concern for Warner. He has maintained his position of power in CONCACAF and FIFA, where he is one of eight vice presidents, despite repeated scandals.

He was caught illegally reselling 2006 World Cup tickets at a tremendous profit, yet was slapped only with a fine he still hasn't paid in full. He once demanded that the Scottish Football Association make out the check from a friendly between the countries to him personally. He levied public insults against England and then apologized only when the Football Association agreed to play Trinidad in a money-spinning friendly.

This weekend, David Beckham will be conducting clinics in Port of Spain alongside Warner and FIFA president Sepp Blatter. The Under-17 Women's World Cup will be decided there on Saturday, and England's FA knew just who to send to lobby for World Cup votes (the hosts for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups will be determined on Dec. 2. Warner and CONCACAF control three votes).

Then there's this hysterical rant over a handbag given to his wife by England's World Cup bid committee. What's Creole for 'chutzpah'?

Last month, Norway's Dagbladet uncovered evidence that Warner once again illegally sold World Cup tickets acquired through official channels to scalpers. The paper estimated Warner's personal profit from the 2010 deal to be around $150,000.

Keeping the Minnows Happy

Why is Warner able to continue to defame soccer in this part of the world and act with such impunity? Because he delivers money and favors to the people who maintain his position. At FIFA, that means votes and support for Blatter. Within CONCACAF, it's about funneling rewards back to the smaller nations that, combined, represent the real power in the confederation.

This has even more relevance to American soccer fans because of recent developments regarding the new proposed system for World Cup qualification. If you missed that, CONCACAF has asked FIFA for permission (a formality) to restructure the quadrennial tournament in a manner that will guarantee more games (and more money) to the smaller teams. It also may make it easier for one of those teams to qualify.

FanHouse confirmed the proposed format with the confederation. Instead of eliminating 11 countries in a first round, two-leg playoff, the new structure will see just three exit early. The remaining 32 countries, including the USA and Mexico, will play double-round robins in eight groups of four teams each.

The top two in each group would advance to a second group stage, comprising four four-team groups. A final stage of two four-team groups would follow. The group winners at that final stage would qualify directly to the World Cup, with the second-place sides contesting the third spot traditionally awarded to CONCACAF.

The reaction among soccer fans and writers in the U.S. when this proposal leaked last month was one of almost universal dismay. The U.S. still would be required to play 18 games, but under the new format it's unlikely to face Mexico. The home-and-home qualifying series between the rivals has been one of the highlights of the American soccer calendar, even though home victories have become relatively routine.

Everyone wondered how and why CONCACAF would conspire to kill off those two games.

The answer, of course, is that CONCACAF doesn't care. CONCACAF isn't about the U.S. or Mexico, as shocking as that may be to people from large, powerful nations who are used to getting their way.

In FIFA's world, it's one country, one vote. That means that St. Kitts and Nevis, Belize and Aruba have as much say in who runs CONCACAF as the U.S. and Mexico. Or even more say, if they band together. So a savvy and unscrupulous politician needs to satisfy only the constituents that ensure his survival. And that's what this new format accomplishes.

Many of the teams that used get just two games now will get at least six. Many that used to get just six now will play 12, and so on. That's extra gate money, extra exposure and extra development. In addition, the elimination of the six-team final round, which has been dominated by the U.S. and Mexico, increases the slight chance that one of the pair might not qualify. An upset is easier to spring over the course of six games than 10.

Keeping the Pie Small

There's another side to it, as well, and that's CONCACAF's tradition of keeping things on the down low. The US-Mexico rivalry, and the attention drawn to the qualifiers between the countries, may have just been a bit too blinding for Warner's liking.

I had a conversation a few years ago with someone who'd had dealings with CONCACAF, and it's stuck with me. I was complaining about the confederation's sloth and lack of ambition. This was before the expanded Champions League, back when the Gold Cup was held at random intervals, the Web site looked like a BBS from the mid '90s and it seemed like Warner and Co. could barely organize a junior high school dance.

In fact, they'd failed to stage a club championship tournament as recently as 2001.

I was told that all of that apparent flailing was by design. Warner and his cronies realized that expansion and publicity would attract more attention, more scrutiny and more people who wanted a piece of the action. They preferred to keep all of a smaller pie than share a larger one.

It took until 2008 for CONCACAF to launch a Champions League tournament. It was the last of FIFA's six confederations to do so (even Oceania beat us), and it doesn't do much to market the competition beyond its own Web site (which, admittedly, has improved).

We wonder why the confederation doesn't do anything to improve the awful refereeing that continues to be a blight on the competition. We wonder why it does nothing to help drum up a few fans at Champions League games (both Crew Stadium and Estadio Azul were practically empty on Tuesday night. That many people are probably just wandering the stands on a given evening whether there's a game or not).

It's because the more big-time the event becomes, the more scrutiny there will be into CONCACAF and Warner's activities.