- Reports claim that Qatar paid $400m to FIFA before success of 2022
- Allegation held by Al Jazeera it signed TV contract to make the offer
Urgent calls put FIFA under pressure to launch an investigation into a $100m TV deal that state-run broadcaster al-Jazeera offered before being awarded 2022 World Cup by 3 weeks.
Allegations made in a book in January 2018 by a whistle-blower from Bonita Mersiades, inside failed 2022 bid of Australia called “the Inside Story of the Fifa Way”.
Sunday Times claimed it seized documents that show al-Jazeera’s executives had signed a TV contract includes unexpected success fee of $100mpaid to Fifa if Qatar won World Cup ballot in 2010.
“In event that the 2022 competition is awarded to the state of Qatar, al-Jazeera shall, in addition to the rights fee, pay to Fifa into the designated account the monetary amount of $100m”
The bidding war for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup tournaments was at its most frenzied and nine nations were hoping that the prize of hosting the world’s greatest football competition would be theirs. It was November 2010 and even England dared to dream.
Chairman of media, sport, culture & digital committee, Damian Collins, believes FIFA has to freeze payments from al-Jazeera then launch an investigation into apparent contract which appears to be in clear breach of the rules”.
Sunday Times claims that it has copy of a second secret television rights contract states that Qatar offered $480m three years later that is now part of a bribery inquiry issued by Swiss police.
The book of Mersiades claims that months before the vote in December 2010, executives of FIFA worried that win of Qatar might leave financial shortfall for governing body in 2022.
On the other hand, beIN Sports agreed to pay $100m as a secret deal f Qatar won voting process.
“Furthermore, please note that Fifa lodged a criminal complaint with the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland, which is still pending. Fifa is and will continue to cooperate with the authorities. production contributions which were standard market practice and are often imposed upon broadcasters by sports federations and sports rights holders. There is clearly a significant uplift in interest and additional revenues to a broadcaster and significant additional local production costs to a rights holder when a major sports event is awarded in a broadcaster’s domestic market. The relevant media agreements were stand alone from any bid, and were in no way intended to influence the outcome of the vote”