BBO Discussion Forums: FIFA - BBO Discussion Forums

i mean lol@me for getting worked up about this and an even bigger lol@terrible analogies, but taking a dump on budweiser is like going to any restaurant in the world that serves good food, whatever your definition of good is, and then telling us that mcdonalds is bad. i mean, ok, mcdonalds isn't even in the same universe as the restaurant you just went to. mcdonalds success has nothing to do with quality. they dont position themselves that way and they don't try to deliver that experience to you.

and if i can continue my terrible analogy, fosters is to subway or nandos or whatever ubiquitous chain is regional to you as bud is to mcdonalds. it's a different product but the experience is the same. it's not trying to be good. it's trying to be not bad to everyone.

but please, tell us more about how your steakhouse is great and mcdonalds is terrible.

i want my 3000th post to be about alcohol. and i want it to be in a thread about soccer. because that will make my happy.

jjbrr, on 2015-June-03, 21:36, said:

This would be fine if they didn't try to present it as so great, and there weren't large queues of Americans coming to countries with excellent beer who won't try it and just want a Bud. There was also a huge sour taste left when they tried to stop the original Budweiser being sold under its name that it had for 400 years.

jjbrr, on 2015-June-03, 21:39, said:

Happy 3K Cheers!

Cyberyeti, on 2015-June-03, 22:41, said:

i'm not sure what to tell you except that these people simply see the world differently than you and i. is it really a surprise that when the lowest common denominator from a country with wacky alcohol laws/culture are presented with possibly unfamiliar alternatives that they stick with what they're familiar and with what they've been conditioned to think is good/patriotic/ooooh look at the clydesdale and the cute dalmation?

diana_eva, on 2015-June-03, 22:57, said:

!H and thanks for all you do for BBF.

jjbrr, on 2015-June-04, 00:13, said:

I think it's cultural, people from many other countries go abroad to experience foreign culture. Brits are not immune to this, going to Benidorm on holiday then drinking LCD British beer and having fish and chips every evening (usually while acquiring a colour only normally seen on a lobster), but this has reduced over the years, it was extremely common 30 years ago. The US seems to have a higher proportion that if they want to go abroad at all, want to have McDonalds then a Bud.

Cyberyeti, on 2015-June-04, 05:40, said:

I know this is the FIFA thead but this interests me so maybe I will be forgiven.

I agree with the above comments, particularly the "extremely common 30 years ago" part. This has a lot to do with age. I always enjoy traveling, but I don't do it all that often. Growing up in Minnesota I regarded a trip to Wisconsin as traveling. Once, when I was eight, we even went to Chicago.
It takes effort to change habits of thought.

As to beer, you might find this amusing. As I started drinking beer (illegally) in the 1950s Hamm's was the big beer on the block. In fact "have a Hamm's" was sort of like "Xerox this article", the latter not always being done with a machine made by Xerox. Anyway, in the early 60's some bars started serving Lowenbrau. No one knew how to pronounce it (this was before Lowenbrau moved to St. Louis and, so to speak, took out American citizenship), but we understood it had snob appeal. I was in a bar with friends, we were all ordering Lowenbrau and commenting on its superiority. I had more of a "beer is beer" attitude. As we were leaving, the bartender confided to me that they had run out of Lowenbrau hours ago and had been serving Hamm's. He figured, correctly, no one would notice.

When I travel I have little interest in guided tours and I mostly stay out of chain outlets, US based or otherwise. The Starbucks in Paris was an exception. French coffee is fine but it is, or was, served in cups that hold maybe 2 ounces. I want a grande, Or a vente. Apparently the French agree, the Starbucks was crowded and by no means was everyone chattering in English.

Sorry I'm late to the topic, please someone tell me, are they finally going to remove all Real Madrid's titles since they all had some kind of bribe to the refery involved?

Fluffy, on 2015-June-04, 09:12, said:

I sure as hell hope not.

Fluffy, on 2015-June-04, 09:12, said:

And give them all to the team who can most act like a victim? "Evil Real Madrid, they're all about the profits. They are not as pure and innocent as us since we only take in 230 million dollars every year."

I think a joint WC between several Caribbean countries would be interesting and tons of fun if possible and if people want to entertain ideas for hosts besides the obvious Australia, England, France, US, etc

jjbrr, on 2015-June-04, 15:45, said:

The cricket world cup has happened on that basis, but I suspect the stadia wouldn't really be big enough or have the right facilities, and unlike Qatar, the islands don't have the money to build a load of white elephant huge stadia.

I can only hope that the Fifa thread becomes the destruction of Fifa.

The world cup belongs to Fifa.

It does not deserve to exist.

Let the competition in; be it one or ten thingy===

-------------------------------


With all of that suggested I predict fans. the customers who pay billions to Fifa and its sponsors will continue to funnel billions upon billions to Fifa

they will forget and forgive

the world cup must exist no matter what

no matter what

mike777, on 2015-June-04, 23:49, said:

You are talking about a game which its roots go way back to 2nd century BC. And you are talking about a world cup that actually all nations on earth participates. Do not confuse it with what we call "World Series" here in USA. You are talking about the real world series of a sport. A sport that is THE MOST popular and loved by HUGE majority of the world.

You have been repeating this nonsense god knows how many times in same thread.

We had corrupted cops, still have, but we do not terminate the law enforcement do we?
We had much more corruption than FIFA, which probably makes FIFA look like a "nun", in all branches of government, justice system, but we do not terminate the country now do we?

Yes The World Cup must exist and it will. You better get used to it Mike.

MrAce, on 2015-June-05, 18:01, said:

Maybe we should.

blackshoe, on 2015-June-05, 20:35, said:

Senor, senor, can you tell me where we're headin ?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon ?
...
Senor, senor, let's overturn these tables
Disconnect these cables
This place don't make sense to me no more
Can you tell me what we're waiting for, senor ?

MrAce, on 2015-June-05, 18:01, said:

FIFA is not a government agency. YOur analogy is silly.

Companies fail all the time. Companies go out of business all the time.

Yet you insist on comparing FIFA to the police force is silly.

btw countries do at times cease to exist, even in our lifetimes. INdeed countries have been terminated and replaced.

Let FIFA cease to exist and it will be replaced by something or perhaps ten somethings. Let the competition in.

-----


With all of the above said, clearly the fans and customers will continue to funnel billions into the pockets of FIFA, they will forgive and forget.

FIFA, the organization, is not the problem here. Organizations aren't corrupt. People are corrupt. Get rid of the corrupt people (which may be all of them) and FIFA will be fine.

blackshoe, on 2015-June-06, 17:10, said:

I must be dense. I don't see the distinction between FIFA the organization and the people who make up FIFA.

If the organization is so corrupt that it is impossible to clean it up, it should be done away with. That may be the case here.

blackshoe, on 2015-June-06, 17:10, said:

FIFA the organization IS the problem due to its structure which encourages corruption. It requires not only getting rid of the people but completely reorganising how FIFA works. This is effectively scrapping FIFA and starting again.