& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Louts blamed for England's loss
fact that Germany won the tournament ahead of South Africa. British newspapers said that for England the battle was lost both on the streets of Belgium and in the corridors of loot balling power.
England has lost out to hooligans and horse-trading.” moaned The Times, referring to the thuggish behaviour of English soccer fans in Charleroi. Belgium, at last month’s Euro 2000 tournament.
"It will in all probability deprive this country of the World Cup for another generation. For the country that invented the beautiful game yet last staged its most prestigious event in 1966. this is a bitter pill to swallow." The Times opined.
The Sun as ever was more succinct How yobs wrecked oui World < up bid it said under a headline s< reaming "Morons 0. Germany I
Other pundits placed the blame on England s footballing luminaries for lavishing 10 million pounds (15 million dollars) on a bid that was never likely to succeed from the outset. England had no support from the key power-brokers and had been humiliatingly outflanked by its rivals, newspapers decided.
The English hosted the best parties and offered the best hospitality... but that counted for little when it came down to football politics." The Guardian said.
It may have been sour grapes, but the press was distinctly miffed at the entire voting procedure which the Dail) Telegraph said "not even Kafka" could have dreamed up.
It reviled a process In which "notes are slipped under a hotel bedroom door trying to influ-
soccer World Cup In 2006. the press hi re concluded Friday reports AFP.
Damning the Kafkaesque bidding process and ruing the
LONDON. July 7:’ An unhappy mix of mindless hooligans and naive campaigners cost England dear in the race to host the
ence a New Zealander in his pyjamas" -- a reference to reports of candidates using both carrot and stick to win votes from members of the FIFA executive.
Back in the real world, the Financial Times rued the decision to give Germany the nod ahead of South Africa as "a shame, a mistake and a badly missed opportunity.
This was a chance to mark Africa's substantial contribution to the game." it said, adding that Germany may have won through because of economic reasons.
Gennanv Is Europe's largest and most successful economy and has easy access to the major European footballing countries which represent the sport's major television markets? the FT said. "Concerns about security in crime-ridden South Africa may alqo have contributed to the final decision."