Commentators give their suggestions about how Fifa should be run. It's in the run-up to the Fifa election now that the organisation's current president Sepp Blatter is the only person left in the running for the position after Mohamed Bin Hammam and Jack Warner were provisionally suspended over allegations that financial incentives were offered to Caribbean Football Union members.
The Qatar based Gulf Times urges Fifa to make serious reforms:
"It would have been ideal if Blatter himself had stepped down himself after naming someone as the acting head until investigations concluded against Bin Hammam and a new date set for the election, which now has lost its meaning and relevance. When there is only one candidate in the running, it only points to a dictatorial set-up and not a democratic one."
Mark Perryman says in the Guardian that the fans have to pick up the bill for Fifa so they should have a say in how it is run:
"Worldwide, most fans have three demands: as many tickets for World Cups as possible should go to the fans, not the sponsors, and they should be at the lowest possible price. And all games should be screened on free-to-air TV, not overpriced subscription channels. Above all, serving Fifa should not be a job for life nor a way to get rich quick. If football's bureaucrats, many of whom do an excellent job, but some we know do anything but, were outnumbered three to one at a Fifa congress by the players, coaches and fans, it would transform the organisation for the better overnight."
In the New York Times' soccer blog, Simon Clancy thinks Fifa should speak for the fans:
"Fans don't want to hear that any more than they want to see Fifa's untouchables riding in chauffeur-driven cars and checking into the world's best hotels. They don't want to hear about privilege or backhanders. And they certainly don't want to hear Blatter refuse to answer questions from nasty journalists over whether FIFA's house is in order.
"Supporters actually don't want much. A little transparency perhaps. But what they want most of all is for the beautiful game to be theirs, to see it in its electrifying glory as it was when Barcelona tore apart Manchester United on Saturday. They want a new Emperor."
In South Africa's Mail and Guardian Verashini Pillay compares Sepp Blatter to Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi:
"There are quite a few similarities between Muammar Gaddafi and Sepp Blatter. They're both ancient, unwelcome, and have a penchant for ludicrous statements...
"The idea that Blatter will stand unopposed to again take the helm of the football super-body on Wednesday is utterly repulsive given the background of the situation. The two possible contenders for the throne were taken out of play by a series of political plays that saw them suspended for corrupt activities. Blatter was cleared of all wrongdoing by an internal committee of the organisation he is president of.
"It is a blatant mockery of any sort of system of accountability.
"And that is where Blatter echoes the Libyan dictator. He may not have murdered dozens or been complicit in genocide, but his sheer lack of accountability and greed put him firmly in the same camp as Gaddafi."
The Economist's Buttonwood suggests why the the press has reacted with outrage:
"Sepp Blatter's attempts to deal with journalists yesterday brought to mind the image of an absolute monarch confronted with some awkward questions from the plebs. His tone implied that humble hacks should not be allowed to question his integrity, or that of his organisation.
"Now the British press has many faults, from a prurient interest in the sex lives of sports stars through to the occasional bout of xenophobia. But along with the American media, the British newspapers have a robust attitude towards people in authority and a deep suspicion of deals done behind closed doors. There is no surer way to provoke a campaign against your organisation than to patronise or lecture the assembled press."