The voice came through crackly but clear on my phone as I trundled between two German cities.
“I backed [Sepp Blatter] in 1998 against [Lennart] Johansson and he won.
“I backed him in 2002 against [Issa] Hayatou and he won.
“At this point in time, I don’t see any reason why I shouldn’t back him.”
It is June 2006 and, while a World Cup is in progress, and thoughts are beginning to turn behind-the-scenes to Blatter’s prospects of securing a third term of office as FIFA President the following year.
The message then from CONCACAF head Jack Warner, whose voice it was, seemed to me crystal clear: yes, you probably will get my support, but remember I helped put you there and don’t take my support for granted.
The reason why Trinidad-based Warner’s backing is so often seen as decisive in key FIFA elections is that he appears to exercise more control over the votes in his Caribbean, North and Central American region than any other confederation boss.
In a race such as Blatter versus Mohamed Bin Hammam in which 105 votes will be enough to secure victory, the 35 votes held by CONCACAF member-associations would set one candidate well on his way.
You could say the same of last year’s high-profile contests for the right to stage the 2018 and 2022 World Cups in which 12 votes were required to win and three of the electorate came from the CONCACAF region.
As Warner himself said in his closing speech this week at the CONCACAF Congress in Miami: “Our strength over the last 20 years is that we as a confederation always vote as a bloc and this shall not change.”
So why am I left with the sneaking suspicion that this time things may be different?
Well, my colleague Andrew Warshaw has alluded to discontent over decisions a) not to award the 2022 World Cup to the United States and b) not to lift CONCACAF’s representation at the 2014 tournament in Brazil.
But it is mainly those last four words: “this shall not change”.
Warner’s sentence could have stood perfectly well without them.
They therefore strike me as the sort of thing that might be said by a man trying just a tiny bit too hard to convince his audience.
Of course, I may be reading too much into four little monosyllables, but if the CONCACAF vote is split, it would be a big moment, possibly signifying a loosening in the grip of one of world football’s most prominent power-brokers.
I personally think it would also give a boost to the cause of democracy within FIFA.
The six Confederation Presidents, to my mind, wield too much influence over FIFA’s affairs, rather than too little.
It follows that any development that dilutes this is potentially healthy.
David Owen worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup and is now freelancing, including covering the 2008 Beijing Olympics and 2010 World Cup. Owen’s Twitter feed can be accessed at www.twitter.com/dodo938