World Cup 2006

[Xin Zhi Zhu]

Ummn... juz my 2 cents worth... corruption within players do exist... Bribery may not be on the part of the govt but the bookies esp... in odds of Brazil and France, alot of ppl bet on Brazil. If Brazil win, the bookies will lose out alot... Do u think they will wana lose? they can bribe players... Also, it can be in the form of dead threats e.g if u score u will be shot.... Who wouldn't be worry about their life? Those person who send the threats juz got to be lucky once and u will be dead... Some may ask, why would these players accept money when they earn high wages.. u will nv noe how much the money that goes into their pocket if they are bribed... A fraction of money earn by all bookies in the world combine is alot and imagine having it... u will be damned rich... sometimes dun u wonder why a team with probability of winning= 99.9999999% will lose? And why is do host countries for world cup win at times though te odds are against them or they get into top 8 when they are least expected to... Yet, when at the nxt world cup when it izzn't their yr to host, they seem to deflate? e.g France. Watch South Korea this yr to c if my predictions are correct... They wun be like wat they were at the last world cup. My pt is hosting countries USUALLY do better dan expected... Consider the amount of money they earn by hosting world cup..

[Xin Zhi Zhu]

the pt is... bookies wun wan to make losses and will attempt to so smthing... they may bribe the referee as well... the bribery may not be applied to tht whole team but individual players like the goalkeepers or strikers. So it makes sense that they will be willing to accept th bribe.. The money if they win the world cup may in fact be lesser than the bribe... The bookies are confirm aware of the need to pay higher amount to the players they are bribing than the world cup prize otherwise why would the player want to help them?

[Moinllieon]

Ummn... juz my 2 cents worth... corruption within players do exist... Bribery may not be on the part of the govt but the bookies esp... in odds of Brazil and France, alot of ppl bet on Brazil. If Brazil win, the bookies will lose out alot... Do u think they will wana lose? they can bribe players.....

Well, it only makes sense if you think the bookies are stupid. They are running a business here people, and they run it in a way to ensure a profit! If alot of people bet on Brazil, the odds on Brazil will go up because they can cover the winnings of the people who bet on France. If money suddenly came in for France and they could no longer be able to cover the winnings if the French win, the odds will then drop. The fact is the odds did not drop for that Final. So meaning no big money came in on one side that wasn't covered on the other side.

[dan J]

... For instance if i was part of the brazillian government, and I told Ronaldo I'll kill his family if he doesn't play like crap, you think he will call the cops on me? ...

Andy Lau made a movie about fixing the World Cup. In France 98. So there must be some truth to it...

with arguments like these, hard to imagine you were old enough to have real money to bet with back in '98.

[Panadol]

with arguments like these, hard to imagine you were old enough to have real money to bet with back in '98.

If you are not going to participate in a constructive manner, I suggest you not post at all. I have said I am not a lawyer, I just do what works for me. I can list a ton of my accomplishments, ones that would make u feel inadequate but that would defeat the purpose of this discussion. The object here is to display your opinion regarding the world cup. Don't be a firestarter.

[soccerfeva]

Guys, this is a discussion about football, not about match-fixing, please.

Why do some underdogs win? Ever heard football is a team game? Ever heard of bloody "stupid" referees? I could list a ton of other factors, and on 1 side we have the people who will say the referee got bribed. On the other side we have people who will say the referee just made a mistake. Since we have no evidence, there is no real way of saying whether France 98 was "fixed" or not.

I for one, stand by my opinion that match fixing did not occur in France 98. It is the biggest stage for football and it shouldn't be allowed to happen. However I didnt watch the Final so I am in no position to comment. I do have a France 98 CD though..

I say, people, let's move away from the dangerously subjective topic of match-fixing, and back to the world cup. Please !! They are not inter-related !! There is no point trying to change opinion of others who stick to their own opinions.

[Xin Zhi Zhu]

Well, it only makes sense if you think the bookies are stupid. They are running a business here people, and they run it in a way to ensure a profit! If alot of people bet on Brazil, the odds on Brazil will go up because they can cover the winnings of the people who bet on France. If money suddenly came in for France and they could no longer be able to cover the winnings if the French win, the odds will then drop. The fact is the odds did not drop for that Final. So meaning no big money came in on one side that wasn't covered on the other side.

U meant the official bookies right? Ever heard of the underground bookies which does not have the "odds". I have encounter with the way they operate from mu unlcle's e.g... They dun go by odds.. For e.g, France will give out 1.5 balls.. This means those betting on France will onli win if France scored by 2 goals... So, it shows dat odds are not affecting illegal bookies.. So, no matter wat, their profit is not guaranteed unless they rigged it...

I think diff ppl have their pt of view... some of u here may believe there may be matchfixing while there are those who staunchly believe it is non existent... Think there is no pt in arguing whether which match is fixed or not since it is clear dat neither side will affect neither side's POV... So, those who are looking for arguments on this, BUG OFF or u can start another thread to discuss this.. I think we shd respect the person dat started this thread... To start off with, who do u guys think will reach the top 4?

[Moinllieon]

U meant the official bookies right? Ever heard of the underground bookies which does not have the "odds". I have encounter with the way they operate from mu unlcle's e.g... They dun go by odds.. For e.g, France will give out 1.5 balls.. This means those betting on France will onli win if France scored by 2 goals... So, it shows dat odds are not affecting illegal bookies.. So, no matter wat, their profit is not guaranteed unless they rigged it...

That's even harder to fix. That is called by betting the "lines" or the "spread" here in America. In that case, the bookie tries to set the line so as to entice the same amount of money being bet on both sides. That way they can use the money from one side to pay off the winnings on the otherside and make a profit off of the fees. So if the line for that match was Brazil by -1.5, then that means at that line, there was an equal amount of money being betted on by both sides. Once again, if a huge amount of money suddenly came in for France, the line would shift to Brazil by -1 or maybe even so the bookies can entice more betting on Brazil to even out the bets on both sides. This kind of sports gambling is much much harder to fix without suspicion of a fix. For example, back in the early 90s, an Arizona State player started to shave points (betting on the other team and purposely win by less than the spread, or the line, by playing badly when the team is further ahead), the police and the gambler knew BEFORE that game that something was up because the line shifted 18 times! Normally the line does not shift at all. This hurts your argument even more.

I think diff ppl have their pt of view... some of u here may believe there may be matchfixing while there are those who staunchly believe it is non existent... Think there is no pt in arguing whether which match is fixed or not since it is clear dat neither side will affect neither side's POV... So, those who are looking for arguments on this, BUG OFF or u can start another thread to discuss this.. I think we shd respect the person dat started this thread... To start off with, who do u guys think will reach the top 4?

Sure thing, as long as you hold yourself to it as well. Anyways, it's just silly to me that nobody that understands gambling is claiming a fix and those who have no clue how sports gambling works are. So I figure I clear up some misconceptions.

Top 4 will be hard to say without looking at the draws. But the Top 4 in talent should be Brazil, Argentina, the Netherlands, and (I hate to say it) England.

[- L1n -]

That's even harder to fix. That is called by betting the "lines" or the "spread" here in America. In that case, the bookie tries to set the line so as to entice the same amount of money being bet on both sides. That way they can use the money from one side to pay off the winnings on the otherside and make a profit off of the fees. So if the line for that match was Brazil by -1.5, then that means at that line, there was an equal amount of money being betted on by both sides. Once again, if a huge amount of money suddenly came in for France, the line would shift to Brazil by -1 or maybe even so the bookies can entice more betting on Brazil to even out the bets on both sides. This kind of sports gambling is much much harder to fix without suspicion of a fix. For example, back in the early 90s, an Arizona State player started to shave points (betting on the other team and purposely win by less than the spread, or the line, by playing badly when the team is further ahead), the police and the gambler knew BEFORE that game that something was up because the line shifted 18 times! Normally the line does not shift at all. This hurts your argument even more.



Sure thing, as long as you hold yourself to it as well. Anyways, it's just silly to me that nobody that understands gambling is claiming a fix and those who have no clue how sports gambling works are. So I figure I clear up some misconceptions.

Top 4 will be hard to say without looking at the draws. But the Top 4 in talent should be Brazil, Argentina, the Netherlands, and (I hate to say it) England.

Top 4 is debatable, to me there was only really one star in each of those teams, the rest was expendable.

Brazil - Ronaldo, the rest were scraps,
England - Possibly owen or sheaere
NetherLand - Bergkamp
Argetina- Bastituta.


France - Zizu

[Moinllieon]

Top 4 is debatable, to me there was only really one star in each of those teams, the rest was expendable.

Brazil - Ronaldo, the rest were scraps
England - Possibly owen or sheaere
NetherLand - Bergkamp
Argetina- Bastituta.

France - Zizu

The people you named were fitting for France 98. I was referring to Germany06.

But I'd disagree with your take on Brazil, the Netherlands, Argentina, and France.

Brazil had Rivaldo at his peak, Cafu at his peak, RC at his best, not to mention

The Netherlands had Overmars, the De Boer brothers, Kluivert (despite all his misses), Cocu, Davids, Seedorf, Reiziger.

Argentina had Zanetti, Ariel Ortega, Crespo, Veron (back when he absolutely dominated games), Simone.

France had Henry, Petit, Desailly, Blanc, Thuram, Lizurazu, Trezguet, Vieira (granted those last 2 didn't play much that Tourney).

[dgfds01]

I don't think the '98 final was fixed. It just doesn't seem possible that a bunch of overpaid multimillionaires would give up personal pride and glory for more dinero.

But I must admit, the fact that Brazil were 2-0 down and still didn't bother attacking looks suspiscious. I remember screaming at the tv - they started what looked like an offensive move but passed back when they were scarely out of their half. Under NO pressure too.

Anyway, that's the past. For 2006, I hope some underdog makes it to the top but this time, without dodgy calls. It was awesome seeing teams like Argentina and France being knocked out early on in 2002. Especially after seeing countless semis predictions of Argentina, France, Italy and Portugal.

[Long]

The best squads on paper in Germany 2006 in my mind are:

1. Brazil
2. Argentina
3. Holland
4. Italy
5. France
--------------------------
6. Germany
7. Portugual
8. Spain
9. Czech Republic
10. Serbia and Montenegro
11. Sweden
12. USA
13. Switzerland
14. Mexico
15. Australia
...........................
32. England

[Xin Zhi Zhu]

haha.... my top 4 will be Brazil, Germany, England, and Argentina
Juz a qns, why do many ppl hate England?
I, for one like England... Maybe is due to the influence of EPL.... But i think the pulling factor is their spirit, esp Rooney who has the determination and the hunger... Their fans are totally awesome and u feel as if u wanna cheer with them... (minus their criticism when their team are down)

[Long]

Juz a qns, why do many ppl hate England?

The reasons are:

1. They think they're the best team in the world, and they whine even worst then the Italians when they lose a major tournament - ie in every tournament, England were robbed.

2. They have some of the worst fans in the world - whenever England lose a riot starts in every host country of that tournament it seems.

3. The English press make if feel as if England go into every World Cup as the "defending" Champions - yeah defending champions from 1966.

4. They're all hype and of little substance - when was the last they made a major finals of any tournament?? Even under achieving Spain managed to get a Gold medal at the Olympics at least in recent decades...

5. David Beckam is thier captain - enough said.

[dgfds01]

Ah Long, you've made your feelings on England clear enough many times.
Just one comment....

The reasons are:

1. They think they're the best team in the world, and they whine even worst then the Italians when they lose a major tournament - ie in every tournament, England were robbed.

3. The English press make if feel as if England go into every World Cup as the "defending" Champions - yeah defending champions from 1966.

4. They're all hype and of little substance - when was the last they made a major finals of any tournament?? Even under achieving Spain managed to get a Gold medal at the Olympics at least in recent decades...

Could it be that you see all this cos of your exposure to the English press. It's the English press that whines, it's the English press that makes it feel like England are the defending champions, the source of all the hype is the English press.

Now since most of us don't read Italian, Spanish, German, French, Portugese..... who's to say that the national news media of other countries aren't as bad? They probably are, except that they don't irritate you to the same extent simply because there's minimal exposure to it.

[soccerfeva]

3. The English press make if feel as if England go into every World Cup as the "defending" Champions - yeah defending champions from 1966.

LOL Good one

England has the most coverage around the world I think.. Why do we have EPL highlights on free-to-air tv instead of Seria A highlights on free-to-air tv?

"The EPL is the most exciting league in the world" How many times have we heard that before?!

[dgfds01]

LOL Good one

England has the most coverage around the world I think.. Why do we have EPL highlights on free-to-air tv instead of Seria A highlights on free-to-air tv?

"The EPL is the most exciting league in the world" How many times have we heard that before?!

That's because you live in an ex-British colony, Spore. The English influence is strong. Hence the EPL's prominence.

The La Liga receives quite wide coverage as well, but more so in South America rather than South East Asia. In terms of quality, it's at least on par, if not better than the EPL.

As for the Serie A.......hmmm.......

[dgfds01]

Juz a qns, why do many ppl hate England?

Because they play boring football.

[Moinllieon]

As for the Serie A.......hmmm.......

Serie A is by far and away number 1 in Japan. So they got that going for them.

[Xin Zhi Zhu]

i dun really like serie a at times though... the referee tends to blow the whistle alot of times, making the match boring.... For me, i prefer EPL and Spanish soccer...