Tonights was a prime example.
Both sides knew Barca where winning and that a draw was enough for both of them and that fucking ref!
Some fucker in Asia has won a fortune on the outcome of 2 red cards, nailed on!
This is not match fixing tho.
Late in the game BMG knew they were not goin to get the result they needed to make 2nd spot likely and with Barca winning Celtic couldn't catch them for 3rd spot so they took their foot off the gas.A draw was fine by us so we did likewise.
A draw was a higher probability before the match than it would have been in different circumstances,and this was reflected in the pre-match prices.
Had a look at the blog site and what pile of shit it is.Apart from comments on some proven fixes like the Italian one of a few years ago,they just seem to select matches that have had unusual twists in them and deduced that it was fixed without a shred of evidence for coming to this conclusion.
Another bit I noticed was a guy they got on from sportsradar who spoke about unusual betting patterns and the inference was that this equated to fixing.
Unusual betting patterns can be the result of many things most of which are not dubious.A good example is a current fad of so called betting experts who have followers(subscribers) who take on gambles like the £10-£1000 or £25-£10000 challenge.
The followers wait for the tipster to post his bet(it may be pre-match or in play) and many follow his bet.Quite often the bets in question may be a team like Bromley or Hednesford.Now if you imagine a sizeable about of people placing a bet on a low level fixture such as this in a short space of time it would look extremely suspicious but in reality nothing wrong with it.
So people should be aware that just because betting patterns are unusual it doesn't always equate to fixing.
