Match fixing confirmed (including in England)

[Santiago Street]

It's wrong to assume that because an unusually large amount of money is placed in a market to back one outcome that it's evidence of potential corruption. It's often done either to manipulate the market or to cover liabilities elsewhere.

 

[mancunial]

Is there some form of corruption in the Premiership? I think yes.

I don't think the money is on things like Manchester United to win the Premiership, but I do think there is betting on the smaller games. Betting on the biggest games with the massive audiences doesn't make sense; they're under the spotlight a lot more and the betting odds aren't any higher.

For example, in a game between Swansea and Sunderland, do I think there's a chance there is a lot of money on something like a first half red card? Yes. I think that's 100% possible. I'm not saying it has happened, but there's definitely a chance.

Money controls everything. If players were getting offered big money for little risk (key part) I think they would a least consider it.

If you were a referee and were offered big money to ensure there was a first half red card (for either side) would you consider that offer?[/quote. Vinneys red against the scum in the fa cup was the most unfortunate but proper course of action that was taken? Said the fa to the whole world !

 

[mancmackem]

There's two perceptions on this, one that has just come to me (as other posters have made reference to).

1. You follow the money. The Premier League is the most lucrative league in the world and the players with clubs towards the bottom of the league on moderate wages compared to the big boys could be open to manipulation on certain markets (red card in the game? number of corners?). Markets they can contain individually, also linked to the referee.

2. The English league structure is possibly the deepest in European football. I seem to remember a league 2 game being guilty of corruption 1/2 years ago (involved Bury?). In a more lucrative fixed odds markets away from the exchanges (team to win, scorecast), it would be easier to manipulate a group of players due to the low level of pay at these clubs. These could generate more revenue than the individual markets such as corners or red cards but spike bets would be easier to spot due to the lower level of stakes cascading down the leagues.

Bit of a rushed post, but there my angles on the subject. With the high level of tax in the UK currently for top earners, even a top player on £120k a week after tax could be tempted by a one of payment of £500k-£1m in a hidden offshore account from a syndicate standing to gain 10 times that from the one result.

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

I told you it was bent. Now strip United of all their titles

Yeah, ours was the only one that was clean!

Too right, Cuntface McTavish should be un-Knighted as well

 

[nederblue]

Any triad blues on who can tell me what to lump on this weekend?

 

[Ducado]

It would be far easier for the officials to nobble a game!

It comes as no surprise, it was bound to happen just look at the regulation authorities from the FA to FIFA, you would never get anything so non-transparent in any other regulation bodies, I mean the head man at FIFA is an out and out racist and no one bats an eye lid

 

[MCC]

Chelsea vs Barca (was it?) when Drogba went nuts at the end was 3-4 years ago. Some dodgy decisions in that one. Although was a very high profile game so maybe they went more low key.

 

[GHoddle]

Which game do you all think it was?.....

You would imagine it would be a group game, toward the end of the group in which qualification was already assured for the losing/drawing team, and in England, and 3-4 years ago according to the article. So based on the 2008-09 and 2009-10 champions league, these are the possible games I would say:

Manchester United 0-1 Besikas
Chelsea 2-2 Apoel
Liverpool 1-2 Fiorentina
Manchester United 2-2 Aalborg BK

The United Besikas game is suspicious because United were guaranteed to top the group with 2 games left (they were on 10 points and next team was on 4 points). Chelsea were also certain to top the group in the 2-2 draw with Apoel. In the United 2-2 Aalborg game they were not certain to top the group, and Liverpool was already eliminated before their loss to Fiorentina.

It's probably either the Chelsea-Apoel game or the United - Besikas game. Unless it wasn't a group game or in a different season.

I bet its the Chelsea Apoel game because in that game Apoel scored in the 87th minute.

 

[MCC]

Which game do you all think it was?.....

You would imagine it would be a group game, toward the end of the group in which qualification was already assured for the losing/drawing team, and in England, and 3-4 years ago according to the article. So based on the 2008-09 and 2009-10 champions league, these are the possible games I would say:

Manchester United 0-1 Besikas
Chelsea 2-2 Apoel
Liverpool 1-2 Fiorentina
Manchester United 2-2 Aalborg BK

The United Besikas game is suspicious because United were guaranteed to top the group with 2 games left (they were on 10 points and next team was on 4 points). Chelsea were also certain to top the group in the 2-2 draw with Apoel. In the United 2-2 Aalborg game they were not certain to top the group, and Liverpool was already eliminated before their loss to Fiorentina.

It's probably either the Chelsea-Apoel game or the United - Besikas game. Unless it wasn't a group game or in a different season.

Would LOVE IT if the rags were somehow involved. LOVE IT.

 

[GHoddle]

Chelsea vs Barca (was it?) when Drogba went nuts at the end was 3-4 years ago. Some dodgy decisions in that one. Although was a very high profile game so maybe they went more low key.

But Chelsea were winning that game until the last minute and Barca only went through when Iniesta scored. That seems like too difficult a game to fix, even if you were able to buy off the officials.

It will be something where betters could make a lot of money, which probably means players of at least one team being involved.