We posted last Sunday that Arsenal were one of only two prominent Premiership teams that hadn't yet sold out to corrupt owners (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/arsnes-arsenal-about-to-go-arse-over.html).
Yesterday, that situation changed in the most disturbing way imaginable. Former Arsenal vice-chairman (the word "vice" being particularly meaningful here) David Dein sold his 14.58% stake in Arsenal to Red And White Holdings (R&WH) - an investment vehicle owned by Uzbek billionaire Alisher Usmanov. Aside from the reward of pocketing £75 million ($150 million) on a stake that originally cost him just £300,000, Dein will become chairman of R&WH. Dein will head up the R&WH's attempts to increase their stake in the Gunners, but the firm insist they have no immediate plans to mount a takeover. Dein was forced off Arsenal's board in April after falling out with his fellow directors over their failure to support his plan to back a takeover by American businessman Stanley Kroenke. There are now fears that R&WH will team up with Kroenke to launch a hostile bid for Arsenal.
So far so similar to standard capitalist business practice worldwide. What sets this deal apart from the norm is Mr Alisher Usmanov.
Usmanov is 278th on the Forbes Rich List and is Russia's 18th richest man with assets totalling £2.75 billion. His prime business interests include being sole proprietor of Gallagher Holdings Ltd, owner of the Kommersant newspaper and Gazmetall steel and mining empire, he owns half of Metalloinvest and is a director of Gazprominvestholding which manages the debts of Russian monopolistic gas giant, Gazprom. The man also owns a mobile phone company, a couple of television stations and is very interested in the diamond trade.
These are the bits of his life, alongside his interest in fencing, that Mr Usmanov wishes for the world to see. Inevitably in the world of Russia's oligarchs, there is an awful lot more below the surface that Uzbek Usmanov wishes to hide from prying eyes.
Usmanov is "a typical oligarch with a very murky past" which leaves him open to pressure from the Kremlin (see: http://russophobe.blogspot.com/2006/10/editor-of-kommersant-out.html). Last year, Usmanov bought Kommersant (a leading Russian business journal that was, at the time, critical of Putin) at the Kremlin's request. The newspaper was formerly owned by Boris Berezovsky - a man who is no stranger to controversial football corruptions as we have posted previously and who has been recently implicated in the murder of journalist Anna Politkovskaya. Usmanov himself stated after the purchase: "no-one asked me to buy the publisher, although I should say that my purchase of it was not against the wishes of the authorities". In today's Russia, this is a clear indication that Usmanov enjoys Putin's approval. After taking over Kommersant, the editor-in-chief was immediately sacked while the defence correspondent, Igor Safranov, mysteriously fell to his death from a Moscow window three months later. The new editor of Kommersant is Andrei Vasilyev who is a close collaborator of Berezovsky and the word on the street in Moscow is that Usmanov is plate-spinning trying to keep well-in with both Putin and Berezovsky so that he may retain his power bases no matter which route Russia moves along in the near future. Usmanov also shares close links to Roman Abramovich via their shared links to the metals sector.
In the grey world of Russian oligarchy, there are two ways to assess an individuals past and current hidden agendas - their previous/current business and political links and the views of those who have come into close contact with the operator historically.
Described widely as "the hard man of Russia" which, when one considers the other hard men of the country, is a pretty disturbing motif, the Mail On Sunday calls Usmanov a "sinister...oligarch". Usmanov has very close links to fellow Uzbek, Gafor Rakhimov - in Uzbekistan, when people utter Rakhimov's name, they prefer to say it quietly. Rakhimov is Uzbekistan's richest self-made businessman and The Observer has labelled him "a major figure in Uzbekistan's booming heroin trade". Rakhimov is also accused of conspiracy and rampant involvement in organised crime and he is close to the Uzbek dictator Islam Karimov as, indeed, through his friendship with his daughter, is Usmanov. Rakhimov cooperates with Usmanov via Gazprom which is a channel for massive slush funds and linkages to offshore financial centres (OFCs). Gazprom's Sergei Kuprianov states: "he [Usmanov] devises vehicles for handling our most difficult and sensitive transactions". In support of this view, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, states that Usmanov "was in charge of Gazprom's bribery and slush funds" and, in his book "Murder In Samarkand" describes human rights abuses including boiling people to death. Reports have claimed that Britain's National Criminal Intelligence Service was monitoring Usmanov for alleged links to suspected mafia figures and a report by Lena Smirnova entitled "Uzbekistan: The Disappeared" suggests that cute and cuddly Mr Usmanov is linked to the abduction of Uzbek dissidents living abroad - a view that is supported by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
All in all, in the warped world of Richard Scudamore (the chief executive of the Premier League), Alisher Usmanov is evidently a fit and proper person for potential future ownership of one of the big four English football teams!
Dein has encouraged Arsène Wenger to sign a new contract and claims that the pair will work together again in the future. Wenger was known to be disappointed about the manner of Dein's departure but has remained silent, in public at least, about his views on the developing takeover battle at the Emirates although he is known to be disconcerted about the manner in which English clubs are being bought up by global inappropriates. We await Wenger's views.
Kroenke and R&WH now own 26.77% of the shares in Arsenal which, if they combine forces, would make them the largest single shareholder in the club. It also would put them close to the 29.9% benchmark that would require a takeover bid to be launched.
The battle for the soul of Arsenal is only just beginning.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Friday, 31 August 2007
Thursday, 30 August 2007
Platini - Idealist Or Pragmatist?
Michel Platini reached the sewers of power on the back of a manifesto that sought to democratise football in Europe and he has been in control now for long enough for observers to make an assessment of his impact to date. Taking everything into account, we reserve judgement but the signs are that his idealism is being compromised by the requirements of the power lobbies within the game.
Platini's big idea was a reduction in the Champions League quotas for the big three countries of England, Spain and Italy. This he has manifestly failed to accomplish as, lo and behold, each of these territories have the full complement of four teams for this season's tournament. And this is despite several of the teams having fallen short of good behaviour with Lazio "fans" stabbing several Dinamo Bucureşti supporters prior to the first leg of their qualifier, Valencia players perpetrating an on-field brawl after last year's Champions League match against Internazionale and those loveable Liverpool fans rampaging through Athens after last year's showpiece final.
We posted last season that the G14(18) would simply not allow any reduction in the major territories entrants and Platini has had to backslide ever since. His latest wheeze is to offer the four places but with one of these places going to the national cup winners. If this ruling had existed over the last ten years, it would have had minimal impact as, in England, every FA Cup winner has been one of the big four while, in Italy over the same period, only Parma and Fiorentina (once each) would have qualified via the Coppa Italia. The exception is Spain where none of the big teams take the Copa Del Rey seriously with neither Real Madrid nor Barcelona having won it for ten years. If Platini is able to get his "meritocratising" idea past the numerous obstacles in his path, this Iberian attitude will, no doubt, change. So, the actual result will be exactly the same as is currently the case - the big teams will always qualify for the Champions League unless they are suffering domestic punishment as is the case with Juventus currently.
Furthermore, Platini's plan will have two very unfortunate side effects. If the major G14(18) teams focus more on the domestic cup competitions then the chances of any of the smaller teams getting anywhere near the final will be vastly diminished. The situation in England last year where the first FA Cup final back at the new Wembley was always going to feature Manchester United and Chelsea will become the common template. Additionally, if the fourth place battle is to become, in many seasons, irrelevant then the new structure will increase the number of meaningless games where neither side has anything to play for of consequence which will have the unfortunate impact of increasing games which exist merely for the enhancement of the global betting markets.
Despite this, the power bases in the European game are fuming. They always exhibit a kneejerk response to anything that might look like having the outcome of reducing their power and control within the game. These operators do not do themselves nor anyone else the service of strategically thinking through any changes. So, we hear the European Professional Leagues chairman, Sir David Richards of the Premier League, spouting "anything which could affect negatively the league's competitions would be detrimental to the whole of European football". And, through his dollar-tinted spectacles, the knight is probably right. The lower level teams throughout the continent are dependent financially on the Solidarity Payments which operate like a bribe to the lesser nations to bequeath the trophies and the honours to the big G14(18) clubs in return for some crumbs from football's financial table. Furthermore, Kenyon and Gill at Chelsea and Man Utd have gone on record that their respective clubs have "the power to prevent change". Like they think that this is a suitable state of affairs...
No non-G14(18) team has won the Champions League since football sold out to the financiers and media barons in 1992 - fifteen seasons, fifteen prizes for the big guys. In the previous fifteen years when a more meritocratic competition which actually featured the national team champions existed, six of the winners were non-power teams including two (Crvena Zvezda and Steaua Bucureşti) from the east of the continent. Platini gained power within UEFA by promising the earth and then some to the disenfranchised former Eastern Bloc countries - it was their votes on which he rode into Geneva. Of the 32 qualifiers for the group stages of the Champions League in 2007/08, only Steaua Bucureşti are indicative of any change in the reality. Eighteen of the qualifiers are G14(18) proper or on the G14(18) Supplementary List. Only thirteen of the teams are even champions anyway!
Platini is stuck between a rock and a financial place. If he sticks to his principles, the G14(18) will pick up their ball and form their own proprietary Super League. If he plays along with their propaganda and lies, UEFA can retain some control of the world's premier club competition until the power operators decide that it is time for the Super League whatever. In Monaco tomorrow, the UEFA President is hoping to try to spin the national cup winners ruse into a reflection of his beliefs that spreading the pool wider within the big countries might be seen as a suitable substitute for spreading the pool wider throughout the continent. This is a fallacy and nothing has changed. For the Champions League 3rd Qualifying Round second Legs, UEFA wheeled out fourteen of their top tier referees for the sixteen games. Particular corruptive influence was demonstrated in the four penalties that ensured that big Werder Bremen, Shakhtar Donetsk and Lazio qualified instead of little Dinamo Zagreb, Salzburg and Dinamo Bucureşti.
Platini's publicity bash will also suffer from the impact of the death of Antonio Puerta as his Sevilla team will be playing Milan in the Super Cup on the Friday evening. Scandalously, UEFA refused to postpone the AEK Athens versus Sevilla Champions League Qualifier out of respect to the scores of innocent Greeks who have died in the government/ construction companies/ property developers-sponsored fires around the Greek capital and, yet, they were willing to reluctantly cancel the match once Puerta died. The value of a life is another warped factor in UEFA's strange world.
If all these power operators would just leave football alone, it can still be a beautiful game. The astonishing match between Glasgow Celtic and Spartak Moscow last night was solid proof of this fact despite the massive gambling on the event in Asia. The football was attacking and exhilarating and the theatre was all-consuming. Hearing the non-plagiarised singing of "You'll Never Walk Alone" and "The Fields Of Athenry" (take note you scouse song thieves) while all the participants did their utmost to win was physically exhausting to a spectator in the way that football used to be before betting patterns and power barons decided our match outcomes.
So what are we left with? The steady demise of the game until the Super League turns football into a sort of year-long Breeders Cup or Royal Ascot would be our reckoning. Platini, through his idealism, is a pragmatist. His two decade long relationship with Sepp Blatter is proof of that. Platini has been willing to give psychopathic Blatter legitimacy and Blatter, in turn, has brought the Frenchman into the inner circle of people who run football. Expect the same machinations now Platini is in power at UEFA.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Platini's big idea was a reduction in the Champions League quotas for the big three countries of England, Spain and Italy. This he has manifestly failed to accomplish as, lo and behold, each of these territories have the full complement of four teams for this season's tournament. And this is despite several of the teams having fallen short of good behaviour with Lazio "fans" stabbing several Dinamo Bucureşti supporters prior to the first leg of their qualifier, Valencia players perpetrating an on-field brawl after last year's Champions League match against Internazionale and those loveable Liverpool fans rampaging through Athens after last year's showpiece final.
We posted last season that the G14(18) would simply not allow any reduction in the major territories entrants and Platini has had to backslide ever since. His latest wheeze is to offer the four places but with one of these places going to the national cup winners. If this ruling had existed over the last ten years, it would have had minimal impact as, in England, every FA Cup winner has been one of the big four while, in Italy over the same period, only Parma and Fiorentina (once each) would have qualified via the Coppa Italia. The exception is Spain where none of the big teams take the Copa Del Rey seriously with neither Real Madrid nor Barcelona having won it for ten years. If Platini is able to get his "meritocratising" idea past the numerous obstacles in his path, this Iberian attitude will, no doubt, change. So, the actual result will be exactly the same as is currently the case - the big teams will always qualify for the Champions League unless they are suffering domestic punishment as is the case with Juventus currently.
Furthermore, Platini's plan will have two very unfortunate side effects. If the major G14(18) teams focus more on the domestic cup competitions then the chances of any of the smaller teams getting anywhere near the final will be vastly diminished. The situation in England last year where the first FA Cup final back at the new Wembley was always going to feature Manchester United and Chelsea will become the common template. Additionally, if the fourth place battle is to become, in many seasons, irrelevant then the new structure will increase the number of meaningless games where neither side has anything to play for of consequence which will have the unfortunate impact of increasing games which exist merely for the enhancement of the global betting markets.
Despite this, the power bases in the European game are fuming. They always exhibit a kneejerk response to anything that might look like having the outcome of reducing their power and control within the game. These operators do not do themselves nor anyone else the service of strategically thinking through any changes. So, we hear the European Professional Leagues chairman, Sir David Richards of the Premier League, spouting "anything which could affect negatively the league's competitions would be detrimental to the whole of European football". And, through his dollar-tinted spectacles, the knight is probably right. The lower level teams throughout the continent are dependent financially on the Solidarity Payments which operate like a bribe to the lesser nations to bequeath the trophies and the honours to the big G14(18) clubs in return for some crumbs from football's financial table. Furthermore, Kenyon and Gill at Chelsea and Man Utd have gone on record that their respective clubs have "the power to prevent change". Like they think that this is a suitable state of affairs...
No non-G14(18) team has won the Champions League since football sold out to the financiers and media barons in 1992 - fifteen seasons, fifteen prizes for the big guys. In the previous fifteen years when a more meritocratic competition which actually featured the national team champions existed, six of the winners were non-power teams including two (Crvena Zvezda and Steaua Bucureşti) from the east of the continent. Platini gained power within UEFA by promising the earth and then some to the disenfranchised former Eastern Bloc countries - it was their votes on which he rode into Geneva. Of the 32 qualifiers for the group stages of the Champions League in 2007/08, only Steaua Bucureşti are indicative of any change in the reality. Eighteen of the qualifiers are G14(18) proper or on the G14(18) Supplementary List. Only thirteen of the teams are even champions anyway!
Platini is stuck between a rock and a financial place. If he sticks to his principles, the G14(18) will pick up their ball and form their own proprietary Super League. If he plays along with their propaganda and lies, UEFA can retain some control of the world's premier club competition until the power operators decide that it is time for the Super League whatever. In Monaco tomorrow, the UEFA President is hoping to try to spin the national cup winners ruse into a reflection of his beliefs that spreading the pool wider within the big countries might be seen as a suitable substitute for spreading the pool wider throughout the continent. This is a fallacy and nothing has changed. For the Champions League 3rd Qualifying Round second Legs, UEFA wheeled out fourteen of their top tier referees for the sixteen games. Particular corruptive influence was demonstrated in the four penalties that ensured that big Werder Bremen, Shakhtar Donetsk and Lazio qualified instead of little Dinamo Zagreb, Salzburg and Dinamo Bucureşti.
Platini's publicity bash will also suffer from the impact of the death of Antonio Puerta as his Sevilla team will be playing Milan in the Super Cup on the Friday evening. Scandalously, UEFA refused to postpone the AEK Athens versus Sevilla Champions League Qualifier out of respect to the scores of innocent Greeks who have died in the government/ construction companies/ property developers-sponsored fires around the Greek capital and, yet, they were willing to reluctantly cancel the match once Puerta died. The value of a life is another warped factor in UEFA's strange world.
If all these power operators would just leave football alone, it can still be a beautiful game. The astonishing match between Glasgow Celtic and Spartak Moscow last night was solid proof of this fact despite the massive gambling on the event in Asia. The football was attacking and exhilarating and the theatre was all-consuming. Hearing the non-plagiarised singing of "You'll Never Walk Alone" and "The Fields Of Athenry" (take note you scouse song thieves) while all the participants did their utmost to win was physically exhausting to a spectator in the way that football used to be before betting patterns and power barons decided our match outcomes.
So what are we left with? The steady demise of the game until the Super League turns football into a sort of year-long Breeders Cup or Royal Ascot would be our reckoning. Platini, through his idealism, is a pragmatist. His two decade long relationship with Sepp Blatter is proof of that. Platini has been willing to give psychopathic Blatter legitimacy and Blatter, in turn, has brought the Frenchman into the inner circle of people who run football. Expect the same machinations now Platini is in power at UEFA.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Wednesday, 29 August 2007
Time For A Little Evolution In Newcastle
We made a load of money on the Boro versus Newcastle derby on Sunday but the financial gains were soured somewhat by the Islamophobic and other offensive chanting from the visiting Geordie fans.
Now, one shouldn't expect too much from any club that has such a quasi-religious attitude that one of their fanzines is entitled "True Faith" but the racist screaming at Egyptian striker Mido was totally out of order. Mido, a Muslim, had to put up with such nonsenses as "Mido, he's got a bomb you know" and the equally witty "Mido is a paedo" (cutely relating to the Cleveland child abuse scandal of the 80's) throughout the first half from a large contingent of the visiting hordes and, yet, when Mido put his finger to his lips to suggest the 3000 "fans" shut up after he had scored the equalising goal, referee Mike Dean promptly booked him for incitement to violence.
Several points... What on earth was the chanting if not incitement to violence but the police made not one arrest during the game (fighting people, protecting crime)? Mike Dean claimed that he was unable to hear the shouts which is rubbish - they were easily audible. Perhaps he was too busy listening to the betting market information being conveyed over his headset! Also, if a finger to the lips is a bookable offence then fat Frank Lampard should be permanently banned but evidently there is one law for the English and another for the Muslims. This isn't the first time that Mido has been subjected to racist abuse as, true to form, West Ham United fans started the fun and laughter last season.
The FA was forced to take action and is attempting, with police help, to identify the main protagonists so that they might be banned. Islamophobia is rampant in England - it is one of the most obvious (of many) -isms that one notices when one returns to this unpleasant land. One suspects that no action would have been taken in this particular case if the game had not been live on television and if Mido wasn't the highly educated son of a wealthy Cairo businessman who was able to state his abhorrence of what he had been subjected to in a very succinct manner.
The FA, apparently, "are very much in favour of banning orders being imposed on anyone identified as engaging in racist behaviour in football". We would wish that the Premier League and the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) might be equally politically correct. They aren't. The Premier League chief executive now shares a bed with Thaksin Shinawatra, a man responsible for ordering the murder of many hundreds of Muslims in the south of Thailand while the PGMOB turns a blind eye to the racist bias in decision making exhibited by certain of their referees (as we posted last season in relation to Howard Webb).
The reactions of the respective clubs is worthy of comment. Although disgusted by the chanting, Middlesbrough have declined to make a formal complaint choosing instead to purchase another Egyptian player, Mohammed Shawky, as a gesture towards Mido. Newcastle, on the other hand, have failed to issue any statement in condemnation of their Islamophobic fans at all and are also refusing to comment. As a further indication of the racist blinkering in Geordieland, Ian Cusack (the editor of True Faith) declares that he "didn't think the chants were racist" and that "the chants should be placed in the context of local rivalries". The only thing missing is the use of the word "crusades" really.
The bare-chested beer-bellied lumps who choose to display their masculinity at all Toon games cannot accept 100% of the blame for their racism. Football, at all levels, pays lip service to the "Kick Racism Out Of Football" campaign while allowing the perpetrators to continue despite their repulsive transgressions - think Aragones about Henry, Blokhin's "monkey" taunts, the racist chanting from that targeting Vince Hillaire at Leeds United to the majority of Spanish and Italian grounds today, the refusal of some clubs to even sign Black players etc etc.
On the very day that the FA decided to do something about this microcosm of British Islamophobia, a revealing story broke in Switzerland. The Swiss Football Association has officially distanced itself from comments made by a prominent right wing politician criticising the number of Black players in the national team. Giuliano Bignasca, the founder and president of Switzerland's far right Lega dei Ticinesi party, wrote an article including the despicable trash "one chocolate-coloured footballer can be accepted. Three seems like going much too far." Bignasca may well be prosecuted under national anti-racism laws and one would like to think the racist Geordies will be treated the same rather than just banned from football grounds.
After all, if Muslim demonstrators can be imprisoned for holding anti-Coalition of the Willing banners and Abu Hamza may be imprisoned for seven years for incitement to violence then judicial parity may only be achieved by giving jail sentences to the white racist bigots of Newcastle and to the likes of Salman Rushdie for writing The Satanic Verses which hardly encourages racial harmony.
We expect nothing of the sort. The FA inquiry will fade away and Rushdie was merely provided with the punishment of a knighthood by the British establishment.
And, while we're at it, prosecute those xenophobes at Migrationwatch too...
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Now, one shouldn't expect too much from any club that has such a quasi-religious attitude that one of their fanzines is entitled "True Faith" but the racist screaming at Egyptian striker Mido was totally out of order. Mido, a Muslim, had to put up with such nonsenses as "Mido, he's got a bomb you know" and the equally witty "Mido is a paedo" (cutely relating to the Cleveland child abuse scandal of the 80's) throughout the first half from a large contingent of the visiting hordes and, yet, when Mido put his finger to his lips to suggest the 3000 "fans" shut up after he had scored the equalising goal, referee Mike Dean promptly booked him for incitement to violence.
Several points... What on earth was the chanting if not incitement to violence but the police made not one arrest during the game (fighting people, protecting crime)? Mike Dean claimed that he was unable to hear the shouts which is rubbish - they were easily audible. Perhaps he was too busy listening to the betting market information being conveyed over his headset! Also, if a finger to the lips is a bookable offence then fat Frank Lampard should be permanently banned but evidently there is one law for the English and another for the Muslims. This isn't the first time that Mido has been subjected to racist abuse as, true to form, West Ham United fans started the fun and laughter last season.
The FA was forced to take action and is attempting, with police help, to identify the main protagonists so that they might be banned. Islamophobia is rampant in England - it is one of the most obvious (of many) -isms that one notices when one returns to this unpleasant land. One suspects that no action would have been taken in this particular case if the game had not been live on television and if Mido wasn't the highly educated son of a wealthy Cairo businessman who was able to state his abhorrence of what he had been subjected to in a very succinct manner.
The FA, apparently, "are very much in favour of banning orders being imposed on anyone identified as engaging in racist behaviour in football". We would wish that the Premier League and the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) might be equally politically correct. They aren't. The Premier League chief executive now shares a bed with Thaksin Shinawatra, a man responsible for ordering the murder of many hundreds of Muslims in the south of Thailand while the PGMOB turns a blind eye to the racist bias in decision making exhibited by certain of their referees (as we posted last season in relation to Howard Webb).
The reactions of the respective clubs is worthy of comment. Although disgusted by the chanting, Middlesbrough have declined to make a formal complaint choosing instead to purchase another Egyptian player, Mohammed Shawky, as a gesture towards Mido. Newcastle, on the other hand, have failed to issue any statement in condemnation of their Islamophobic fans at all and are also refusing to comment. As a further indication of the racist blinkering in Geordieland, Ian Cusack (the editor of True Faith) declares that he "didn't think the chants were racist" and that "the chants should be placed in the context of local rivalries". The only thing missing is the use of the word "crusades" really.
The bare-chested beer-bellied lumps who choose to display their masculinity at all Toon games cannot accept 100% of the blame for their racism. Football, at all levels, pays lip service to the "Kick Racism Out Of Football" campaign while allowing the perpetrators to continue despite their repulsive transgressions - think Aragones about Henry, Blokhin's "monkey" taunts, the racist chanting from that targeting Vince Hillaire at Leeds United to the majority of Spanish and Italian grounds today, the refusal of some clubs to even sign Black players etc etc.
On the very day that the FA decided to do something about this microcosm of British Islamophobia, a revealing story broke in Switzerland. The Swiss Football Association has officially distanced itself from comments made by a prominent right wing politician criticising the number of Black players in the national team. Giuliano Bignasca, the founder and president of Switzerland's far right Lega dei Ticinesi party, wrote an article including the despicable trash "one chocolate-coloured footballer can be accepted. Three seems like going much too far." Bignasca may well be prosecuted under national anti-racism laws and one would like to think the racist Geordies will be treated the same rather than just banned from football grounds.
After all, if Muslim demonstrators can be imprisoned for holding anti-Coalition of the Willing banners and Abu Hamza may be imprisoned for seven years for incitement to violence then judicial parity may only be achieved by giving jail sentences to the white racist bigots of Newcastle and to the likes of Salman Rushdie for writing The Satanic Verses which hardly encourages racial harmony.
We expect nothing of the sort. The FA inquiry will fade away and Rushdie was merely provided with the punishment of a knighthood by the British establishment.
And, while we're at it, prosecute those xenophobes at Migrationwatch too...
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Bet - Not So Fucking - Fair, After All...
Dietrological/Football Is Fixed attempt to point leisure punters in the correct direction both with respect to the markets that should be considered for trading and the bookmakers that are kosher with regard to offering suitable prices and reliable payment.
Unfortunately, the global betting markets are in a constant state of flux and what might appear to be a stable and non-manipulated betting platform may transform into something much less edifying. Historical examples of layers to avoid have included the now defunct Pointbet and Premierbet plus the Asian underground markets and the traditional bookmakers in Europe that squeeze profits via the abuse of the overround. By applying this template to the available pool of market makers, a careful trader (professional or leisure) is left with a very small number of operators - namely, the betting exchanges, the low overround traditional bookmakers and reliable Asian layers that are not constantly moving across borders avoiding the attentions of Interpol.
We have particularly pointed leisure traders towards the betting exchanges as, historically, they have offered fixed odds overrounds of approximately 4% as opposed to the totally outrageous tilt of 13% with Ladbrokes, Hills etc. Furthermore, the betting exchanges have offered Asian handicap margins only slightly larger than those available in Asia itself and with considerably greater likelihood of payment of winnings being forthcoming.
Therefore, we are not very happy with the current shenanigans at the leading betting exchange, Betfair. This London-based firm has always marketed itself as a fresh betting platform that, by matching clients taking opposite positions on an event, can be profitable merely by charging the winning client a small commission. Prior to this football season, Betfair were charging 5% commission on traditional fixed odds and 1% on Asian handicaps.
As we posted last week, it came as a little shock to find that Betfair have increased the commission on Asian handicaps from early August to an ridiculously greedy 5%. They undertook this sleight of hand not by informing clients directly but by requiring of their clientele a degree in twisted logic in order to be able to find a statement regarding this money grab on some minor forum page at the periphery of the Betfair online platform.
Although the European firms are used by our Trading Team merely for occasional hedging or trade enhancement of our early market positions traded in the Far East, we took it upon ourselves to contact Betfair to try and get an explanation. The 5% commission makes Betfair merely equivalent to Ladbrokes in margin which is not a viable market positioning when the firm allegedly takes a neutral trading stance on markets with no potential to build up inappropriate market liabilities. Lets leave aside, for the moment, the fact that Betfair actively trade their own markets by matching clients positions internally on the occasions where the myopic Betfair traders believe themselves to have a trading edge and lets focus on their marketing motif.
The Betfair Marketing Department expect us all to accept that the old 1% commission level was merely a "promotional offer". This promo actually lasted eight years which is an interesting spin on the truth. Additionally, the marketeers attempt to soften the blow by telling us that we can now trade one or two games per week on Asian handicaps in-running with Betfair. Aside from the fact that it is impossible to find out pre-match which events the Betfair people are offering, the margins available when they do decide to price up an event are not merely prohibitive but are actually the worst ANYWHERE on the planet. For the Sunderland versus Liverpool game on Saturday, the margins on the three available handicaps averaged 40% after commission (Ladbrokes go for 15% and the Asian layers around 7.5%).
Lets put some real money into these data. If one were to take a pre-match position on Team A at -0.5 2.00 with Betfair and the trade is a winner, then last season would have yielded profit of £990 on a £1000 trade whereas this season only £950 would be credited to your account. In-running, the situation is even worse. If one were to trade the same bet as above on the Asian markets during the match, winnings would be around £962.50 on an each-of-two event while Betfair would pay out just £800! Moreover, Betfair shut down their in-running Asian handicap markets as soon as a goal is scored as they simply do not possess the trading talents to reassess the markets in real-time in order to offer new markets for the new reality.
Across the board, the Europeans are averse to offering in-running handicap markets for two major reasons. Firstly, the bookmakers prefer for you to be made to judge a three runner race ie home, away or draw rather than the much more analysable two horse race of merely selecting to go one way or the other from an offered market price. Despite this Europe-wide refusal to offer a fair bet, Betfair are particularly warped when one looks at their self-styled marketing stance of offering something a bit more palatable than the market manipulators running the traditional layers.
And we haven't finished moaning about this bunch of abusers yet.
The commission that Betfair charge is highly regressive so that occasional leisure punters get hammered much more than industry insiders and professionals. But this little inversion is nothing compared to the betting scam that is the Betfair live streaming service.
Betfair have bought the rights to Italian Serie A, Portuguese Liga bwin and selected tennis tournaments and UEFA Cup games to be screened via their live streaming platform. Aside from the incredibly poor quality of the visual images which make any monitoring of the events a bit of a lottery, the Betfair boys have added a massive market manipulation in their favour. The images are delayed by between 10 and 20 seconds which, with the addition of a further 10 seconds to type in your trading position and to get it accepted, can lead to your trade being matched (or not) fully 30 seconds after the visuals you are currently seeing on the screen. Think about this corruption for a moment. You are watching Dinamo Bucureşti against Lazio tonight and the ball is in midfield and you fancy backing one of the teams. Attempting to predict where the ball might be and what match occurrences may happen in the ensuing thirty seconds prior to the trade being registered is a total random walk. This random walk tilts the market massively in favour of the bookmaker as an extension of this example shows. Say, you are backing Lazio and, in the thirty second window, Lazio score. Your trade will not be accepted. However, if the Romanians were to score in this window, you are effectively trading the wrong way on something that has already happened. This is not a viable route to a profitable trading strategy.
Obviously, Betfair are not the only company utilising this particular scam - Sky delay images related to some of their Spanish La Liga football matches while Globet accepts bets out of working hours and, if the event occurs while the company is closed, winning positions are denied and losers are accepted.
The manipulative options for Betfair with regard to tennis markets are even more daunting to a client as a couple aces takes about 30 seconds!
Betfair and their ilk are merely taking advantage of informational noise with a time delay in their favour. No market analyst can predict very short-term market and reality occurrences as the background noise swamps out any possible real data. The case is similar when looking very far into the future - not even Warren Buffett or Goldman Sachs could give you any proper indication of a future share price, say, five years from now. All analysts use the medium term markets both in sports and international financial markets to find value through mispricing. By creating highly corrupt short term markets, Betfair are not only robbing punters via a massive informational advantage discrepancy but they are also gaining control of the medium term in-running markets.
This is a scam, pure and simple.
Our advice? Close your account telling the rogues exactly why and move over to Betdaq (www.betdaq.co.uk) or one of the other betting exchanges that offer more realistic margins.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Unfortunately, the global betting markets are in a constant state of flux and what might appear to be a stable and non-manipulated betting platform may transform into something much less edifying. Historical examples of layers to avoid have included the now defunct Pointbet and Premierbet plus the Asian underground markets and the traditional bookmakers in Europe that squeeze profits via the abuse of the overround. By applying this template to the available pool of market makers, a careful trader (professional or leisure) is left with a very small number of operators - namely, the betting exchanges, the low overround traditional bookmakers and reliable Asian layers that are not constantly moving across borders avoiding the attentions of Interpol.
We have particularly pointed leisure traders towards the betting exchanges as, historically, they have offered fixed odds overrounds of approximately 4% as opposed to the totally outrageous tilt of 13% with Ladbrokes, Hills etc. Furthermore, the betting exchanges have offered Asian handicap margins only slightly larger than those available in Asia itself and with considerably greater likelihood of payment of winnings being forthcoming.
Therefore, we are not very happy with the current shenanigans at the leading betting exchange, Betfair. This London-based firm has always marketed itself as a fresh betting platform that, by matching clients taking opposite positions on an event, can be profitable merely by charging the winning client a small commission. Prior to this football season, Betfair were charging 5% commission on traditional fixed odds and 1% on Asian handicaps.
As we posted last week, it came as a little shock to find that Betfair have increased the commission on Asian handicaps from early August to an ridiculously greedy 5%. They undertook this sleight of hand not by informing clients directly but by requiring of their clientele a degree in twisted logic in order to be able to find a statement regarding this money grab on some minor forum page at the periphery of the Betfair online platform.
Although the European firms are used by our Trading Team merely for occasional hedging or trade enhancement of our early market positions traded in the Far East, we took it upon ourselves to contact Betfair to try and get an explanation. The 5% commission makes Betfair merely equivalent to Ladbrokes in margin which is not a viable market positioning when the firm allegedly takes a neutral trading stance on markets with no potential to build up inappropriate market liabilities. Lets leave aside, for the moment, the fact that Betfair actively trade their own markets by matching clients positions internally on the occasions where the myopic Betfair traders believe themselves to have a trading edge and lets focus on their marketing motif.
The Betfair Marketing Department expect us all to accept that the old 1% commission level was merely a "promotional offer". This promo actually lasted eight years which is an interesting spin on the truth. Additionally, the marketeers attempt to soften the blow by telling us that we can now trade one or two games per week on Asian handicaps in-running with Betfair. Aside from the fact that it is impossible to find out pre-match which events the Betfair people are offering, the margins available when they do decide to price up an event are not merely prohibitive but are actually the worst ANYWHERE on the planet. For the Sunderland versus Liverpool game on Saturday, the margins on the three available handicaps averaged 40% after commission (Ladbrokes go for 15% and the Asian layers around 7.5%).
Lets put some real money into these data. If one were to take a pre-match position on Team A at -0.5 2.00 with Betfair and the trade is a winner, then last season would have yielded profit of £990 on a £1000 trade whereas this season only £950 would be credited to your account. In-running, the situation is even worse. If one were to trade the same bet as above on the Asian markets during the match, winnings would be around £962.50 on an each-of-two event while Betfair would pay out just £800! Moreover, Betfair shut down their in-running Asian handicap markets as soon as a goal is scored as they simply do not possess the trading talents to reassess the markets in real-time in order to offer new markets for the new reality.
Across the board, the Europeans are averse to offering in-running handicap markets for two major reasons. Firstly, the bookmakers prefer for you to be made to judge a three runner race ie home, away or draw rather than the much more analysable two horse race of merely selecting to go one way or the other from an offered market price. Despite this Europe-wide refusal to offer a fair bet, Betfair are particularly warped when one looks at their self-styled marketing stance of offering something a bit more palatable than the market manipulators running the traditional layers.
And we haven't finished moaning about this bunch of abusers yet.
The commission that Betfair charge is highly regressive so that occasional leisure punters get hammered much more than industry insiders and professionals. But this little inversion is nothing compared to the betting scam that is the Betfair live streaming service.
Betfair have bought the rights to Italian Serie A, Portuguese Liga bwin and selected tennis tournaments and UEFA Cup games to be screened via their live streaming platform. Aside from the incredibly poor quality of the visual images which make any monitoring of the events a bit of a lottery, the Betfair boys have added a massive market manipulation in their favour. The images are delayed by between 10 and 20 seconds which, with the addition of a further 10 seconds to type in your trading position and to get it accepted, can lead to your trade being matched (or not) fully 30 seconds after the visuals you are currently seeing on the screen. Think about this corruption for a moment. You are watching Dinamo Bucureşti against Lazio tonight and the ball is in midfield and you fancy backing one of the teams. Attempting to predict where the ball might be and what match occurrences may happen in the ensuing thirty seconds prior to the trade being registered is a total random walk. This random walk tilts the market massively in favour of the bookmaker as an extension of this example shows. Say, you are backing Lazio and, in the thirty second window, Lazio score. Your trade will not be accepted. However, if the Romanians were to score in this window, you are effectively trading the wrong way on something that has already happened. This is not a viable route to a profitable trading strategy.
Obviously, Betfair are not the only company utilising this particular scam - Sky delay images related to some of their Spanish La Liga football matches while Globet accepts bets out of working hours and, if the event occurs while the company is closed, winning positions are denied and losers are accepted.
The manipulative options for Betfair with regard to tennis markets are even more daunting to a client as a couple aces takes about 30 seconds!
Betfair and their ilk are merely taking advantage of informational noise with a time delay in their favour. No market analyst can predict very short-term market and reality occurrences as the background noise swamps out any possible real data. The case is similar when looking very far into the future - not even Warren Buffett or Goldman Sachs could give you any proper indication of a future share price, say, five years from now. All analysts use the medium term markets both in sports and international financial markets to find value through mispricing. By creating highly corrupt short term markets, Betfair are not only robbing punters via a massive informational advantage discrepancy but they are also gaining control of the medium term in-running markets.
This is a scam, pure and simple.
Our advice? Close your account telling the rogues exactly why and move over to Betdaq (www.betdaq.co.uk) or one of the other betting exchanges that offer more realistic margins.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Monday, 27 August 2007
The Sky's The Limit On Premiership Corruption
On the last two weekends, Sky's Super Sunday matches have yielded incredibly corrupt global betting events that clearly exhibit the power play between the different market makers as they seek and attempt to gain proprietary control of these high profile matches.
The key aspect to Sky's heavily biased and manipulative televised output is their over confidence in the security of their control of the events under their warped jurisdiction. One might think that some effort might be made to disguise the corruption but Sky seem to glorify in it.
For example, lets look at the Sky choice of summarisers for the Man United v Tottenham match - Jamie ("I really believe this") Redknapp and Graeme Souness. Thinking back to the Quest bungs inquiry and the City of London Police raids on Portsmouth, Newcastle and Glasgow Rangers (particularly relating to the scam of a transfer of Boumsong to the Geordies from Ibrox overseen by Souness), are these the types of individual that Sky should have the arrogance to place on our screens to provide the pre-match and half-time disinformation? As we have posted previously, four of the seven points and concerns raised by Lord Stevens related to Harry Redknapp and/or Portsmouth - there was even that peculiarly specific point linking Redknapp to Glasgow based bookmaker, horserace trainer and football agent, Willie McKay. Sky totally taps into this semi-masonic structure featuring corrupt individuals from Glasgow and East London and, if they were able to step back and view how their media operation might be observed by outsiders, they would see that these inappropriate choices of talking head might just be noticed by the ever alert footballing public.
Of course, Sky don't give a damn and why should they when they exhibit a psychopathic control over the English game. Sky's focus on pundits from a few key geographical and business areas is highly revealing. If you can be bothered, check how many of Sky's "expert" summarisers are Londoners, Liverpudlians or Glaswegian - Reid, Redknapp, Walsh, Merson, McInally, Cottee, Thompson, Souness, Gale, Nicholas, Gray, Lampard etc etc etc. Furthermore, the same clubs keep resurfacing in the spectrum of Sky's output - West Ham United, Glasgow Rangers, Portsmouth, for example and we could, if we so wished, tell you which casino in London you would be most likely to find these operators relaxing during their leisure time.
Now, if it was merely the case that Sky people were giving jobs to their mates then one could, perhaps, accept it as a standard example of the lack of meritocracy that exists throughout the English media. Unfortunately, the template is far more manipulative than that.
Rob Styles made two errors in the Liverpool v Chelsea match. These errors worked against the proprietary trading positions taken on the global betting markets by Skybet and their associated market manipulators. Andy Gray's apoplexy was worthy of note. Howard Webb yesterday avoided giving Tottenham either of two potential penalties. The point isn't particularly whether these decisions were correct (in our estimation, one was and one wasn't) but that the Sky post-match summary featured a gloating Andy Gray who totally focused on just one of these decisions (the handball that wasn't) and the entirely pointless argument of whether Carlos Tevez deflected the ball for United's goal. Now, we are sure that you will be interested in the background to this nonsense.
Sky took huge trading positions on a United victory yesterday targeting some of the major European and Asian bookmakers as they sought to make up for their losses of the previous week. Indeed, the markets were so volatile that William Hill suspended betting in-running from the twenty minute mark until half-time. Souness and Redknapp offered verbal manipulations to persuade the leisure punter to put their hard-earned cash in loss-inducing markets and Sky were left with that warm glow that always results from a successful betting scam. It is an interesting aside that when peculiar betting patterns are related to an insider's corruption, there is no public inquiry. If you or I are lucky enough to benefit from a similar piece of market manipulation then alarm bills ring and there is a chance that winnings will not be paid out. Sky raised the media profile of this match from the moment they realised that they had ultimate control in the event - Martin Jol and the managerial crisis, the focus on Robinson's goalkeeping faux pas, Gabriel Heinze and the Premier League and Berbatov's supposed move to Manchester United all ratcheted up the betting turnover.
Will Webb be vilified throughout the media before being stood down for a month because of poor decision making in a major televised game? Of course not. The implication for the match officials is that one shouldn't stand in the way of the betting market corruptions on the games which they referee. It is worth remembering that the ONLY time a referee was suspended last season was Dermot Gallagher. The media spin was that Gallagher was banned (in his final season as a professional ref) for two-and-a-half months for failing to send off Thatcher for his assault on Mendes - this relates not to the war in Las Islas Malvinas but to the football match between Man City and Portsmouth. Not so. Gallagher also failed to give Portsmouth a penalty in the match and the decision was actually related to a huge global gamble with the fingerprints of a football manager who looks like a standard criminal all over it.
Sky kept us entertained in other ways too at the weekend - although not in the manner that they intended. Their inability to notice that the media rumpus in Spain would pull the plug on their opening La Liga game featuring the Madrid derby was laughable. Up to the hour prior to the alleged kick off, Sky were marketing their four Spanish live games before being forced to hurriedly backtrack. Almost as funny as Rob Palmer's repeated claims to actually be in whichever Spanish city the game is from when he is actually in a London studio.
In a moment of excessive boredom over my breakfast on Sunday, I decided to watch Sky's Sunday Supplement which is when four newspaper hacks sit around a table giving out rampant disinformation. The feature on why referees are incapable of errors and why we should totally trust that the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) is above any type of corruption or criminality was well entertaining. In fact, if you inversed everything that was said by the four sour-faced alcoholics during the programme, you would not have been too far from the absolute truth!
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
The key aspect to Sky's heavily biased and manipulative televised output is their over confidence in the security of their control of the events under their warped jurisdiction. One might think that some effort might be made to disguise the corruption but Sky seem to glorify in it.
For example, lets look at the Sky choice of summarisers for the Man United v Tottenham match - Jamie ("I really believe this") Redknapp and Graeme Souness. Thinking back to the Quest bungs inquiry and the City of London Police raids on Portsmouth, Newcastle and Glasgow Rangers (particularly relating to the scam of a transfer of Boumsong to the Geordies from Ibrox overseen by Souness), are these the types of individual that Sky should have the arrogance to place on our screens to provide the pre-match and half-time disinformation? As we have posted previously, four of the seven points and concerns raised by Lord Stevens related to Harry Redknapp and/or Portsmouth - there was even that peculiarly specific point linking Redknapp to Glasgow based bookmaker, horserace trainer and football agent, Willie McKay. Sky totally taps into this semi-masonic structure featuring corrupt individuals from Glasgow and East London and, if they were able to step back and view how their media operation might be observed by outsiders, they would see that these inappropriate choices of talking head might just be noticed by the ever alert footballing public.
Of course, Sky don't give a damn and why should they when they exhibit a psychopathic control over the English game. Sky's focus on pundits from a few key geographical and business areas is highly revealing. If you can be bothered, check how many of Sky's "expert" summarisers are Londoners, Liverpudlians or Glaswegian - Reid, Redknapp, Walsh, Merson, McInally, Cottee, Thompson, Souness, Gale, Nicholas, Gray, Lampard etc etc etc. Furthermore, the same clubs keep resurfacing in the spectrum of Sky's output - West Ham United, Glasgow Rangers, Portsmouth, for example and we could, if we so wished, tell you which casino in London you would be most likely to find these operators relaxing during their leisure time.
Now, if it was merely the case that Sky people were giving jobs to their mates then one could, perhaps, accept it as a standard example of the lack of meritocracy that exists throughout the English media. Unfortunately, the template is far more manipulative than that.
Rob Styles made two errors in the Liverpool v Chelsea match. These errors worked against the proprietary trading positions taken on the global betting markets by Skybet and their associated market manipulators. Andy Gray's apoplexy was worthy of note. Howard Webb yesterday avoided giving Tottenham either of two potential penalties. The point isn't particularly whether these decisions were correct (in our estimation, one was and one wasn't) but that the Sky post-match summary featured a gloating Andy Gray who totally focused on just one of these decisions (the handball that wasn't) and the entirely pointless argument of whether Carlos Tevez deflected the ball for United's goal. Now, we are sure that you will be interested in the background to this nonsense.
Sky took huge trading positions on a United victory yesterday targeting some of the major European and Asian bookmakers as they sought to make up for their losses of the previous week. Indeed, the markets were so volatile that William Hill suspended betting in-running from the twenty minute mark until half-time. Souness and Redknapp offered verbal manipulations to persuade the leisure punter to put their hard-earned cash in loss-inducing markets and Sky were left with that warm glow that always results from a successful betting scam. It is an interesting aside that when peculiar betting patterns are related to an insider's corruption, there is no public inquiry. If you or I are lucky enough to benefit from a similar piece of market manipulation then alarm bills ring and there is a chance that winnings will not be paid out. Sky raised the media profile of this match from the moment they realised that they had ultimate control in the event - Martin Jol and the managerial crisis, the focus on Robinson's goalkeeping faux pas, Gabriel Heinze and the Premier League and Berbatov's supposed move to Manchester United all ratcheted up the betting turnover.
Will Webb be vilified throughout the media before being stood down for a month because of poor decision making in a major televised game? Of course not. The implication for the match officials is that one shouldn't stand in the way of the betting market corruptions on the games which they referee. It is worth remembering that the ONLY time a referee was suspended last season was Dermot Gallagher. The media spin was that Gallagher was banned (in his final season as a professional ref) for two-and-a-half months for failing to send off Thatcher for his assault on Mendes - this relates not to the war in Las Islas Malvinas but to the football match between Man City and Portsmouth. Not so. Gallagher also failed to give Portsmouth a penalty in the match and the decision was actually related to a huge global gamble with the fingerprints of a football manager who looks like a standard criminal all over it.
Sky kept us entertained in other ways too at the weekend - although not in the manner that they intended. Their inability to notice that the media rumpus in Spain would pull the plug on their opening La Liga game featuring the Madrid derby was laughable. Up to the hour prior to the alleged kick off, Sky were marketing their four Spanish live games before being forced to hurriedly backtrack. Almost as funny as Rob Palmer's repeated claims to actually be in whichever Spanish city the game is from when he is actually in a London studio.
In a moment of excessive boredom over my breakfast on Sunday, I decided to watch Sky's Sunday Supplement which is when four newspaper hacks sit around a table giving out rampant disinformation. The feature on why referees are incapable of errors and why we should totally trust that the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) is above any type of corruption or criminality was well entertaining. In fact, if you inversed everything that was said by the four sour-faced alcoholics during the programme, you would not have been too far from the absolute truth!
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Sunday, 26 August 2007
Arsène's Arsenal About To Go Arse Over Tit
There are only five Premiership teams that Dietrological or, for that matter, the individual members of our Trading Team would consider working alongside on a consultative level. We refuse to get involved with teams linked to gangsters, bookmakers, arms dealers, online casinos, private equity-heads, human rights abusers and professional gamblers (whether at management or player level). Three of these five outfits are on borrowed time which is hardly surprising in a Premiership that actively seeks out the corrupt for its membership. Consequently, our approaches are limited to just two teams.
As the top English league evolves to ever more inappropriate levels of gambling-based sophistication, we decided last November to approach Arsène Wenger with an offer to provide a Consultancy Project which would enable Arsenal to cease being abused on a decision making level by the referees owned by the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) which, at the time, was becoming a repetitive occurrence (particularly in televised matches - think the games at Man City, West Ham, Sheff Utd and Bolton, for example). After a flow of communication, Mr Wenger decided that we would not be able to help his team face down the corruption but advised us instead to contact his Board of Directors so that we might develop a strategy whereby the Gunners could offset the negative impacts of betting market liabilities on the outcome of Arsenal's matches without selling out to the likes of Stan Kroenke. This, of course, we did and we are now working alongside aspects of the Arsenal hierarchy on related matters.
But, despite our respect for Wenger, he really missed a trick here. The man utilised our initial holistic input and made the decision to extrapolate our bases of a strategy to produce his own proprietary template to address the corruption being laid at Arsenal's door. Through approaches to the PGMOB hierarchy, Wenger was able to entirely reverse the machinations against his team's interests in the latter part of last season and the referee bias has continued in his favour for the start of the current season. At the completion of this post, we list the major decisions in all of Arsenal's matches since Wenger confronted the PGMOB. As can be seen, the turnaround has been marked.
So, why are we confident that Wenger's reactive strategy is short-termist in its positive impact? By the time that the PGMOB decided to be less blinkered in their approach to Arsenal's matches, there was, in effect, nothing worth playing for aside from a Champions League place. The corruptions of earlier in the 2006/07 season had terminated any hope of a shot at the title despite Arsenal's competitive over-performance against the other top teams (Arsenal won four, drew three and lost only one of their matches against the teams in the top five places but were repeatedly kicked off the park with a lack of protection by the officials against all those grim northern football outposts). The result is that Wenger thinks that the officiating bias has turned the corner and everything will be hunky dory in the new season. He needs to think again.
One of the prime reasons that Arsenal were targeted by the PGMOB to such an extent is that they are the only big English team that have, to date, refused to sell out to the corrupt dollar (or baht or shekel or rouble or króna or whatever). The hierarchy that is imposing the criminalised template on the Premiership are particularly irked by any of the major clubs standing, to a degree, on their principles as opposed to jumping into bed with the bookies. The attitude of Arsenal is costing the betting industry serious money and, in the eyes of the powers-that-be, the sooner the Arsenal Board sell out to Kroenke the better. Dietrological are actively working to prevent this occurrence.
Anyway, back to Wenger's myopia. The Arsenal manager has become carried away with the window of support from officialdom that has existed for much of 2007. After defeating the vastly overrated Man City team, he is insisting that Arsenal have what it takes to mount a serious title challenge this year. On a level playing field, we would have to agree with him but the level playing field has become undulated beyond recognition and the Gunner's run of good fortune is simply not sustainable.
The global football betting markets are in a state of fragmented cartelisation which is great for slick market analysts but a real bummer for everyone else. A whole spectrum of different power operators are fighting for control of the liquidity in the markets as the global turnover spirals ever upwards towards the half billion pound market which, by our estimation, should arrive in the first half of this season. By linking his strategy to merely one of these power bases, Wenger refuses to address the holistic nature of the marketplace and, furthermore, his strategy will be sold short by the operators that he believes he has some degree of control over. We do not envisage the flow of decisions in Arsenal's favour to continue for these two prime reasons - the English aristocracy do not wish for it to be the case and the major global operators are imposing ever greater market control.
It does not matter at what level or from which angle one approaches corrupt edifices, the only solution is a big picture solution. Wenger has instead chosen a highly blinkered approach and he is fortunate that there are other people within his club's hierarchy who are more open-minded to the new global realities. Despite this, Wenger remains, by some distance, the manager that we most respect in the Premiership and he is in our top half dozen managers across Europe. His activities in the transfer market make the likes of Ferguson and Mourinho look dyscalculic. But he is out of his depth in the betting marketplace and we repeat our retort offered to him in our last communication - "if you are not aware that you have a problem, there is little point in us offering you a solution".
How the PGMOB has aided Arsenal in 2007:
Manchester City (h) - a penalty in their favour and the denial of a penalty to the visitors.
Blackburn Rovers (a) - a very harsh sending off of Nelson after the Lancastrians had equalised.
Fulham (h) - Arsenal were given a generous penalty after an earlier one had been denied.
Portsmouth (a) - Portsmouth had a valid goal chalked off and Arsenal were given a spotkick.
Chelsea (h) - Another penalty in their favour plus a first half sending off to amplify the bias.
Fulham (h) - Clattenburg gives the Gunners a penalty.
Tottenham (a) and Man City (h) - No bias detected.
Bolton (h) - The visitors had a very harsh sending off at the hands of Styles who also denied the northerners a nailed-on penalty.
Newcastle (a) - Newcastle denied a penalty.
West Ham (h) and Liverpool (a) - No bias detected.
Everton (a) - Everton should have had a penalty.
Aston Villa (a) - No bias.
Reading (h) - Foy gives Wenger's boys a hugely generous penalty.
Wigan (h) - A Dowd special denied Wigan a penalty and the decision also should have resulted in Arsenal being a man light.
In total, that is 16 decisions in favour of Arsenal with only one against and even that was offset by a later equalising penalty. It is little wonder that we have been hearing rather less of Wenger's moaning about the match officials.
We look forward to the return of the despairing gallic shrug in the weeks and months ahead.
If the man can overcome his predisposition to stubbornness, he has our number...
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
As the top English league evolves to ever more inappropriate levels of gambling-based sophistication, we decided last November to approach Arsène Wenger with an offer to provide a Consultancy Project which would enable Arsenal to cease being abused on a decision making level by the referees owned by the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) which, at the time, was becoming a repetitive occurrence (particularly in televised matches - think the games at Man City, West Ham, Sheff Utd and Bolton, for example). After a flow of communication, Mr Wenger decided that we would not be able to help his team face down the corruption but advised us instead to contact his Board of Directors so that we might develop a strategy whereby the Gunners could offset the negative impacts of betting market liabilities on the outcome of Arsenal's matches without selling out to the likes of Stan Kroenke. This, of course, we did and we are now working alongside aspects of the Arsenal hierarchy on related matters.
But, despite our respect for Wenger, he really missed a trick here. The man utilised our initial holistic input and made the decision to extrapolate our bases of a strategy to produce his own proprietary template to address the corruption being laid at Arsenal's door. Through approaches to the PGMOB hierarchy, Wenger was able to entirely reverse the machinations against his team's interests in the latter part of last season and the referee bias has continued in his favour for the start of the current season. At the completion of this post, we list the major decisions in all of Arsenal's matches since Wenger confronted the PGMOB. As can be seen, the turnaround has been marked.
So, why are we confident that Wenger's reactive strategy is short-termist in its positive impact? By the time that the PGMOB decided to be less blinkered in their approach to Arsenal's matches, there was, in effect, nothing worth playing for aside from a Champions League place. The corruptions of earlier in the 2006/07 season had terminated any hope of a shot at the title despite Arsenal's competitive over-performance against the other top teams (Arsenal won four, drew three and lost only one of their matches against the teams in the top five places but were repeatedly kicked off the park with a lack of protection by the officials against all those grim northern football outposts). The result is that Wenger thinks that the officiating bias has turned the corner and everything will be hunky dory in the new season. He needs to think again.
One of the prime reasons that Arsenal were targeted by the PGMOB to such an extent is that they are the only big English team that have, to date, refused to sell out to the corrupt dollar (or baht or shekel or rouble or króna or whatever). The hierarchy that is imposing the criminalised template on the Premiership are particularly irked by any of the major clubs standing, to a degree, on their principles as opposed to jumping into bed with the bookies. The attitude of Arsenal is costing the betting industry serious money and, in the eyes of the powers-that-be, the sooner the Arsenal Board sell out to Kroenke the better. Dietrological are actively working to prevent this occurrence.
Anyway, back to Wenger's myopia. The Arsenal manager has become carried away with the window of support from officialdom that has existed for much of 2007. After defeating the vastly overrated Man City team, he is insisting that Arsenal have what it takes to mount a serious title challenge this year. On a level playing field, we would have to agree with him but the level playing field has become undulated beyond recognition and the Gunner's run of good fortune is simply not sustainable.
The global football betting markets are in a state of fragmented cartelisation which is great for slick market analysts but a real bummer for everyone else. A whole spectrum of different power operators are fighting for control of the liquidity in the markets as the global turnover spirals ever upwards towards the half billion pound market which, by our estimation, should arrive in the first half of this season. By linking his strategy to merely one of these power bases, Wenger refuses to address the holistic nature of the marketplace and, furthermore, his strategy will be sold short by the operators that he believes he has some degree of control over. We do not envisage the flow of decisions in Arsenal's favour to continue for these two prime reasons - the English aristocracy do not wish for it to be the case and the major global operators are imposing ever greater market control.
It does not matter at what level or from which angle one approaches corrupt edifices, the only solution is a big picture solution. Wenger has instead chosen a highly blinkered approach and he is fortunate that there are other people within his club's hierarchy who are more open-minded to the new global realities. Despite this, Wenger remains, by some distance, the manager that we most respect in the Premiership and he is in our top half dozen managers across Europe. His activities in the transfer market make the likes of Ferguson and Mourinho look dyscalculic. But he is out of his depth in the betting marketplace and we repeat our retort offered to him in our last communication - "if you are not aware that you have a problem, there is little point in us offering you a solution".
How the PGMOB has aided Arsenal in 2007:
Manchester City (h) - a penalty in their favour and the denial of a penalty to the visitors.
Blackburn Rovers (a) - a very harsh sending off of Nelson after the Lancastrians had equalised.
Fulham (h) - Arsenal were given a generous penalty after an earlier one had been denied.
Portsmouth (a) - Portsmouth had a valid goal chalked off and Arsenal were given a spotkick.
Chelsea (h) - Another penalty in their favour plus a first half sending off to amplify the bias.
Fulham (h) - Clattenburg gives the Gunners a penalty.
Tottenham (a) and Man City (h) - No bias detected.
Bolton (h) - The visitors had a very harsh sending off at the hands of Styles who also denied the northerners a nailed-on penalty.
Newcastle (a) - Newcastle denied a penalty.
West Ham (h) and Liverpool (a) - No bias detected.
Everton (a) - Everton should have had a penalty.
Aston Villa (a) - No bias.
Reading (h) - Foy gives Wenger's boys a hugely generous penalty.
Wigan (h) - A Dowd special denied Wigan a penalty and the decision also should have resulted in Arsenal being a man light.
In total, that is 16 decisions in favour of Arsenal with only one against and even that was offset by a later equalising penalty. It is little wonder that we have been hearing rather less of Wenger's moaning about the match officials.
We look forward to the return of the despairing gallic shrug in the weeks and months ahead.
If the man can overcome his predisposition to stubbornness, he has our number...
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Saturday, 25 August 2007
3 For 3 And 2 For 2 Rigged Matches
A very common form of inside manipulation affecting football matches and the betting markets are 3 for 3 and 2 for 2 arrangements. Perfected in the eighties and nineties in Serie A but now present in leagues throughout Europe, the 3 for 3/2 for 2 structures represent the sharing of points over a season for mutual benefit.
When these agreements were first orchestrated in Italy, there were only two points for a victory and the format almost always featured two drawn games. The Italian fans were well aware of these agreed results between linked teams and generally took perverse pleasure in being present at these non-competitive matches. 0-0 scorelines featured frequently with minimal physical exertions although, on occasion, the arrangement went pear-shaped. I remember one Milan game against Atalanta when Albertini scored with a highly speculative 45 metre piledriver to a shared look of total horror and disbelief from his teammates. Of course, Atalanta went straight down to the other end of the pitch, Franco Baresi obligingly fell over for no apparent reason and a one-all draw resulted. The principle curiosity relating to the phenomenon of sharing the points in Italy was that the same 2 for 2 structure remained the predominant form of manipulation even once three points for a victory was introduced. There are numerous reasons for this state of affairs but the lack of logic in making a choice that might well work against both teams interests in the longer term still trumped any short term considerations relating to the negative psychology or media focus on a defeat.
Aside from the benefits of avoiding two competitive games and sharing the points, 3 for 3/2 for 2 structures can help significantly if the game(s) are in crowded fixture windows eg around xmas, New Year or easter in England or adjacent to Champions League events in all territories. If a team has three competitive games in seven days, the arrangement whereby one of those events is effectively a practice match has marked knock-on advantages with regard to the other two matches. In such cases, the 3 for 3/2 for 2 can enhance the overall season's points total to a greater extent.
There are betting angles relating to these corrupt events. Numerous insiders are aware of the proprietary arrangements and such individuals have been known to exercise their knowledge in the marketplace for financial gain. Indeed, the markets are a good place to start any investigation into clubs that might be in the practice of developing 3 for 3/2 for 2 structures. A further fruitful area are matches between clubs known to already have close linkages either through politics, religion, shared personnel, multiple player loan arrangements or non-derby geographical proximity. Another area of interest to any market analyst are arrangements that are created through end of season matches which are critical for one of the participants and of no consequence to the other team. Frequently, a pliant outcome will be offset by an equally pliancy in the reverse direction in the following season.
Territories like Italy, Russia, Romania and England feature numerous examples of 3 for 3/2 for 2 arrangements but, in recent years, the structure has been adapted for the Champions League group stages (remember the matches between Celtic and Manchester United last season) and also the Qualifying matches for the Euro and World Cup competitions. The matches between Russia and Croatia in Euro 2008 Group E each resulted in 0-0 draws with next to no bookings nor physical challenges plus supportive betting markets and would have to be considered potentially to be rogue events. In fact, the former game was heavily disguised also on a media level with television coverage entirely randomising the visuals making it impossible to trade on the match in-running. There were ludicrous features like the camera focusing on one particular player's ankle instead of providing pictures of corner kicks and other key match occurrences.
It is often in-running that suspect games reveal themselves as being arranged events. The visual structure is entirely different in format to the events where there is individualised or a small cartel of manipulative operators at play in that a large proportion of the participants are behaving to an arranged template. Unfortunately, the market makers are not quite as stupid as they sometimes appear and markets on such events remove value at speed as the layers and professional market analysts snaffle up any value at speed. Undoubtedly, speed is of the essence in profiting from these rigged matches and analysts have a constant balance between the degree of certainty of any corruption and the loss of value through delay - its speed poker to very high stakes.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
When these agreements were first orchestrated in Italy, there were only two points for a victory and the format almost always featured two drawn games. The Italian fans were well aware of these agreed results between linked teams and generally took perverse pleasure in being present at these non-competitive matches. 0-0 scorelines featured frequently with minimal physical exertions although, on occasion, the arrangement went pear-shaped. I remember one Milan game against Atalanta when Albertini scored with a highly speculative 45 metre piledriver to a shared look of total horror and disbelief from his teammates. Of course, Atalanta went straight down to the other end of the pitch, Franco Baresi obligingly fell over for no apparent reason and a one-all draw resulted. The principle curiosity relating to the phenomenon of sharing the points in Italy was that the same 2 for 2 structure remained the predominant form of manipulation even once three points for a victory was introduced. There are numerous reasons for this state of affairs but the lack of logic in making a choice that might well work against both teams interests in the longer term still trumped any short term considerations relating to the negative psychology or media focus on a defeat.
Aside from the benefits of avoiding two competitive games and sharing the points, 3 for 3/2 for 2 structures can help significantly if the game(s) are in crowded fixture windows eg around xmas, New Year or easter in England or adjacent to Champions League events in all territories. If a team has three competitive games in seven days, the arrangement whereby one of those events is effectively a practice match has marked knock-on advantages with regard to the other two matches. In such cases, the 3 for 3/2 for 2 can enhance the overall season's points total to a greater extent.
There are betting angles relating to these corrupt events. Numerous insiders are aware of the proprietary arrangements and such individuals have been known to exercise their knowledge in the marketplace for financial gain. Indeed, the markets are a good place to start any investigation into clubs that might be in the practice of developing 3 for 3/2 for 2 structures. A further fruitful area are matches between clubs known to already have close linkages either through politics, religion, shared personnel, multiple player loan arrangements or non-derby geographical proximity. Another area of interest to any market analyst are arrangements that are created through end of season matches which are critical for one of the participants and of no consequence to the other team. Frequently, a pliant outcome will be offset by an equally pliancy in the reverse direction in the following season.
Territories like Italy, Russia, Romania and England feature numerous examples of 3 for 3/2 for 2 arrangements but, in recent years, the structure has been adapted for the Champions League group stages (remember the matches between Celtic and Manchester United last season) and also the Qualifying matches for the Euro and World Cup competitions. The matches between Russia and Croatia in Euro 2008 Group E each resulted in 0-0 draws with next to no bookings nor physical challenges plus supportive betting markets and would have to be considered potentially to be rogue events. In fact, the former game was heavily disguised also on a media level with television coverage entirely randomising the visuals making it impossible to trade on the match in-running. There were ludicrous features like the camera focusing on one particular player's ankle instead of providing pictures of corner kicks and other key match occurrences.
It is often in-running that suspect games reveal themselves as being arranged events. The visual structure is entirely different in format to the events where there is individualised or a small cartel of manipulative operators at play in that a large proportion of the participants are behaving to an arranged template. Unfortunately, the market makers are not quite as stupid as they sometimes appear and markets on such events remove value at speed as the layers and professional market analysts snaffle up any value at speed. Undoubtedly, speed is of the essence in profiting from these rigged matches and analysts have a constant balance between the degree of certainty of any corruption and the loss of value through delay - its speed poker to very high stakes.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Friday, 24 August 2007
Spectacular Society On Styles, Scudamore And Sky
The only news items that have received any coverage in the mainstream press and media this week have been the ongoing campaign to get Calamity James back in the goalkeeping position for England and the creation of major focus on Martin Jol's managerial position and Gabriel Heinze's protracted transfer as a backcloth to the Sky televised game between Man Utd and Spurs on Sunday. An alien visiting our planet would have assumed that absolutely nothing else has happened of any consequence in the English football world over the week.
This is neither the time nor the place to list the pertinent arguments against James being given the No 1 position but selective memory should not be allowed to eradicate Calamity's comedy keeping against France in Euro 2004 nor the games against Austria and Denmark nor, indeed, his peculiarly and inappropriately correlated performances for Harry Redknapp's betting medium.
The previous post addressed the fake story that is Martin Jol and the pseudo-linkages of Tottenham to any football manager who is seen in north west Europe. In this blog posting, we wish to focus on the furore surrounding Heinze's move to Madrid.
The media has plotted the continuation of this Manchester versus Liverpool posturing to a boring degree and, yet, the one aspect of the charade that was actually interesting was conspicuous by its absence from the vast majority of the media - Rafa Benitez and his outburst against the Premier League.
Some of what Benitez had to say was just silly eg the comparison between the difficulties Liverpool had in signing Javier Mascherano in relation to the alleged ease of Man Utd's Carlos Tevez deal - this simply isn't true. However, most of the remainder of the Spaniard's rant hit home truthfully. Smarting from the impact of the Rob Styles freebie patio and driveway construction project courtesy of loveable Roman Abramovich, Benitez has developed a bit of a persecution complex of late. Unfortunately, he doesn't quite take aim as accurately as he might if he really wished to illuminate his point.
The scandal and corruption at West Ham United that has been okayed repeatedly by the Premier League only came to light when Liverpool brought the evident illegalities to Scudamore's attention during the transfer of Mascherano in January. Without Liverpool's ethical input, none of us would ever have been any the wiser about the Third Party agreements and, obviously, the Premier League would have vastly preferred this scenario. So, somewhere underneath the shouting, there is a serious point - the Premier League are not too happy with Liverpool for not allowing the whole sorry mess to remain out of the public eye.
Undoubtedly, the twisted logic behind the Premier League's decision to block the transfer of Heinze to Merseyside was related to this episode and merely formed a reciprocal slap on the wrist for Liverpool - don't rock the boat otherwise we'll set Styles and Scudamore on you!
Following Benitez having his say, the Premier League put out a press release containing the usual twaddle including "We are disappointed to read Rafael Benitez's comments in the press, especially when channels exist for every member club to raise any issues directly with the league." The refusal of the Premier League to arbitrate fairly, the highly selective choices regarding who the Premier League are willing to talk and listen to and the warped and corrupt hidden agendas that nowadays underpin all aspects of the Premier League's strategies would suggest otherwise and Benitez was correct to go public.
Benitez is also right in drawing attention to the complex game theory behind the setting of the Premiership fixtures. The English and Scottish leagues are the only ones in Europe that require payment prior to publication in the media. The Football DataCo Limited who control this licensing scam are not only manipulative regarding the enhancement of their cashflow. The fixtures are very manipulated in a whole range of ways. The windows around the Champions League matches are always indicative of this strategy. The four Champions League contestants are obviously compromised on a fitness level following their exertions in the planet's premier club competition. The advantage to the other teams in facing, say, Liverpool after a Barcelona game is massive compared to facing the reds in a quieter match window. Prior to the commencement of each season, our Traders always evaluate the fixture list in relation to the Champions League. The full analysis is proprietary and will not be revealed here but there is one aspect that we wish to highlight. The lists below detail the teams with the most and the least games against the Big 4 adjacent to the Champions League matches (up to the semi finals):
The Most Games:
Bolton and Middlesbrough 7 games
Derby, Everton and Wigan 6 games
The Least Games:
Portsmouth 1 game
Sunderland 2 games
Reading and Tottenham 3 games
Making a rather simplistic assumption that a team will, on average, gain one extra point per game through taking advantage of the tiredness of the Champions League participants, it may be seen that Portsmouth are being handicapped 6 points when compared with Bolton and Boro. Now, we are not renowned for having any sympathy with Portsmouth on any matter as they are a nine bob note outfit but a level playing field would share out this advantage more equitably and should always be the aim.
There are numerous other tilts built in to the Premiership fixture listing. For example, we posted earlier in the week that West Ham United were the only Premiership team to have the advantage of a free midweek off in comparison with their opponents, Birmingham City, last weekend - this was simply a gift of three points for the crooked east Londoners.
Scudamore's gang came up with the following: "The Premier League tried to make sure that our dealings with all our member clubs, including the scheduling of fixtures, are as fair as possible." Rubbish! We utilise this rampant lack of fairness in all our ante-post positions along with many other corrupt machinations perpetrated from on high. It is simply not a valid strategy to spin out these pithy utterances when any half decent market analyst knows that there are agendas at play in all the control structures that are in the Premier League's possession.
Finally, one point that Benitez failed to make was the massive advantage bestowed on Manchester United in the early years of the Premiership. Although biases between the Big 4 have levelled out to an extent in recent seasons, the Red Devils were given a marked handicap advantage after the takeover of the English game by Sky Television.
This obviously had absolutely nothing to do with the 9.9% stake that Sky had in Manchester United.
Obviously...
Ferguson should take care in his accusations of skullduggery.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
This is neither the time nor the place to list the pertinent arguments against James being given the No 1 position but selective memory should not be allowed to eradicate Calamity's comedy keeping against France in Euro 2004 nor the games against Austria and Denmark nor, indeed, his peculiarly and inappropriately correlated performances for Harry Redknapp's betting medium.
The previous post addressed the fake story that is Martin Jol and the pseudo-linkages of Tottenham to any football manager who is seen in north west Europe. In this blog posting, we wish to focus on the furore surrounding Heinze's move to Madrid.
The media has plotted the continuation of this Manchester versus Liverpool posturing to a boring degree and, yet, the one aspect of the charade that was actually interesting was conspicuous by its absence from the vast majority of the media - Rafa Benitez and his outburst against the Premier League.
Some of what Benitez had to say was just silly eg the comparison between the difficulties Liverpool had in signing Javier Mascherano in relation to the alleged ease of Man Utd's Carlos Tevez deal - this simply isn't true. However, most of the remainder of the Spaniard's rant hit home truthfully. Smarting from the impact of the Rob Styles freebie patio and driveway construction project courtesy of loveable Roman Abramovich, Benitez has developed a bit of a persecution complex of late. Unfortunately, he doesn't quite take aim as accurately as he might if he really wished to illuminate his point.
The scandal and corruption at West Ham United that has been okayed repeatedly by the Premier League only came to light when Liverpool brought the evident illegalities to Scudamore's attention during the transfer of Mascherano in January. Without Liverpool's ethical input, none of us would ever have been any the wiser about the Third Party agreements and, obviously, the Premier League would have vastly preferred this scenario. So, somewhere underneath the shouting, there is a serious point - the Premier League are not too happy with Liverpool for not allowing the whole sorry mess to remain out of the public eye.
Undoubtedly, the twisted logic behind the Premier League's decision to block the transfer of Heinze to Merseyside was related to this episode and merely formed a reciprocal slap on the wrist for Liverpool - don't rock the boat otherwise we'll set Styles and Scudamore on you!
Following Benitez having his say, the Premier League put out a press release containing the usual twaddle including "We are disappointed to read Rafael Benitez's comments in the press, especially when channels exist for every member club to raise any issues directly with the league." The refusal of the Premier League to arbitrate fairly, the highly selective choices regarding who the Premier League are willing to talk and listen to and the warped and corrupt hidden agendas that nowadays underpin all aspects of the Premier League's strategies would suggest otherwise and Benitez was correct to go public.
Benitez is also right in drawing attention to the complex game theory behind the setting of the Premiership fixtures. The English and Scottish leagues are the only ones in Europe that require payment prior to publication in the media. The Football DataCo Limited who control this licensing scam are not only manipulative regarding the enhancement of their cashflow. The fixtures are very manipulated in a whole range of ways. The windows around the Champions League matches are always indicative of this strategy. The four Champions League contestants are obviously compromised on a fitness level following their exertions in the planet's premier club competition. The advantage to the other teams in facing, say, Liverpool after a Barcelona game is massive compared to facing the reds in a quieter match window. Prior to the commencement of each season, our Traders always evaluate the fixture list in relation to the Champions League. The full analysis is proprietary and will not be revealed here but there is one aspect that we wish to highlight. The lists below detail the teams with the most and the least games against the Big 4 adjacent to the Champions League matches (up to the semi finals):
The Most Games:
Bolton and Middlesbrough 7 games
Derby, Everton and Wigan 6 games
The Least Games:
Portsmouth 1 game
Sunderland 2 games
Reading and Tottenham 3 games
Making a rather simplistic assumption that a team will, on average, gain one extra point per game through taking advantage of the tiredness of the Champions League participants, it may be seen that Portsmouth are being handicapped 6 points when compared with Bolton and Boro. Now, we are not renowned for having any sympathy with Portsmouth on any matter as they are a nine bob note outfit but a level playing field would share out this advantage more equitably and should always be the aim.
There are numerous other tilts built in to the Premiership fixture listing. For example, we posted earlier in the week that West Ham United were the only Premiership team to have the advantage of a free midweek off in comparison with their opponents, Birmingham City, last weekend - this was simply a gift of three points for the crooked east Londoners.
Scudamore's gang came up with the following: "The Premier League tried to make sure that our dealings with all our member clubs, including the scheduling of fixtures, are as fair as possible." Rubbish! We utilise this rampant lack of fairness in all our ante-post positions along with many other corrupt machinations perpetrated from on high. It is simply not a valid strategy to spin out these pithy utterances when any half decent market analyst knows that there are agendas at play in all the control structures that are in the Premier League's possession.
Finally, one point that Benitez failed to make was the massive advantage bestowed on Manchester United in the early years of the Premiership. Although biases between the Big 4 have levelled out to an extent in recent seasons, the Red Devils were given a marked handicap advantage after the takeover of the English game by Sky Television.
This obviously had absolutely nothing to do with the 9.9% stake that Sky had in Manchester United.
Obviously...
Ferguson should take care in his accusations of skullduggery.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Thursday, 23 August 2007
Reality - Martin Jol Is Compromised By Mansion88
From time to time, the English mainstream media throw excessive hissy fits about entirely fabricated footballing realities. These spectacular society nonsenses, although pithy in the big scheme of things, always have a purpose and that purpose usually relates to some insider(s) increasing the positive nature of their cashflow(s).
A prime example of this waste of column inches is the focus on Martin Jol and Tottenham.
We posted previously that there was rampant disinformation around the managerial situation at Spurs (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/bastards-in-black.html) and the "news" story has got entirely out of hand in the last few days.
Lets get some things as straight as is feasible.
* Martin Jol was not summoned by Spurs supremo Daniel Levy last week to explain the team's poor start to the season.
* There were no major bets last Friday on Martin Jol being the first manager in the Premiership to get the sack this season. Indeed, the markets do not even make Jol the favourite to win the race for Jobseekers Allowance - that privilege goes to Sammy Lee at Bolton.
* Juande Ramos (the Sevilla manager) did meet with the Tottenham club secretary John Alexander and vice-chairman Paul Kemsley at the Alfonso XIII hotel in Seville last Friday. But this meeting was prior to the alleged major bets on the sacking and, at the meeting, Ramos firmly stated that he intended to honour his contract at the Andalucian club. Tottenham now claim that this meeting never took place.
* Ramos also initially denied that the encounter existed but the Spanish sports media are not so compliant and controlled as the English propaganda machine and he was forced to come clean about the "dizzying" offer that he received from the north Londoners. Entertainingly, Sky's Spanish reporter, Sid Lowe, managed to get virtually every aspect of the spin incorrect in his reports on Sky and in The Guardian.
* It has been made clear to Martin Jol (at a meeting this week) that a top four place or, at the very least, finishing above rivals Arsenal are the targets that need to be achieved for the Dutchman to remain in charge.
The amount of media attention to this partially real occurrence is out of all proportion to its significance. There are clear parallels with the non-story at the end of last season when it was rumoured that there had been major bets on Southampton getting promoted because Microsoft founder Paul Allen was taking over the club (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/04/hrh-queen-elizabeth-ii-to-invest-in.html). That particular spectacular was merely a betting scam perpetrated by a certain south coast manager with an inappropriate interest in the markets.
The current Tottenham/Martin Jol wheeze has been dependent on three informational loci. Firstly, Sky Television has driven the story to the forefront of our attentions with an incessant stream of rumour and counter-rumour that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Sky's big live game next Sunday features Manchester United and Tottenham. Betting turnover is being magnified by all the media focus and Skybet benefit accordingly. Secondly, the mainstream media in England have run the story to the exclusion of other more pertinent concerns within the game. Compare the number of column inches related to Martin Jol with the complete disappearance of the proper reality relating to the City of London police raids on Portsmouth, Glasgow Rangers and Newcastle, for example, which lasted less than 24 hours in the media spotlight. Thirdly, there are a group of betting market operators who are very close to this story. The main impact on the market for the first Premiership managerial casualty has been the lengthening of the prices of other managers being the first to be sacked. In the current Coral market, for example, Martin Jol is 2/1 (3.00) for the boot. If his sacking was a certainty, he would very short odds-on whereas, in reality, he should be long odds against. Sammy Lee and Gareth Southgate should both be significantly shorter than the 15/8 and 8/1 on offer and represent value accordingly.
The running of this excuse of a story has had the impact of severely undermining Jol's position and the team morale. The degree of uncertainty in the shifting sands of White Hart Lane is hardly conducive to a focused and motivated organisation. By allowing the media to play with their realities, Spurs have allowed themselves to be severely compromised. And yet, this is not the big story at Tottenham this season.
In July, Tottenham Hotspur made the highly dubious decision to allow Mansion bookmakers to become their shirt sponsors pocketing a cool £34 million ($70 million) in the process. Manchester United had already refused to accept a sponsorship deal with the Gibraltar-based company instead accepting a lesser offer from insurance giants AIG due to issues related to guilt by association through relations with a major gaming company. The steady procession of Premiership clubs that allow bookmakers and online casinos totally invalid links with their teams continues apace. These bookies inevitably gain access to privileged inside information and, more disturbingly, are, in some instances, able to impact upon match outcome through ownership of or coercion of individuals within the club. As market analysts, there has to be a major concern about the input of the likes of Bet24 at Blackburn or Boylesports at Sunderland to name but two examples but these concerns pale into insignificance when compared with the impact of Mansion at Tottenham.
Mansion did not pay £34 million just to have their logo plastered on every spare inch of space within the Tottenham ground. They paid for market influence. Mansion are a very interesting operation. Founded by Putera Sampoerna, Mansion utilised the massive profits generated by his family's business interests in tobacco and ginseng to enter the betting markets. While it should come as no surprise that yet another Premiership club has been financially benefiting from the profits of addiction, billionaire Sampoerna had a much bigger picture strategy in place. Mansion were the first Asian betting firm to gain a foothold in the European market. The highly liquid Asian markets are responsible for VIRTUALLY ALL the global betting turnover on European football matches but, until Mansions manoeuvre, the Europeans and Asians had maintained a mutually exclusive strategy territorially. Through gaining a slice of the European action, Mansion was able to significantly increase its informational horizons. This knowledge has been utilised to establish a far more powerful betting operation - Mansion88. Set up in the Philippines, Mansion88 is now one of the key global betting firms pricing up the global markets ahead of the competition. Why is it so key to be the fundamental market price source? Because, if you do not maintain a highly abusive form of control of the betting markets, pricing the markets ahead of the remainder of the sector may produce entirely inappropriate and financially damaging exposures on matches where the outcome is in the control of another bookmaker. An interesting side effect of Mansion88 and some other key Asian betting operations in Thailand, Hong Kong and Singapore wrenching control from the European firms has been the peripheralisation of some of the major European companies. Ladbrokes, for example, priced up this next weekend's Premiership matches fully 5 days after the Asian markets had opened while, as we posted earlier in the week, some of the secondary level European firms (like Premierbet) have become insolvent or are teetering on the edge of insolvency. Even allegedly moralistic Betfair are feeling the pinch. The London based betting exchange should really have no excuse for an excessive increase in their commission on trades as they are merely matching betting positions from their clients. Of course, this is not actually the case and Betfair's traders are actively involved in their proprietary markets matching positions where they believe they possess an informational advantage. This worked fine when Betfair believed themselves to be at the cutting edge of the markets but works considerably less well when the informational advantage rests with the Asians. Hence, Betfair secrete away (on some minor webpage that nobody ever looks at) the news that they are increasing commission on asian handicap positions from 1% to 5%! Betfair's marketing justification for this outrageous hike in commission is that the 1% rate was a "promotional offer" despite the fact that this "offer" had existed since the company's founding in 1999...
Mansion88 have been major operators in the global betting markets this season both via the action of primary pricing but also by actively trading the markets in real time. Tottenham's opening match of the season at Sunderland witnessed one of the largest gambles on record and there was also very significant late money on Spurs beating Derby last weekend. The news flow related to Martin Jol's impending departure produced real value in backing Spurs and the major positions were landed within fifteen minutes of the game starting as Spurs raced into a 3-0 lead.
In this manner, spectacular society creates realities that are entirely fallacious and promotes such realities to the exclusion of all other news and/or information while, under the surface and away from prying eyes, the major global bookmakers continue to corrupt the game to oblivion.
Now, why don't we ever hear about that on Sky Television nor, indeed, in any other mainstream media?
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
A prime example of this waste of column inches is the focus on Martin Jol and Tottenham.
We posted previously that there was rampant disinformation around the managerial situation at Spurs (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/bastards-in-black.html) and the "news" story has got entirely out of hand in the last few days.
Lets get some things as straight as is feasible.
* Martin Jol was not summoned by Spurs supremo Daniel Levy last week to explain the team's poor start to the season.
* There were no major bets last Friday on Martin Jol being the first manager in the Premiership to get the sack this season. Indeed, the markets do not even make Jol the favourite to win the race for Jobseekers Allowance - that privilege goes to Sammy Lee at Bolton.
* Juande Ramos (the Sevilla manager) did meet with the Tottenham club secretary John Alexander and vice-chairman Paul Kemsley at the Alfonso XIII hotel in Seville last Friday. But this meeting was prior to the alleged major bets on the sacking and, at the meeting, Ramos firmly stated that he intended to honour his contract at the Andalucian club. Tottenham now claim that this meeting never took place.
* Ramos also initially denied that the encounter existed but the Spanish sports media are not so compliant and controlled as the English propaganda machine and he was forced to come clean about the "dizzying" offer that he received from the north Londoners. Entertainingly, Sky's Spanish reporter, Sid Lowe, managed to get virtually every aspect of the spin incorrect in his reports on Sky and in The Guardian.
* It has been made clear to Martin Jol (at a meeting this week) that a top four place or, at the very least, finishing above rivals Arsenal are the targets that need to be achieved for the Dutchman to remain in charge.
The amount of media attention to this partially real occurrence is out of all proportion to its significance. There are clear parallels with the non-story at the end of last season when it was rumoured that there had been major bets on Southampton getting promoted because Microsoft founder Paul Allen was taking over the club (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/04/hrh-queen-elizabeth-ii-to-invest-in.html). That particular spectacular was merely a betting scam perpetrated by a certain south coast manager with an inappropriate interest in the markets.
The current Tottenham/Martin Jol wheeze has been dependent on three informational loci. Firstly, Sky Television has driven the story to the forefront of our attentions with an incessant stream of rumour and counter-rumour that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Sky's big live game next Sunday features Manchester United and Tottenham. Betting turnover is being magnified by all the media focus and Skybet benefit accordingly. Secondly, the mainstream media in England have run the story to the exclusion of other more pertinent concerns within the game. Compare the number of column inches related to Martin Jol with the complete disappearance of the proper reality relating to the City of London police raids on Portsmouth, Glasgow Rangers and Newcastle, for example, which lasted less than 24 hours in the media spotlight. Thirdly, there are a group of betting market operators who are very close to this story. The main impact on the market for the first Premiership managerial casualty has been the lengthening of the prices of other managers being the first to be sacked. In the current Coral market, for example, Martin Jol is 2/1 (3.00) for the boot. If his sacking was a certainty, he would very short odds-on whereas, in reality, he should be long odds against. Sammy Lee and Gareth Southgate should both be significantly shorter than the 15/8 and 8/1 on offer and represent value accordingly.
The running of this excuse of a story has had the impact of severely undermining Jol's position and the team morale. The degree of uncertainty in the shifting sands of White Hart Lane is hardly conducive to a focused and motivated organisation. By allowing the media to play with their realities, Spurs have allowed themselves to be severely compromised. And yet, this is not the big story at Tottenham this season.
In July, Tottenham Hotspur made the highly dubious decision to allow Mansion bookmakers to become their shirt sponsors pocketing a cool £34 million ($70 million) in the process. Manchester United had already refused to accept a sponsorship deal with the Gibraltar-based company instead accepting a lesser offer from insurance giants AIG due to issues related to guilt by association through relations with a major gaming company. The steady procession of Premiership clubs that allow bookmakers and online casinos totally invalid links with their teams continues apace. These bookies inevitably gain access to privileged inside information and, more disturbingly, are, in some instances, able to impact upon match outcome through ownership of or coercion of individuals within the club. As market analysts, there has to be a major concern about the input of the likes of Bet24 at Blackburn or Boylesports at Sunderland to name but two examples but these concerns pale into insignificance when compared with the impact of Mansion at Tottenham.
Mansion did not pay £34 million just to have their logo plastered on every spare inch of space within the Tottenham ground. They paid for market influence. Mansion are a very interesting operation. Founded by Putera Sampoerna, Mansion utilised the massive profits generated by his family's business interests in tobacco and ginseng to enter the betting markets. While it should come as no surprise that yet another Premiership club has been financially benefiting from the profits of addiction, billionaire Sampoerna had a much bigger picture strategy in place. Mansion were the first Asian betting firm to gain a foothold in the European market. The highly liquid Asian markets are responsible for VIRTUALLY ALL the global betting turnover on European football matches but, until Mansions manoeuvre, the Europeans and Asians had maintained a mutually exclusive strategy territorially. Through gaining a slice of the European action, Mansion was able to significantly increase its informational horizons. This knowledge has been utilised to establish a far more powerful betting operation - Mansion88. Set up in the Philippines, Mansion88 is now one of the key global betting firms pricing up the global markets ahead of the competition. Why is it so key to be the fundamental market price source? Because, if you do not maintain a highly abusive form of control of the betting markets, pricing the markets ahead of the remainder of the sector may produce entirely inappropriate and financially damaging exposures on matches where the outcome is in the control of another bookmaker. An interesting side effect of Mansion88 and some other key Asian betting operations in Thailand, Hong Kong and Singapore wrenching control from the European firms has been the peripheralisation of some of the major European companies. Ladbrokes, for example, priced up this next weekend's Premiership matches fully 5 days after the Asian markets had opened while, as we posted earlier in the week, some of the secondary level European firms (like Premierbet) have become insolvent or are teetering on the edge of insolvency. Even allegedly moralistic Betfair are feeling the pinch. The London based betting exchange should really have no excuse for an excessive increase in their commission on trades as they are merely matching betting positions from their clients. Of course, this is not actually the case and Betfair's traders are actively involved in their proprietary markets matching positions where they believe they possess an informational advantage. This worked fine when Betfair believed themselves to be at the cutting edge of the markets but works considerably less well when the informational advantage rests with the Asians. Hence, Betfair secrete away (on some minor webpage that nobody ever looks at) the news that they are increasing commission on asian handicap positions from 1% to 5%! Betfair's marketing justification for this outrageous hike in commission is that the 1% rate was a "promotional offer" despite the fact that this "offer" had existed since the company's founding in 1999...
Mansion88 have been major operators in the global betting markets this season both via the action of primary pricing but also by actively trading the markets in real time. Tottenham's opening match of the season at Sunderland witnessed one of the largest gambles on record and there was also very significant late money on Spurs beating Derby last weekend. The news flow related to Martin Jol's impending departure produced real value in backing Spurs and the major positions were landed within fifteen minutes of the game starting as Spurs raced into a 3-0 lead.
In this manner, spectacular society creates realities that are entirely fallacious and promotes such realities to the exclusion of all other news and/or information while, under the surface and away from prying eyes, the major global bookmakers continue to corrupt the game to oblivion.
Now, why don't we ever hear about that on Sky Television nor, indeed, in any other mainstream media?
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Wednesday, 22 August 2007
Richard Scudamore - Desperately Seeking Omerta
The Premier League chief executive, Richard Scudamore, in his increasingly desperate attempts to escape censure over his extensive mismanagement of our national game, continues to paint himself further into a corner from which there is no exit available that might allow his stature to be maintained and his career in football to continue.
We have highlighted in numerous previous posts the inappropriate roles undertaken by Scudamore with respect to the Quest inquiry into bungs in football, the West Ham United scandal, the fit and proper persons test for Premiership team ownership and the entirely invalid links being developed between the Premiership and the global football betting markets. So as not to cover old ground, these posts are detailed at the end of this article.
A couple of weeks back, Scudamore began making public statements which he hoped would draw a line under the rampant corruption which his stewardship has overseen. By implying that he had been a victim of highly improbable circumstance, he hoped to generate an atmosphere of sympathy before sliding out of public sight to get on with the real business behind the conversion of the sport into a gambling medium par excellence. But there are too many loose ends and his own belief in being entirely teflon results in a lack of security in his own personal portrayals of integrity.
This last week has demonstrated the non-sustainability of his position.
As we reported last week, Scudamore decided that it was valid to sit alongside Shinawatra for Man City's match against Derby County just 24 hours after an arrest warrant had been issued in Thailand for His Excellency and his wife over illegal land deals in Bangkok. This was not a bright move. By allying himself with the most inappropriate of characters in the English game at such a time and in such a manner, Scudamore was voluntarily placing the noose around his neck. We have itemised in detail Shinawatra's corruptions, betting market activities and human rights abuses over the last month but the most succinct description of His Excellency was made on Monday by one of our business contacts in the Thai capital. When asked about the view of the Thai people to Shinawatra, our contact informed us that the rural farmers of the north east of the country have been bribed into supporting Shinawatra but that the elite and the educated wished for nothing to do with him to the extent that they preferred to be run by the military until democracy is restored. Quoting our contact: "Thousands of people have simply disappeared. Nobody knows where they are or, indeed, if they are still alive. Shinawatra is a GANGSTER".
The second hiccup in Scudamore's strategic plan was that Sheffield United just won't let it lie. With adequate justification, the Yorkshire team are suing West Ham United over their relegation from the Premiership. This legal process will stretch into the New Year and will keep the illegal machinations of the Premier League and Scudamore very centrally in the public's gaze for much of the current season. West Ham understand that they do not have a judicial leg to stand on and Scudamore must be concerned that both his and the Premier League's refusal to impose the rules of the game on one of its member clubs will continue to produce column inches across the media. Even more disturbingly for Scudamore, Kia Joorabchian has teamed up with Sheffield United to provide inside information about this massive corruption. Significantly, Joorabchian has drawn to United's attention a document dated 1 December 2006, reputed to be an amendment to the player's original contract made after West Ham had been acquired by their new owners. Joorabchian is co-operating with Sheffield United because he is unhappy that the Premier League made him pay West Ham £2m before allowing Tevez's transfer to Manchester United and because he is thought to be under pressure from the financial backers of his MSI organisation. Taking each of these points in turn. The Premier League insisted on the £2 million payment in a desperate attempt to disguise the Tevez transfer to Manchester United as not being a deal based on a Third Party agreement. As we have posted previously, West Ham will get the two million quid while, eventually, Joorabchian's gang will receive upwards of £30 million which looks like a Third Party arrangement to me. The second point is indicative of the unethical natures of the individuals with whom Scudamore chooses to conduct his business. MSI are known to have or are rumoured to have links with a rum group of characters ranging from Joorabchian to Boris Berezovsky and from Pini Zahavi to Roman Abramovich. The battle between these characters and the characters within the Premier League hierarchy has been joined throughout the recent controversies relating to the bungs inquiry, the raiding of selected clubs by the City of London police, the battle for control of the global betting markets and, of course, the West Ham affair. There is an accepted wisdom that one can judge a character by the company he/she keeps and Scudamore's linkages with the MSI criminals and the Thai gangster are simply not compatible with his position at the summit of the Premier League.
The third problem facing Scudamore is that Joorabchian is willing to use his extensive knowledge of the corruption in the English game to bring the edifice tumbling down. At the weekend, Joorabchian offered to personally fund a new inquiry into the Tevez scandal as he searches for "honesty and transparency". Leaving aside the rather obvious point that Joorabchian claiming to show an interest in the moral high ground is undermined by a whole spectrum of incidences including the arrest warrant which exists in Brazil against him for money laundering, when a mafia man becomes a whistleblower the corruption that usually resides below the surface of spectacular society attention comes bubbling to the surface. Joorabchian's press release continued: "Let's have total transparency Mr Scudamore, we have nothing to hide. Why was a full, transparent and thorough investigation not done when your member clubs have a right to know what's happened? Why are they [the Premier League] clouding this issue? Why were the full facts not heard? Why were people not questioned? They never once asked us about any paperwork, never held discussions with us, never wrote us a letter. How did they decide on a £5.5million fine with only 50% of the facts."
In conclusion, we repeat our call for Scudamore to resign or to be sacked. Our legal people prevent us from going into details involving Scudamore, the Premier League, Shinawatra and the illegal underground Far East betting markets but, if readers undertake some joined-up thinking, you will not be too far from the reality that is structurally demolishing Premiership football as a competitive sport. Eventually, the full truth will out but, in the meantime, Scudamore and the Premier League are going to have to find £2 million (probably plus a little extra blackmail cash) to buy off Joorabchian and his Russian/Israeli mafiosi. These arrangements will necessarily take place behind closed doors as Scudamore and the Premier League desperately try to extricate themselves from the quicksand of their own mismanagement.
Gangsters, mafia, extra-judicial murders and disappearances, money laundering, arms dealers, betting markets liquid to over a quarter of a billion pounds, kickbacks, bungs, coercion, illegal transfers, corrupt referees, offshore financial centres, coups and the sight of His Excellency sitting alongside English football's boss...
Whatever happened to football?
Previous posts relating to Scudamore's mismanagement:
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/ol-blue-eyes-is-back.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/from-now-on-you-are-not-yourself.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/enter-fall-guys.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/david-and-arrys-pre-season-earner.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/richard-scudamore-for-jobseekers.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/when-is-3rd-party-agreement-not-3rd.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/biscuits-beer-betting-and-petard.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/shinawatra-sponsoring-premiership.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/stench-of-manchester-city.html
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
We have highlighted in numerous previous posts the inappropriate roles undertaken by Scudamore with respect to the Quest inquiry into bungs in football, the West Ham United scandal, the fit and proper persons test for Premiership team ownership and the entirely invalid links being developed between the Premiership and the global football betting markets. So as not to cover old ground, these posts are detailed at the end of this article.
A couple of weeks back, Scudamore began making public statements which he hoped would draw a line under the rampant corruption which his stewardship has overseen. By implying that he had been a victim of highly improbable circumstance, he hoped to generate an atmosphere of sympathy before sliding out of public sight to get on with the real business behind the conversion of the sport into a gambling medium par excellence. But there are too many loose ends and his own belief in being entirely teflon results in a lack of security in his own personal portrayals of integrity.
This last week has demonstrated the non-sustainability of his position.
As we reported last week, Scudamore decided that it was valid to sit alongside Shinawatra for Man City's match against Derby County just 24 hours after an arrest warrant had been issued in Thailand for His Excellency and his wife over illegal land deals in Bangkok. This was not a bright move. By allying himself with the most inappropriate of characters in the English game at such a time and in such a manner, Scudamore was voluntarily placing the noose around his neck. We have itemised in detail Shinawatra's corruptions, betting market activities and human rights abuses over the last month but the most succinct description of His Excellency was made on Monday by one of our business contacts in the Thai capital. When asked about the view of the Thai people to Shinawatra, our contact informed us that the rural farmers of the north east of the country have been bribed into supporting Shinawatra but that the elite and the educated wished for nothing to do with him to the extent that they preferred to be run by the military until democracy is restored. Quoting our contact: "Thousands of people have simply disappeared. Nobody knows where they are or, indeed, if they are still alive. Shinawatra is a GANGSTER".
The second hiccup in Scudamore's strategic plan was that Sheffield United just won't let it lie. With adequate justification, the Yorkshire team are suing West Ham United over their relegation from the Premiership. This legal process will stretch into the New Year and will keep the illegal machinations of the Premier League and Scudamore very centrally in the public's gaze for much of the current season. West Ham understand that they do not have a judicial leg to stand on and Scudamore must be concerned that both his and the Premier League's refusal to impose the rules of the game on one of its member clubs will continue to produce column inches across the media. Even more disturbingly for Scudamore, Kia Joorabchian has teamed up with Sheffield United to provide inside information about this massive corruption. Significantly, Joorabchian has drawn to United's attention a document dated 1 December 2006, reputed to be an amendment to the player's original contract made after West Ham had been acquired by their new owners. Joorabchian is co-operating with Sheffield United because he is unhappy that the Premier League made him pay West Ham £2m before allowing Tevez's transfer to Manchester United and because he is thought to be under pressure from the financial backers of his MSI organisation. Taking each of these points in turn. The Premier League insisted on the £2 million payment in a desperate attempt to disguise the Tevez transfer to Manchester United as not being a deal based on a Third Party agreement. As we have posted previously, West Ham will get the two million quid while, eventually, Joorabchian's gang will receive upwards of £30 million which looks like a Third Party arrangement to me. The second point is indicative of the unethical natures of the individuals with whom Scudamore chooses to conduct his business. MSI are known to have or are rumoured to have links with a rum group of characters ranging from Joorabchian to Boris Berezovsky and from Pini Zahavi to Roman Abramovich. The battle between these characters and the characters within the Premier League hierarchy has been joined throughout the recent controversies relating to the bungs inquiry, the raiding of selected clubs by the City of London police, the battle for control of the global betting markets and, of course, the West Ham affair. There is an accepted wisdom that one can judge a character by the company he/she keeps and Scudamore's linkages with the MSI criminals and the Thai gangster are simply not compatible with his position at the summit of the Premier League.
The third problem facing Scudamore is that Joorabchian is willing to use his extensive knowledge of the corruption in the English game to bring the edifice tumbling down. At the weekend, Joorabchian offered to personally fund a new inquiry into the Tevez scandal as he searches for "honesty and transparency". Leaving aside the rather obvious point that Joorabchian claiming to show an interest in the moral high ground is undermined by a whole spectrum of incidences including the arrest warrant which exists in Brazil against him for money laundering, when a mafia man becomes a whistleblower the corruption that usually resides below the surface of spectacular society attention comes bubbling to the surface. Joorabchian's press release continued: "Let's have total transparency Mr Scudamore, we have nothing to hide. Why was a full, transparent and thorough investigation not done when your member clubs have a right to know what's happened? Why are they [the Premier League] clouding this issue? Why were the full facts not heard? Why were people not questioned? They never once asked us about any paperwork, never held discussions with us, never wrote us a letter. How did they decide on a £5.5million fine with only 50% of the facts."
In conclusion, we repeat our call for Scudamore to resign or to be sacked. Our legal people prevent us from going into details involving Scudamore, the Premier League, Shinawatra and the illegal underground Far East betting markets but, if readers undertake some joined-up thinking, you will not be too far from the reality that is structurally demolishing Premiership football as a competitive sport. Eventually, the full truth will out but, in the meantime, Scudamore and the Premier League are going to have to find £2 million (probably plus a little extra blackmail cash) to buy off Joorabchian and his Russian/Israeli mafiosi. These arrangements will necessarily take place behind closed doors as Scudamore and the Premier League desperately try to extricate themselves from the quicksand of their own mismanagement.
Gangsters, mafia, extra-judicial murders and disappearances, money laundering, arms dealers, betting markets liquid to over a quarter of a billion pounds, kickbacks, bungs, coercion, illegal transfers, corrupt referees, offshore financial centres, coups and the sight of His Excellency sitting alongside English football's boss...
Whatever happened to football?
Previous posts relating to Scudamore's mismanagement:
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/ol-blue-eyes-is-back.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/from-now-on-you-are-not-yourself.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/enter-fall-guys.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/david-and-arrys-pre-season-earner.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/07/richard-scudamore-for-jobseekers.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/when-is-3rd-party-agreement-not-3rd.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/biscuits-beer-betting-and-petard.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/shinawatra-sponsoring-premiership.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/08/stench-of-manchester-city.html
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Tuesday, 21 August 2007
There Is Sweetness In Revenge
Leisure punters should be aware that leading London-based bookmaker Premierbet is no longer in business and, although visitors to their website are being told that the site is "unavailable for essential maintenance work", the truth is that the company is not available for the essential payment of its debt obligations to clients.
Football Is Fixed have warned readers about this company previously (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/bettor-beware.html) and it is no surprise to our Trading Team that this highly unprofessional operation has entered oblivion.
Premierbet's parent company is Interactive Gaming Holdings plc (IGH) who are listed on the AIM in London. The company stock was suspended on August 17th and yet the bookmaker continued accepting bets over last weekend in the full knowledge that any trades enacted and any monies deposited were to disappear into the black hole of IGH's illiquid bank accounts. IGH were seeking interim funding from General Capital Venture Finance Limited but the venture people pulled the plug on August 15th and, despite company claims, there is no other saviour waiting in the wings.
Premierbet were previously in financial uproar in 2005 when IGH bought it for a nominal fee after the bookmaker had been mismanaged for years by self-styled industry mogul, Tony Bloom (see below for our assessment of Bloom). From day one, there was no coordinated decision on whether the new operation was going to trade at the cutting edge of the gambling sector by offering accounts to winning professional traders or whether the concern was merely going to cream slices of profit off the leisure betting punter. By gyrating between these two options, Premierbet ended up offering inappropriate levels of service to both pros and amateurs. Furthermore, the company was heavily dependent on accepting bets illegally from American clients and, when the Bush administration started arresting British executives for such behaviour, Premierbet's profits and shareprice plummeted. The industry giants always disliked Bloom's operations and continued to target Premierbet after his loss of the company with the result that Premierbet repeatedly developed highly imbalanced trading books on events with the inevitable ensuing losses. Now lets make this clear, the system is so tilted in favour of bookmaking operations that only incompetence of the highest degree may explain an inability to retain market presence and Premierbet were astounding in their degree of unprofessionalism. This culture dated back to Bloom's megalomaniacal style when in charge of the company and, as all buyout merchants understand, a company culture is the most difficult aspect to adjust after takeover.
In a competitive capitalist system, companies obviously must suffer the consequences of a lack of financial rigour but it is only the gambling sector and the illegal black and grey market sectors that provide no comeback for customers who are financially compromised by bankruptcy. There will be no assessment of creditors losses or needs and the directors of this shoddy operation will be able to walk away prior to reinventing themselves in some other form to be able to fleece the uninformed all over again. This is something that Britain's new Gambling Act ostentatiously fails to address - gambling winnings and banked money are not recoverable under law. The upshot of this tawdry state of affairs is that the sector will continue to attract the most abusive type of business charlatan.
The word charlatan rather neatly brings us onto the operator that is Anthony Grant Bloom. Bloom is a criminal although this is not an entirely unbiased opinion as he still owes monies to several members of the Dietrological team. Bloom established himself as a broker who illegally accepted bets for the underground Asian betting markets in the mid-nineties. Through the links that he established in Thailand and Singapore while working with Gibraltar-based Victor Chandler International bookmakers, he provided professionals with access to the Far East markets while treating such a role as the creative buying of information. Bloom has built up considerable assets from this entirely illegal operation and no taxes were ever paid on these illicit earnings. Bloom continued offering consultancy services to Premierbet after the takeover by IGH and there is a certain air of jollity around our trading room this morning that the Lizard has finally got his comeuppance. The Lizard is Bloom's poker playing nickname (he plays professionally) and, as a final act of revenge, we would like to take this opportunity to undermine his effectiveness in this area of his slimy existence. On two occasions, Bloom reached the final of the Ladbrokes Million poker tournament. On the latter occasion, he was virtually assured of victory if he merely played the probabilities but his addiction to flair resulted in him blowing the opportunity by a ridiculous bluff. The first time that he reached the final was more revealing however. All people have a tick. This involuntary bodily response to lying is utilised in negotiations, interviews, by the police and by poker players. Bloom's tick is a tremor at the corner of his eye which reveals itself whenever he is taking the piss at the poker table. All poker professionals should share and use this information so that Bloom's criminal gains are slowly but repeatedly removed from his grubby grasp in the years ahead.
Wow! That's better!!
Finally, we would advise all leisure traders to frequently check Sportsbook Review (SBR) (http://www.sportsbookreview.com/). This website focuses on the corrupt bookmakers in the global betting markets and warns readers of crises before such crises impact upon the bank accounts of the gambler. Premierbet were on SBR's Black List for a considerable period before the issue of bankruptcy came to light and one angry punter writes "I can't understand how they are allowed to go on trading. My account is still open, and I have £1500 credit still showing. Can you advise me on anything I can do? They are ignoring my emails,and phone calls are directed to a London number which is constantly on answer machine."
IGH and Premierbet claimed to provide customers "with a complete gaming experience offering seamless integration between traditional sports betting and its casino products."
What it actually offered was primary level corruption.
Update: Premierbet has just returned online on Wednesday August 21st at 15:00 GMT but there are no prices available for current events. At IGH, Mitchell Petchenik and Robert Spriddell have both resigned, as executive vice president and non-executive director respectively, with immediate effect. Additionally, Arbuthnot Securities Limited have resigned as the company's nominated adviser and broker with immediate effect. Do not deposit any monies with this bunch of cowboys.
Update #2: It is no surprise that Premierbet is once again offline on Thursday am. RIP.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Football Is Fixed have warned readers about this company previously (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/bettor-beware.html) and it is no surprise to our Trading Team that this highly unprofessional operation has entered oblivion.
Premierbet's parent company is Interactive Gaming Holdings plc (IGH) who are listed on the AIM in London. The company stock was suspended on August 17th and yet the bookmaker continued accepting bets over last weekend in the full knowledge that any trades enacted and any monies deposited were to disappear into the black hole of IGH's illiquid bank accounts. IGH were seeking interim funding from General Capital Venture Finance Limited but the venture people pulled the plug on August 15th and, despite company claims, there is no other saviour waiting in the wings.
Premierbet were previously in financial uproar in 2005 when IGH bought it for a nominal fee after the bookmaker had been mismanaged for years by self-styled industry mogul, Tony Bloom (see below for our assessment of Bloom). From day one, there was no coordinated decision on whether the new operation was going to trade at the cutting edge of the gambling sector by offering accounts to winning professional traders or whether the concern was merely going to cream slices of profit off the leisure betting punter. By gyrating between these two options, Premierbet ended up offering inappropriate levels of service to both pros and amateurs. Furthermore, the company was heavily dependent on accepting bets illegally from American clients and, when the Bush administration started arresting British executives for such behaviour, Premierbet's profits and shareprice plummeted. The industry giants always disliked Bloom's operations and continued to target Premierbet after his loss of the company with the result that Premierbet repeatedly developed highly imbalanced trading books on events with the inevitable ensuing losses. Now lets make this clear, the system is so tilted in favour of bookmaking operations that only incompetence of the highest degree may explain an inability to retain market presence and Premierbet were astounding in their degree of unprofessionalism. This culture dated back to Bloom's megalomaniacal style when in charge of the company and, as all buyout merchants understand, a company culture is the most difficult aspect to adjust after takeover.
In a competitive capitalist system, companies obviously must suffer the consequences of a lack of financial rigour but it is only the gambling sector and the illegal black and grey market sectors that provide no comeback for customers who are financially compromised by bankruptcy. There will be no assessment of creditors losses or needs and the directors of this shoddy operation will be able to walk away prior to reinventing themselves in some other form to be able to fleece the uninformed all over again. This is something that Britain's new Gambling Act ostentatiously fails to address - gambling winnings and banked money are not recoverable under law. The upshot of this tawdry state of affairs is that the sector will continue to attract the most abusive type of business charlatan.
The word charlatan rather neatly brings us onto the operator that is Anthony Grant Bloom. Bloom is a criminal although this is not an entirely unbiased opinion as he still owes monies to several members of the Dietrological team. Bloom established himself as a broker who illegally accepted bets for the underground Asian betting markets in the mid-nineties. Through the links that he established in Thailand and Singapore while working with Gibraltar-based Victor Chandler International bookmakers, he provided professionals with access to the Far East markets while treating such a role as the creative buying of information. Bloom has built up considerable assets from this entirely illegal operation and no taxes were ever paid on these illicit earnings. Bloom continued offering consultancy services to Premierbet after the takeover by IGH and there is a certain air of jollity around our trading room this morning that the Lizard has finally got his comeuppance. The Lizard is Bloom's poker playing nickname (he plays professionally) and, as a final act of revenge, we would like to take this opportunity to undermine his effectiveness in this area of his slimy existence. On two occasions, Bloom reached the final of the Ladbrokes Million poker tournament. On the latter occasion, he was virtually assured of victory if he merely played the probabilities but his addiction to flair resulted in him blowing the opportunity by a ridiculous bluff. The first time that he reached the final was more revealing however. All people have a tick. This involuntary bodily response to lying is utilised in negotiations, interviews, by the police and by poker players. Bloom's tick is a tremor at the corner of his eye which reveals itself whenever he is taking the piss at the poker table. All poker professionals should share and use this information so that Bloom's criminal gains are slowly but repeatedly removed from his grubby grasp in the years ahead.
Wow! That's better!!
Finally, we would advise all leisure traders to frequently check Sportsbook Review (SBR) (http://www.sportsbookreview.com/). This website focuses on the corrupt bookmakers in the global betting markets and warns readers of crises before such crises impact upon the bank accounts of the gambler. Premierbet were on SBR's Black List for a considerable period before the issue of bankruptcy came to light and one angry punter writes "I can't understand how they are allowed to go on trading. My account is still open, and I have £1500 credit still showing. Can you advise me on anything I can do? They are ignoring my emails,and phone calls are directed to a London number which is constantly on answer machine."
IGH and Premierbet claimed to provide customers "with a complete gaming experience offering seamless integration between traditional sports betting and its casino products."
What it actually offered was primary level corruption.
Update: Premierbet has just returned online on Wednesday August 21st at 15:00 GMT but there are no prices available for current events. At IGH, Mitchell Petchenik and Robert Spriddell have both resigned, as executive vice president and non-executive director respectively, with immediate effect. Additionally, Arbuthnot Securities Limited have resigned as the company's nominated adviser and broker with immediate effect. Do not deposit any monies with this bunch of cowboys.
Update #2: It is no surprise that Premierbet is once again offline on Thursday am. RIP.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Monday, 20 August 2007
Bastards In The Black
Twenty one. That was the number of influential match outcome altering decisions perpetrated by the Professional Game Match Official Board (PGMOB) referees in the weekend's Premiership football matches.
Football market analysts have come to expect an extra degree of manipulation in the big betting windows but Saturday and Sunday's games were particularly hard hit by the input of Keith Hackett's match controllers. Only the Newcastle versus Villa game avoided controversy.
The most focus has undoubtedly been on Rob Styles and his Poll-esque pantomime performance in Sky Super Sunday's Liverpool against Chelsea game. Throughout the first half Styles heavily favoured Liverpool booking Essien for his first challenge while letting Alonso off repeated indiscretions etc etc. At the conclusion of the half, he pulled back a highly promising Chelsea attack to allow treatment for an allegedly stricken Fernando Torres prior to blowing the whistle before any meaningful restart. Any traders who made the judgement that Styles would continue in this vein in the second period were to be disappointed as the man lost the plot completely. The Chelsea penalty was laughable and the non-sending off of Essien despite a second yellow card brought back memories of Poll and Croatia and Australia. The first of the big encounters was consequently ruined and devalued and, towards the end of the game, the two teams were merely going through the motions of competitiveness as it is difficult to play when the rules of the game become a lottery. It is interesting to note that, at £60 million ($120 million), the global betting turnover on this encounter was merely one-third of the turnover on the equivalent match last season which is indicative of a reluctance by professional punters to get involved in a highly manipulated marketplace.
Football Is Fixed analyses the PGMOB referees very closely both as part of our proprietary trading and for the Bum Ref Index which assesses the negative impact the referees have on match outcome. Last season's best performing official was Mark Clattenburg and his selection for the Manchester derby produced a proper piece of giant-killing with only a slightly dubious penalty decision against United's interests to note. Shinawatra's inappropriate closeness to Richard Scudamore (the Premier League CEO) will yield advantages throughout the season and Ronaldo's absence was just the first of many manipulations that should be expected in favour of the Sky Blues. The bookmakers were hammered globally in a massive turnover event (over £300 million for the second time this season on a Man Utd game) as Shinawatra gained kudos from the City fans, profit from his underground betting activities and political status in the voting in Thailand's referendum on a new constitution in which he lost by 58% to 40% - a closer result than had been expected.
The weirdest game of the weekend was at Wigan where Mike Riley gave the home team two penalties having denied them four more in the first half as Sunderland did their utmost to lose the match. Keane's team are very closely linked to Irish bookmaking interests and all three of their matches to date have been serious betting events. There was a huge global gamble on the Mackems for their victory over Spurs and the self-destruction at the weekend was also probably influenced by the Asian markets. All traders should closely monitor the betting patterns on future Sunderland events as aligning with insiders is a solid route to profit.
The Fulham versus Boro game was memorable for the major gamble on the home team which was undermined by a creative piece of refereeing change just seven minutes into the game when Lee Mason departed with a hammed-up pseudo-limp allowing Andy D'Urso (who is not even a PGMOB elite official) to incorrectly disallow Fulham's late equaliser which was fully two feet over the goalline.
Elsewhere, there were two handballs in the penalty area at Reading, neither of which was seen by the incompetent Steve Bennett and two penalties for West Ham at Birmingham although one wasn't given. It is interesting to note that the only team who enjoyed an advantage of a free midweek over their opponents were the Hammers - Birmingham's opening two games against Chelsea and Sunderland putting them at a distinct disadvantage as manipulations, both obvious and not-so-obvious, continue to flow for the dodgy East Londoners. Why Steve Tanner disallowed Kanu's header is a mystery while Alan Wiley failed to prevent the gamble on Blackburn/Draw being landed, despite the dismissal of Blackburn's captain Nelson, thanks to Lehmann's comedy keeping.
Throughout last week, the mainstream media were ranting about the impending sacking of Martin Jol. Apparently, Jol had been summoned by Daniel Levy (the Spurs supremo) to explain the team's poor start and, on Friday, Sky News were informing us that "a leading bookmaker" (unnamed, of course) had closed their market on Jol being the first managerial sacking of the new season. Our contacts at the club inform us that the alleged meeting never took place and it is also interesting to note that, on Saturday morning, the managerial sack markets had Sammy Lee at 9/4, Jol at 11/4 and Hutchings at 11/2 which is hardly evidence of a certainty - if Jol had been on his way out, a market price of 1/6 should have been expected. Of course, the reasons behind this media manipulation were to reduce the bookmakers exposure to the inevitable Tottenham victory on Saturday where three goals in the opening quarter of an hour led to the late insider gamble being landed.
Out of the twenty seven games to date in the new Premiership season, Dietrological Gold/Silver clients have been given sixteen advices (every single one of which has been a winning position) while Dietrological Bronze clients have been provided with a 10 out of 12 return (plus three Champions League Qualifier winners). Before English football reached the current levels of massive corruption, achieving a 100% return on 16 events was nigh impossible as early phase markets produce merely a probability of profit. The advantage to our Trading Team of the degree of manipulation now being foisted onto the English game is inversely correlated with the authenticity of the sport as a competitive game.
The more corrupt the market, the more certain an analyst's profits. On one level, our selfishness leads us to be properly grateful to the Premier League and the PGMOB for their corrupt machinations yet, on another level, the corruption produces a sadness around the trading room as we see our once great game become the equivalent of greyhound racing.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Football market analysts have come to expect an extra degree of manipulation in the big betting windows but Saturday and Sunday's games were particularly hard hit by the input of Keith Hackett's match controllers. Only the Newcastle versus Villa game avoided controversy.
The most focus has undoubtedly been on Rob Styles and his Poll-esque pantomime performance in Sky Super Sunday's Liverpool against Chelsea game. Throughout the first half Styles heavily favoured Liverpool booking Essien for his first challenge while letting Alonso off repeated indiscretions etc etc. At the conclusion of the half, he pulled back a highly promising Chelsea attack to allow treatment for an allegedly stricken Fernando Torres prior to blowing the whistle before any meaningful restart. Any traders who made the judgement that Styles would continue in this vein in the second period were to be disappointed as the man lost the plot completely. The Chelsea penalty was laughable and the non-sending off of Essien despite a second yellow card brought back memories of Poll and Croatia and Australia. The first of the big encounters was consequently ruined and devalued and, towards the end of the game, the two teams were merely going through the motions of competitiveness as it is difficult to play when the rules of the game become a lottery. It is interesting to note that, at £60 million ($120 million), the global betting turnover on this encounter was merely one-third of the turnover on the equivalent match last season which is indicative of a reluctance by professional punters to get involved in a highly manipulated marketplace.
Football Is Fixed analyses the PGMOB referees very closely both as part of our proprietary trading and for the Bum Ref Index which assesses the negative impact the referees have on match outcome. Last season's best performing official was Mark Clattenburg and his selection for the Manchester derby produced a proper piece of giant-killing with only a slightly dubious penalty decision against United's interests to note. Shinawatra's inappropriate closeness to Richard Scudamore (the Premier League CEO) will yield advantages throughout the season and Ronaldo's absence was just the first of many manipulations that should be expected in favour of the Sky Blues. The bookmakers were hammered globally in a massive turnover event (over £300 million for the second time this season on a Man Utd game) as Shinawatra gained kudos from the City fans, profit from his underground betting activities and political status in the voting in Thailand's referendum on a new constitution in which he lost by 58% to 40% - a closer result than had been expected.
The weirdest game of the weekend was at Wigan where Mike Riley gave the home team two penalties having denied them four more in the first half as Sunderland did their utmost to lose the match. Keane's team are very closely linked to Irish bookmaking interests and all three of their matches to date have been serious betting events. There was a huge global gamble on the Mackems for their victory over Spurs and the self-destruction at the weekend was also probably influenced by the Asian markets. All traders should closely monitor the betting patterns on future Sunderland events as aligning with insiders is a solid route to profit.
The Fulham versus Boro game was memorable for the major gamble on the home team which was undermined by a creative piece of refereeing change just seven minutes into the game when Lee Mason departed with a hammed-up pseudo-limp allowing Andy D'Urso (who is not even a PGMOB elite official) to incorrectly disallow Fulham's late equaliser which was fully two feet over the goalline.
Elsewhere, there were two handballs in the penalty area at Reading, neither of which was seen by the incompetent Steve Bennett and two penalties for West Ham at Birmingham although one wasn't given. It is interesting to note that the only team who enjoyed an advantage of a free midweek over their opponents were the Hammers - Birmingham's opening two games against Chelsea and Sunderland putting them at a distinct disadvantage as manipulations, both obvious and not-so-obvious, continue to flow for the dodgy East Londoners. Why Steve Tanner disallowed Kanu's header is a mystery while Alan Wiley failed to prevent the gamble on Blackburn/Draw being landed, despite the dismissal of Blackburn's captain Nelson, thanks to Lehmann's comedy keeping.
Throughout last week, the mainstream media were ranting about the impending sacking of Martin Jol. Apparently, Jol had been summoned by Daniel Levy (the Spurs supremo) to explain the team's poor start and, on Friday, Sky News were informing us that "a leading bookmaker" (unnamed, of course) had closed their market on Jol being the first managerial sacking of the new season. Our contacts at the club inform us that the alleged meeting never took place and it is also interesting to note that, on Saturday morning, the managerial sack markets had Sammy Lee at 9/4, Jol at 11/4 and Hutchings at 11/2 which is hardly evidence of a certainty - if Jol had been on his way out, a market price of 1/6 should have been expected. Of course, the reasons behind this media manipulation were to reduce the bookmakers exposure to the inevitable Tottenham victory on Saturday where three goals in the opening quarter of an hour led to the late insider gamble being landed.
Out of the twenty seven games to date in the new Premiership season, Dietrological Gold/Silver clients have been given sixteen advices (every single one of which has been a winning position) while Dietrological Bronze clients have been provided with a 10 out of 12 return (plus three Champions League Qualifier winners). Before English football reached the current levels of massive corruption, achieving a 100% return on 16 events was nigh impossible as early phase markets produce merely a probability of profit. The advantage to our Trading Team of the degree of manipulation now being foisted onto the English game is inversely correlated with the authenticity of the sport as a competitive game.
The more corrupt the market, the more certain an analyst's profits. On one level, our selfishness leads us to be properly grateful to the Premier League and the PGMOB for their corrupt machinations yet, on another level, the corruption produces a sadness around the trading room as we see our once great game become the equivalent of greyhound racing.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Saturday, 18 August 2007
Why Insurance Is Exactly The Same As Bookmaking
At a first glance, there might not appear to be much in common between the bookmaking and insurance industries. Think again. The two sectors are virtually identical.
The basic foundation of the business models for bookmakers and insurers involves the accurate analysis of risk assessment and management. These market makers have an aversion to risk and create strategies whereby any exposure is diversified and/or hedged away from the risk profile of the company. This may be achieved in a range of ways.
All insurance companies rely on the reinsurance sub-sector. These industry giants charge the smaller operators for effectively offering an enhancement of the risk profiles of the small operators. Lloyds of London, Swiss Re, Berkshire Hathaway etc will then trade these probabilities between themselves as financial risk is shunted around the global insurance sector. The resulting structure is opaque, to say the least, as risk is converted into a tradeable asset. As the international financial markets are discovering in the current credit squeeze, in a time of crisis nobody can be sure where the real exposure to risk lies. This, as The Economist states "has shown weaknesses in some of the foundations of modern finance". Mathematical models involving algorithmic and neural network black box techniques are fine at spotting patterns in times of market calm but any new systemic infrastructures render such modelling worse than useless - Goldman Sachs were financially compromised last week via a market occurrence that their proprietary analysis told them should happen once every 100,000 years!
Bookmakers behave similarly. Whether the template is Ladbrokes returning their off-course liabilities to the rails and betting rings of British horseracing courses or Ladbrokes behaving similarly in the illegal Far East football betting markets, the prime aim of market makers is to hedge any risk that they do not wish to keep on their trading books. The European bookmakers also trade directly between themselves in private markets which serve the purposes of risk removal and informational and/or disinformational proprietary strategies. This is high stakes manipulated poker relating to the outcome of sports events.
The major infrastructural difference between these two industry sectors merely relates to the expansiveness of the area covered by their operations. The big picture to be analysed by an insurer is global whereas the bookmakers are dealing with an enclosed system. This is a major dichotomy and, yet, the two sectors move back towards equivalence by their respective responses.
Every effort is made by both the insurance and the bookmaking industries to tilt the playing field markedly in their favour. Insurers utilise such strategies as regulatory capture, abusive clause creation and arbitrary charges and loss adjustments to remove value from the consumer to the favour of the company. Such tactics are omnipresent in any insurance policy whether personal or business and, in our estimation, undermine any logic in getting insured in the first place as the market is priced significantly against a clients interests when viewed holistically.
The closed system of football is even more manipulated. Football bookmakers employ all the same tactics as the insurance sector and then some. The traditional bookies use the overround percentage to tilt the market in their favour before layering their more corrupt trading strategies on top. To the uninitiated, the degree of overround is a built-in bias in the marketplace. For example, for tomorrow's Manchester derby match, Ladbrokes are offering prices of City 7/2, United 8/11 and the Draw 21/10 which represent actual probabilities of approximately 22%, 58% and 32% which results in a book overround of 112%. Based on a 100% book, these prices should be 4/1, 10/11 and 13/5. So, if the Reds were to win, a £1000 bet would return £727 as opposed to £909 without any market tilt. But this machination is only the start of it.
The bookmakers control the outcome of football matches through the coercion of insiders. Players, referees and/or management work together with the bookies to ensure an outcome suitable to the bookmakers bottom line. When a match is under the direct control of any particular bookmaker, there is no need for the manipulating bookie to hedge or offset any liabilities as the match outcome is known prior to the event taking place. Consequently, incredibly skewed books are established for these corrupted events as the market makers happily take any amount of money on outcomes that they KNOW will not occur. The difference between this type of event and a truly competitive event is obvious as, in the latter case, a bookmaker will be seeking to merely achieve a balanced book to avoid exposure to a future reality outside of their proprietary influence. This market strategy is evident to all professional gamblers by the response of the bookies to positions traded in the marketplace. Beneficial prices are offered by the layers on positions that are guaranteed losers while price scalping occurs in all other scenarios.
The bookmakers are always on the lookout for valuable inside information which might solve a particular football match outcome. By offering preferential trading conditions to industry insiders and professional market analysts and brokers, a bookmaker is able to develop a market strategy that increases profits by the buying of information. In this manner, the betting markets are highly regressive with those least able to accommodate losses being charged the most for the trading experience. Not content with this collection of highly abusive business templates, the bookmaking sector has a further pair of aces up its collective sleeve. Firstly, gambling winnings are not enforceable under law and, consequently, all professional traders must build in to their trading strategies the unpleasant reality that the final payment from a bookmaker will not be made. Secondly, once it is apparent to the industry that you are a winning client, there are very few bookmakers who will accommodate your trading positions. In the same manner that casinos bar card-counting blackjack players, Ladbrokes and their like will inform you that "it is not in our economic interests to continue to offer you trading facilities."
As the systemic risks in the global insurance industry become more unpredictable due, in particular, to issues related to climate change, a similarly abusive infrastructural attitude is developing. The breakpoint for this new attitude in insurance was 9/11. The insurance industry haggled, bartered and battled for several years arguing that the demolition of the Twin Towers was one event rather than two separate events. This unethical posturing was profit-motivated and this strategy has now been fine-tuned and, in a direct equivalence with bookmakers, the insurers will now not take on certain types of risk. Following Hurricane Katrina, American insurance companies either refused to insure in hurricane zones or made the cost of such insurance prohibitively expensive. The parallels between insurance, bookmakers and casinos is startlingly similar.
A further intriguing area to focus on is the psychology of risk. Gambling is an addiction that incorporates a whole spectrum of personality attributes and disorders. For example, magical thinking enforces all players of the National Lottery to go to ridiculous lengths to ensure that they purchase their tickets each week as the FEAR that their numbers might come up in the very week where they choose to do something else with their money is colossal. And irrational... Similarly, the insurance industry thrives on fear. The likelihood of being burgled in England has significantly fallen over the last decade which is not a piece of good news that one finds trumpeted throughout the media. The insurers wish for us to remain terrified of burglary, mugging, theft, loss of belongings while travelling etc to an extent massively beyond the real probability of such an occurrence actually coming to fruition. Even better still, from the perspective of the insurance industry, is regulatory capture which enforces insurance on the population whether they desire such cover or not. Health insurance in America is a particularly hot potato at the moment while compulsory car insurance in England is another prime example of regulatory capture.
The marketing of insurance and gambling products show similar equivalence of strategy. William Hill's homepage is currently offering four introductory offers. These offers are very revealing as to where the bookmaker wishes you to place your bets. £50 ($100) bonuses are offered for opening sports betting or casino accounts and £20 for bingo. But, for the highly corrupt poker platforms offered online, Willie Hill's offer a $500 introductory bonus. As we have stated before, it is beyond our comprehension why any individual would trust the efficacy of an online poker game where the cards, the table, the other players and the reality of the game are so opaque and open to rampant manipulation that the format is a magnet for the criminalised businessperson. Similarly with insurance where, for example, it is almost impossible to buy any object with a plug on it or to make any travel booking without some slimy agent informing us of the risks related to the purchase.
So, how should the person on the street deal with these corrupt edifices? With gambling, the solution is simple. Unless you are a professional analyst or have access to privileged inside information, forget it. You are a patsy and you will lose your hard-earned cash. With regard to insurance, the basic strategy should be similar. Apart from areas of compulsory insurance, do the mathematics and determine the value (or, more often, the lack of it) in insuring yourself against a particular risk. If it appears that the insurance company has mispriced the risk then, by all means, seek cover but one should remember that the insurers have highly developed business models and the likelihood of mispricing is minimal.
Personally, I possess no insurance whatsoever anywhere. I minimise my risks by creative work/life balancing and have developed a type of individual amortisation account to provide a safety net against potential future occurrences that are outside my control. Similarly, I never hedge any trading positions unless I am certain that my market exposure has become incorrect due to externalities.
I refuse to pay others for the maintenance of an adequate risk profile and I would advise everybody to behave similarly. We do not need any external cover.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
The basic foundation of the business models for bookmakers and insurers involves the accurate analysis of risk assessment and management. These market makers have an aversion to risk and create strategies whereby any exposure is diversified and/or hedged away from the risk profile of the company. This may be achieved in a range of ways.
All insurance companies rely on the reinsurance sub-sector. These industry giants charge the smaller operators for effectively offering an enhancement of the risk profiles of the small operators. Lloyds of London, Swiss Re, Berkshire Hathaway etc will then trade these probabilities between themselves as financial risk is shunted around the global insurance sector. The resulting structure is opaque, to say the least, as risk is converted into a tradeable asset. As the international financial markets are discovering in the current credit squeeze, in a time of crisis nobody can be sure where the real exposure to risk lies. This, as The Economist states "has shown weaknesses in some of the foundations of modern finance". Mathematical models involving algorithmic and neural network black box techniques are fine at spotting patterns in times of market calm but any new systemic infrastructures render such modelling worse than useless - Goldman Sachs were financially compromised last week via a market occurrence that their proprietary analysis told them should happen once every 100,000 years!
Bookmakers behave similarly. Whether the template is Ladbrokes returning their off-course liabilities to the rails and betting rings of British horseracing courses or Ladbrokes behaving similarly in the illegal Far East football betting markets, the prime aim of market makers is to hedge any risk that they do not wish to keep on their trading books. The European bookmakers also trade directly between themselves in private markets which serve the purposes of risk removal and informational and/or disinformational proprietary strategies. This is high stakes manipulated poker relating to the outcome of sports events.
The major infrastructural difference between these two industry sectors merely relates to the expansiveness of the area covered by their operations. The big picture to be analysed by an insurer is global whereas the bookmakers are dealing with an enclosed system. This is a major dichotomy and, yet, the two sectors move back towards equivalence by their respective responses.
Every effort is made by both the insurance and the bookmaking industries to tilt the playing field markedly in their favour. Insurers utilise such strategies as regulatory capture, abusive clause creation and arbitrary charges and loss adjustments to remove value from the consumer to the favour of the company. Such tactics are omnipresent in any insurance policy whether personal or business and, in our estimation, undermine any logic in getting insured in the first place as the market is priced significantly against a clients interests when viewed holistically.
The closed system of football is even more manipulated. Football bookmakers employ all the same tactics as the insurance sector and then some. The traditional bookies use the overround percentage to tilt the market in their favour before layering their more corrupt trading strategies on top. To the uninitiated, the degree of overround is a built-in bias in the marketplace. For example, for tomorrow's Manchester derby match, Ladbrokes are offering prices of City 7/2, United 8/11 and the Draw 21/10 which represent actual probabilities of approximately 22%, 58% and 32% which results in a book overround of 112%. Based on a 100% book, these prices should be 4/1, 10/11 and 13/5. So, if the Reds were to win, a £1000 bet would return £727 as opposed to £909 without any market tilt. But this machination is only the start of it.
The bookmakers control the outcome of football matches through the coercion of insiders. Players, referees and/or management work together with the bookies to ensure an outcome suitable to the bookmakers bottom line. When a match is under the direct control of any particular bookmaker, there is no need for the manipulating bookie to hedge or offset any liabilities as the match outcome is known prior to the event taking place. Consequently, incredibly skewed books are established for these corrupted events as the market makers happily take any amount of money on outcomes that they KNOW will not occur. The difference between this type of event and a truly competitive event is obvious as, in the latter case, a bookmaker will be seeking to merely achieve a balanced book to avoid exposure to a future reality outside of their proprietary influence. This market strategy is evident to all professional gamblers by the response of the bookies to positions traded in the marketplace. Beneficial prices are offered by the layers on positions that are guaranteed losers while price scalping occurs in all other scenarios.
The bookmakers are always on the lookout for valuable inside information which might solve a particular football match outcome. By offering preferential trading conditions to industry insiders and professional market analysts and brokers, a bookmaker is able to develop a market strategy that increases profits by the buying of information. In this manner, the betting markets are highly regressive with those least able to accommodate losses being charged the most for the trading experience. Not content with this collection of highly abusive business templates, the bookmaking sector has a further pair of aces up its collective sleeve. Firstly, gambling winnings are not enforceable under law and, consequently, all professional traders must build in to their trading strategies the unpleasant reality that the final payment from a bookmaker will not be made. Secondly, once it is apparent to the industry that you are a winning client, there are very few bookmakers who will accommodate your trading positions. In the same manner that casinos bar card-counting blackjack players, Ladbrokes and their like will inform you that "it is not in our economic interests to continue to offer you trading facilities."
As the systemic risks in the global insurance industry become more unpredictable due, in particular, to issues related to climate change, a similarly abusive infrastructural attitude is developing. The breakpoint for this new attitude in insurance was 9/11. The insurance industry haggled, bartered and battled for several years arguing that the demolition of the Twin Towers was one event rather than two separate events. This unethical posturing was profit-motivated and this strategy has now been fine-tuned and, in a direct equivalence with bookmakers, the insurers will now not take on certain types of risk. Following Hurricane Katrina, American insurance companies either refused to insure in hurricane zones or made the cost of such insurance prohibitively expensive. The parallels between insurance, bookmakers and casinos is startlingly similar.
A further intriguing area to focus on is the psychology of risk. Gambling is an addiction that incorporates a whole spectrum of personality attributes and disorders. For example, magical thinking enforces all players of the National Lottery to go to ridiculous lengths to ensure that they purchase their tickets each week as the FEAR that their numbers might come up in the very week where they choose to do something else with their money is colossal. And irrational... Similarly, the insurance industry thrives on fear. The likelihood of being burgled in England has significantly fallen over the last decade which is not a piece of good news that one finds trumpeted throughout the media. The insurers wish for us to remain terrified of burglary, mugging, theft, loss of belongings while travelling etc to an extent massively beyond the real probability of such an occurrence actually coming to fruition. Even better still, from the perspective of the insurance industry, is regulatory capture which enforces insurance on the population whether they desire such cover or not. Health insurance in America is a particularly hot potato at the moment while compulsory car insurance in England is another prime example of regulatory capture.
The marketing of insurance and gambling products show similar equivalence of strategy. William Hill's homepage is currently offering four introductory offers. These offers are very revealing as to where the bookmaker wishes you to place your bets. £50 ($100) bonuses are offered for opening sports betting or casino accounts and £20 for bingo. But, for the highly corrupt poker platforms offered online, Willie Hill's offer a $500 introductory bonus. As we have stated before, it is beyond our comprehension why any individual would trust the efficacy of an online poker game where the cards, the table, the other players and the reality of the game are so opaque and open to rampant manipulation that the format is a magnet for the criminalised businessperson. Similarly with insurance where, for example, it is almost impossible to buy any object with a plug on it or to make any travel booking without some slimy agent informing us of the risks related to the purchase.
So, how should the person on the street deal with these corrupt edifices? With gambling, the solution is simple. Unless you are a professional analyst or have access to privileged inside information, forget it. You are a patsy and you will lose your hard-earned cash. With regard to insurance, the basic strategy should be similar. Apart from areas of compulsory insurance, do the mathematics and determine the value (or, more often, the lack of it) in insuring yourself against a particular risk. If it appears that the insurance company has mispriced the risk then, by all means, seek cover but one should remember that the insurers have highly developed business models and the likelihood of mispricing is minimal.
Personally, I possess no insurance whatsoever anywhere. I minimise my risks by creative work/life balancing and have developed a type of individual amortisation account to provide a safety net against potential future occurrences that are outside my control. Similarly, I never hedge any trading positions unless I am certain that my market exposure has become incorrect due to externalities.
I refuse to pay others for the maintenance of an adequate risk profile and I would advise everybody to behave similarly. We do not need any external cover.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Thursday, 16 August 2007
The Stench Of Manchester City
On Tuesday, an arrest warrant was issued in Thailand for Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife over illegal land deals in Bangkok.
On Wednesday, Richard Scudamore (the chief executive of the Premier League) sits next to Shinawatra and his posse of mercenary bodyguards for the Premiership match between Man City and Derby.
Scudamore possesses no expert inside knowledge of the corruption repeatedly perpetrated by Shinawatra in his homeland and he has studiously ignored the representations from Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International regarding extra-judicial killings. And yet, surely he is taking ludicrous risks with regard to the public perception of his and his organisation's integrity when he decides to sit alongside Shinawatra so soon after a clear legal statement of intent by the Thai authorities.
And the land deals issue is merely the tip of a very large iceberg of corruption that sloshes around the feet of the ousted Thai leader. We have itemised in numerous previous posts the illicit pocketing of government and public cash regarding business deals in Singapore and Myanmar, the explicit links between Shinawatra and the underground and illegal Far East football betting markets and money laundering using Offshore Financial Centres (OFCs).
So why is Scudamore putting his head on the line in this manner?
The early phases of the new Premiership season have seen a reassertion of control by the illegal bookmakers in Asia. The sponsorship of the referees via the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) by Shinawatra's former company AirAsia is an edifice guaranteed to engender corruption. Shinawatra still has considerable influence within AirAsia (after all the new owners worked hand in hand with him to allow the profits from the sale to end up in inappropriate financial locations) and there is no justification for a major league global criminal to warp the betting markets and the integrity of the game of football in this manner.
Scudamore has been bought off. His mismanagement of the game has already been amply demonstrated by his behavioural patterns during the Quest/bungs inquiry and the Carlos Tevez scandal so, I suppose, we should not be surprised that the ultimate corruption of the game through links to Far East bookmakers is also on the man's agenda. Any half-competent guardian of the game would have seen that Shinawatra is not a fit and proper person to be involved in English football but half-competence is a standard that Scudamore falls far below. We possess evidence that we are unable to post due to legal advice but, suffice to say, Scudamore is in kickback territory here and we repeat our call for the termination of his contract with immediate effect. We are entitled to expect more from the authorities and regulators running the game of football.
All that we are able to expect from the other protagonists in this corruption is more of the same as their individual strategies are typical of historical behaviour. Eriksson does not do principles. He takes the dollar whatever its source and his previous authorisation of the use of Performance Enhancing Substances (PESs) for medicinal and physical advantage is well known within the game, for instance. Similarly, the bookmakers involved in this scam are hardly likely to turn away from any illicit earnings - what do bookies exist for other than to corrupt markets to their proprietary advantage? And Shinawatra is in the early throes of an election campaign to regain the Thai leadership and is using the Manchester City entity as a stepping stone towards that very end. The man has a Napoleon complex and the image of the City players being made to stand to attention behind His Excellency (just who does this criminal think he is?) to applaud his ego was particularly unpleasant. Scudamore however is supposed to be in charge of the stewardship of our game and not the establishment of infrastructures that enhance the control of bookmakers over match outcome nor the preparation of the ground for an individuals political campaign in his home country.
The reaction of many of the City fans is particularly abhorrent to any Mancunian with a sense of the political history of our great city. The warped world of these shallow excuses for humanity is astounding. Shinawatra is not Pol Pot (as some of the wilder voices have suggested) but he shares equivalence with Pinochet, for example, and he might become anything in the future if he is allowed to. Yet, the Blue Moon brigade happily ignore the blood money being used to build their team as their myopic universe is merely focused on one objective - Manchester United. It should be noted here that victories over a West Ham team involved in a betting scam and the weakest promoted team, Derby County, hardly represents a new dawn but we'll reserve judgement on the playing performances of City for another time.
Two writers clearly express this dichotomy. David Conn (one of the few perceptive mainstream journalists), writing in World Soccer magazine, states "If football clubs make their claims to lifelong loyalty, they have to embody something worth belonging to. This club [Manchester City] is not, in reality, the magical sky-blue vision of my six-year-old imagination. Manchester City is a company that belongs to Thaksin Shinawatra and his family. And so, I feel, it is not my club anymore."
Compare this with the blinkered drivel, lies and misrepresentations produced by Tim Lewis for The Guardian (see: http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2147108,00.html) and the full impact of a quasi-religious belief in a football team becomes apparent.
In conclusion, I have never been in possession of so much material and evidence regarding a particular corruption (and this, as regular readers will respect, is saying something). Shinawatra and Scudamore are a double act that make Berlusconi appear positively virtuous. Berlusconi may have done mafia but mass murder was not on his agenda.
At least Berlusconi had the decency to face down his detractors in court (so long as he had the protection of the statute of limitations, of course). Shinawatra has been assured of his safety if he returns to Thailand to face trial over the corruption charges but he has stated that he will not return. How about running the trial in a third party territory like Malaysia. The disenfranchised people of Thailand that have been murdered, imprisoned and robbed by the psychopath who is Shinawatra deserve this basic human right.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
On Wednesday, Richard Scudamore (the chief executive of the Premier League) sits next to Shinawatra and his posse of mercenary bodyguards for the Premiership match between Man City and Derby.
Scudamore possesses no expert inside knowledge of the corruption repeatedly perpetrated by Shinawatra in his homeland and he has studiously ignored the representations from Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International regarding extra-judicial killings. And yet, surely he is taking ludicrous risks with regard to the public perception of his and his organisation's integrity when he decides to sit alongside Shinawatra so soon after a clear legal statement of intent by the Thai authorities.
And the land deals issue is merely the tip of a very large iceberg of corruption that sloshes around the feet of the ousted Thai leader. We have itemised in numerous previous posts the illicit pocketing of government and public cash regarding business deals in Singapore and Myanmar, the explicit links between Shinawatra and the underground and illegal Far East football betting markets and money laundering using Offshore Financial Centres (OFCs).
So why is Scudamore putting his head on the line in this manner?
The early phases of the new Premiership season have seen a reassertion of control by the illegal bookmakers in Asia. The sponsorship of the referees via the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB) by Shinawatra's former company AirAsia is an edifice guaranteed to engender corruption. Shinawatra still has considerable influence within AirAsia (after all the new owners worked hand in hand with him to allow the profits from the sale to end up in inappropriate financial locations) and there is no justification for a major league global criminal to warp the betting markets and the integrity of the game of football in this manner.
Scudamore has been bought off. His mismanagement of the game has already been amply demonstrated by his behavioural patterns during the Quest/bungs inquiry and the Carlos Tevez scandal so, I suppose, we should not be surprised that the ultimate corruption of the game through links to Far East bookmakers is also on the man's agenda. Any half-competent guardian of the game would have seen that Shinawatra is not a fit and proper person to be involved in English football but half-competence is a standard that Scudamore falls far below. We possess evidence that we are unable to post due to legal advice but, suffice to say, Scudamore is in kickback territory here and we repeat our call for the termination of his contract with immediate effect. We are entitled to expect more from the authorities and regulators running the game of football.
All that we are able to expect from the other protagonists in this corruption is more of the same as their individual strategies are typical of historical behaviour. Eriksson does not do principles. He takes the dollar whatever its source and his previous authorisation of the use of Performance Enhancing Substances (PESs) for medicinal and physical advantage is well known within the game, for instance. Similarly, the bookmakers involved in this scam are hardly likely to turn away from any illicit earnings - what do bookies exist for other than to corrupt markets to their proprietary advantage? And Shinawatra is in the early throes of an election campaign to regain the Thai leadership and is using the Manchester City entity as a stepping stone towards that very end. The man has a Napoleon complex and the image of the City players being made to stand to attention behind His Excellency (just who does this criminal think he is?) to applaud his ego was particularly unpleasant. Scudamore however is supposed to be in charge of the stewardship of our game and not the establishment of infrastructures that enhance the control of bookmakers over match outcome nor the preparation of the ground for an individuals political campaign in his home country.
The reaction of many of the City fans is particularly abhorrent to any Mancunian with a sense of the political history of our great city. The warped world of these shallow excuses for humanity is astounding. Shinawatra is not Pol Pot (as some of the wilder voices have suggested) but he shares equivalence with Pinochet, for example, and he might become anything in the future if he is allowed to. Yet, the Blue Moon brigade happily ignore the blood money being used to build their team as their myopic universe is merely focused on one objective - Manchester United. It should be noted here that victories over a West Ham team involved in a betting scam and the weakest promoted team, Derby County, hardly represents a new dawn but we'll reserve judgement on the playing performances of City for another time.
Two writers clearly express this dichotomy. David Conn (one of the few perceptive mainstream journalists), writing in World Soccer magazine, states "If football clubs make their claims to lifelong loyalty, they have to embody something worth belonging to. This club [Manchester City] is not, in reality, the magical sky-blue vision of my six-year-old imagination. Manchester City is a company that belongs to Thaksin Shinawatra and his family. And so, I feel, it is not my club anymore."
Compare this with the blinkered drivel, lies and misrepresentations produced by Tim Lewis for The Guardian (see: http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2147108,00.html) and the full impact of a quasi-religious belief in a football team becomes apparent.
In conclusion, I have never been in possession of so much material and evidence regarding a particular corruption (and this, as regular readers will respect, is saying something). Shinawatra and Scudamore are a double act that make Berlusconi appear positively virtuous. Berlusconi may have done mafia but mass murder was not on his agenda.
At least Berlusconi had the decency to face down his detractors in court (so long as he had the protection of the statute of limitations, of course). Shinawatra has been assured of his safety if he returns to Thailand to face trial over the corruption charges but he has stated that he will not return. How about running the trial in a third party territory like Malaysia. The disenfranchised people of Thailand that have been murdered, imprisoned and robbed by the psychopath who is Shinawatra deserve this basic human right.
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)