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
