Joe Havelange: 66 and 74 World Cups were fixed to favor the home team.

That's factually incorrect.
There was some controversy in 94: Italy beat Spain in the quarters following that brutal foul on Enrique, which should have been a penalty and a red card. Tassotti was then banned for 8 games post-match by FIFA, which is as clear an admission of a ref error as you'll ever get (I don't know of any other such case, in a KO WCup game, it may be the only one). If the ref had taken the right decision, most likely Spain would have won that game. Given that afterwards the Brazil - Italy final went into a penalty shootout, there's no saying what would have happened in a potential Brazil - Spain final. I agree that's not much of a controversy compared to other cups, but to say there was no controversy at all is a bit wrong.

As for Argentina - England, as I said in another thread, even though that goal was a shame, on the whole that wasn't a crooked win by the argies, given that the english were in fact clearly more unlawful themselves.
If that's the only controversy regarding their win, then their title is clean. IMO that's not so because Maradona was later found doped, which for me invalidates everything he did on the field, including of course the 86 title which he won almost single-handedly.

As for 1966. I don't think anybody can deny that Pele was brutally hacked by Bulgaria and Portugal, and the refs allowed it. That's accepted fact. Given that he was the best in the world, and Brazil at the very least a strong contender, I need nothing else to be 100% convinced that that title is crooked too and favored by the refs.

 

Lennart Johansson (UEFA boss) said a few times Havelange personally intervened in the referee appointments of the 1994WC. Fact is that Havelange did intervene in appointing and sending home of people. Like sending home 'ref committee' boss Paolo Casarin (an Italian; after the semi-final dismissed), Palotai, Mikkelssen, Ponnet, Kurt Rothlisberger etc. Over the course of a few days he single-handedly replaced the whole referee committee.

According to Johansson, Havelange was good in messing with accreditations, but what exactly happened is difficult to prove.
Havelange certainly followed a double standards policy with regards to drug offences; sending letters to the one federation (examples abound), but banning others (starting with Scotland at 1978 WC and Haiti in 1974). Conspiracy theories that 1994WC was Havelange his farewell present do exist, fuelled by books as David Yallop.

 

The most surprising part of all of this, for me, is: João Havelange is still alive???

 

interesting accusations. we all know that home teams get favorable calls. however, taking it to the extreme of screwing over other teams is something different. this stuff doesn't surprise me if it happens in domestic leagues. it's surprising to hear that this stuff happens at an international tournament. but then again, after south korea's joke of a run in 2002, nothing should surprise me.

 

....He stole so much money he can afford the absolute best medical attention in order to keep his useless corrupt ass above ground....

 

Yerba mala nunca muere

 

Interesting question; who will succumb first? Havelange or his friend and partner in crime Heinz Alfred ('Henry') Kissinger.

 

World Cup 2010 was fixed. Spain received a lot of favourable calls.

 

wait for 2014... you ain't seen nothing yet

 

was he? I did not find the exact date of his election. It only says 1974, but not the month... if it was before or after the 1974 World Cup.

 

plus in 78 Brazil was eliminated in a very controversial fashion... with Argentina getting an unlikely huge win over Peru if I am not mistaken.

and the ref blowing the whistle and ending a match while the ball was in the air after a corner kick in which Brazil scored... if my memory does not fails.

 

Rubbish. They did have some help against Germany but nothing too blatant, plus Brazil was ousted with some ref errors so their strongest opponent was cleared for them. That's little compared to other Cups.
Italy 06 on the other hand never would have made it without the refs.

You can see the details here if you're interested:

http://www.fairfootball.com

 

If he became president in 74 then he cannot be blamed much for that Cup, even if it was before it.

 

He was already a big shot in FIFA before that, however.

 

The website you gave said Spain should have beaten Paraguay 2-0 because Spain should have gotten a second penalty after the one they missed. However, Spain wouldn't have gotten their first penalty if the referee allowed Paraguay to retake their penalty because of clear encroachment.

Villa should have been sent off against Honduras for punching a player. FIFA should have suspended him after reviewing but they did not. Villa scored against Chile and Torres dived to get Chilean player sent off (Chile outplayed them with 10 men). Villa’s goal against Portugal was offside and a Portuguese player was sent off because a Spanish player pretended to get hit. Paraguay’s goal was wrongly disallowed and Paraguay’s missed penalty should have been retaken for encroachment. Germany should have gotten a penalty against Spain.

Iniesta should have been sent off against the Netherlands. Puyol should have been sent off also. Netherlands were twice denied clear corners (one in regular time and the other in the second extra time period). There was a clear foul on Elia that was ignored which led to the counterattack that led to Spain’s winning goal. They only scored 8 goals in 7 games. Wow, powerful Spain.

 

Luckily, Spain wasn't hosting the Cup So no hotel tricks, media manipulation or police tactics this time around.

 

I'm glad to see you visited my site.

Looks like you didn't read enough there to get the whole picture.
I only analyze (that is, actually, analyzed, I don't do it any more) games starting from the quarters. The other ones are presumed from the start to be too unbalanced to be treated in this manner. When they're unbalanced, it's too likely that the post-correction gives wrong results, that is, not what would have happened in the real case with good ref decisions.

Look, as I said I'm not doing this any more. A few years ago I would have been happy to debate this with you. Besides, it's slightly not the place here. All I can say is I have looked carefully at the game and debated it with some knowledgeable people at the time, and if it's not there then it probably wasn't so. That's my opinion at least. You can have yours.

Corners aren't taken into account as their likelihood of changing the score is too low.

This one is true, and it's noted.

Yes, that's their paradox. They are (or were, who knows how they will look like now) an offensive team which scores very few goals, though they create many chances. This has been true also for Barca, especially 2 years ago when they lost against Chelsea.

PS. One exception though was in the Euro final when they thrashed Italy.

 

The German secret service continuously eavesdropped the Dutch national team during the 1974 World Cup, has now become a hard fact.

http://sportgeschiedenis.nl/2014/05/23/nederlandse-voetballers-afgeluisterd-tijdens-wk-1974.aspx

However, once it was going on, the FA heard about this and even said it was OK... How foolish.

 

Obviously, to lend some legitimacy to the whole sordid affair.

I do strongly believe that the 1978 Cup was fixed in favor of Argentina. First, they manipulated the rules to get to play after Brazil. Second, there are historical accounts (including one mentioned in a book published in Italy - sorry, I forgot the title) that the Argentine government gave food aid to the Peruvian government (they were going through a famine at the time) in exchange for Peru throwing that game. Last (from the same book) there was some evidence that the military dictators threatened Holland's players right before the final, saying that they wouldn't leave the country if they won the game, through made-up charges against them such as finding drugs in their baggage at the airport and throwing them in prison for decades.

Well, I know that what I'm saying is lame because it sounds like a conspiracy theory and I'm not even providing the title of the book (sorry, I did forget what the title was - I'm not lying about it). I'm also perfectly aware that this book might very well be, well, a groundless conspiracy theory.

But the thing is, I believe in it, because it fits the modus operandis of the military junta. They were not doing so well at the time and wanted the populace to be distracted from their wrongdoings, by delivering a soccer victory.

------

Anyway, true or not, that's what I believe. I know it can't be proved.

Now, I also do believe that the 1966 Cup was maybe not exactly fixed, but there were strong attempts to influence the results, including for instance the Brits transporting an opponent's team to their training location by bus, the bus breaking in the middle of the road, a replacement being promised, and not arriving for several hours into the night so that the players would be fatigued.

Also, the above mentioned refereeing arrangements and bias were rather impressive.

-------

Am I saying so given my bias for Brazil? Not at all. Do you want proof? I think the claim that Brazil was hindered in 1974 is ridiculous. Holland did deserve that win.

-------

Korea? As well; the refereeing mistakes were pretty obvious to be ignored.

--------

So in summary I think there was manipulation of results in 1966, 1978, and 2002, but not in 1974.

--------

Now, as further proof that I'm not thinking like I exposed above, just in order to favor Brazil out of bias, I'll say the following:

I'm afraid there will be refereeing bias *favoring* Brazil in 2014.

Here is why I think it, and I know it will sound like a conspiracy theory as well; sorry for that, but believe it or not, I'm not a conspiracy theory kind of person. However, a detail I'll talk about next, got me thinking.

Dilma Rousseff had a meeting with Blatter between closed doors, in Switzerland. Only the two of them were present. Nobody knows what was discussed.

Here is what I believe she had to say to Blatter:

"My friend, you're facing re-election for FIFA. I'm facing re-election for the presidency of Brazil. The way the country has been dissatisfied with FIFA and with my government, which was clear during the Confederation Cup riots, I think odds are high that if Brazil does well people will pretty much get on board with the yellow jersey and protests will be mild. However if Brazil doesn't win, I'm afraid the country will explode and riots will be ten times worse than in the CC. You don't want to go down in history as the fool who granted the organization of the Cup to Brazil and was ultimately responsible for the biggest fiasco in the history of the tournament. I don't want to lose the election. Therefore, it's in both our best interests that Brazil wins. Make sure it happens."

I don't think this kind of backroom deal is inconsistent with the Worker's Party's style (PT, the party currently holding power in Brazil) - just remember the Mensalão scandal (for international readers, that's the biggest corruption scandal in the history of Brazil with all sorts of backroom deals, all under PT).

I think Dilma is terrified that her Panis et Circensis strategy won't work if Brazil loses the Cup. Blatter is notoriously sleazy and corrupt. Therefore, an alliance of these two to influence the refs and make sure Brazil wins, is not excluded at all.

I hope it doesn't happen because I want to see a Brazilian win, but a clean one; but I think refereeing bias for Brazil this time is not impossible at all, and might even be likely.

 

The referee in the match between Brazil and Belgium in 2002 is a Brazilian fan.

 

Before the game, Prendergast ordered to the Belgian players to not protest his decisions. If you rewatch the match, it is indeed noticeable that the Belgians do not protest anything (unlike the Brazilians at a few sporadic occasions).

But just like Spain in 2010, Brazil was not the host in 2002. Scottish author McIlvanney writes in his books about the typical trickeries of the English and Germans in 1966 and 1974 as well (Havelange rightfully refers to the anglo-german alliance in football).

 

Courtney Walsh (ex-cricketer) owns a sports bar in Kingston, Jamaica. One of the sports memorabilia there is a Ronaldo jersey that was given to Prendegast in 2002.

 

Interesting story! I knew Prendergast received Ronaldo his World Cup shirt (he also received a watch from the Brazilian football federation) but can you tell where you've read/heard that it now hangs in Jamaica?

 

According to what I'm reading in this thread, just about every World Cup is fixed in some way. So my question is, WHY DO YOU PEOPLE WATCH IT? I mean, if the refs are on the take and it's all scripted, why bother watching? If I really believed things were fixed to the extent people are saying here, I would be so disgusted with the sport I would never watch another World Cup game in my life.