Table of contents with brief description

Table of contents with brief description

Initiation
Football is so gigantic. What could be wrong with that? What could be said that hasn’t already been said? A whole lot…
Motivational text
In addition to the introduction, it can help to overcome a few initial difficulties that are to be expected, especially when it comes to the topic of “soccer”.

Part I: the rules

1. Basic claims
   a. more goals, more excitement, more fun, more fans.
   b. The current application and interpretation of the rules puts forwards at a disadvantage
   c. Applying existing rules would suffice if there was a rethinking of goal actions
   i.e. Football has become a pure fan sport. You only watch one game in which you are a supporter of a team. Questionable development: the game itself doesn’t seem so nice and presentable anymore?
   e. Injustices are inherent in the game. They were easily eliminated. Here, too, the aim is to win back the neutral spectator. As a vision: You watch a football game because it is beautiful, fair, exciting and at the same time entertaining.
2. What is a penalty?
   The foul-free kick sequence is not a punishment. The defender is happy to accept this, as the goal situation prevented by a foul would be greater than that conceded by the free kick. As a rule, there are no personal sanctions. You don’t want to see ugly scenes, but they occur more and more often. If you want to ban them: impose penalties that are also perceived as such.
3. Penalty
   One of the key decisions. A foul in the penalty area is not counted as such, although it is recorded as such in the rules. What if you did? More goals guaranteed, nicer scenes too, and by no means more penalties. The defenders would adapt quickly: I can’t do that, so I won’t do it either. Hand game analogue.
4. Offside
   In addition to the penalties, the second decisive and constantly recurring situation. “In case of doubt for the attacker” is a slogan proclaimed at the World Cup in the USA in 1994, which is not heeded. If you did it: more goals, more nice actions, more excitement.
   The current application of the rule is the opposite: if in doubt, wave offside. Psychologically explainable, detrimental to football and its attractiveness, as in the case of penalty kick situations.
5. The Advantage Rule
   …should be renamed to disadvantage rule. It almost never turns into an advantage for the attackers. Rethinking is also helpful here: you want to see the goal actions. Advantage should be an advantage. Foul play must not be rewarded. There are possibilities. one reads
6. The three-point rule
   One of the central rules to get the discussion going. Why was it introduced? Because you wanted more goals, more action. To what extent did that work? Answer: no effect. So other means are needed. Statistical evidence, but also psychological backgrounds are addressed.
7. Time game
   injustices everywhere. Can you gain an advantage with targeted time play? Nobody wants to see that, it scares off any neutral viewer (with a sense of justice). Something is not right. Substitution in stoppage time to bring a result over time? Something is totally wrong there. Everyone realizes what the goal is – but you get away with it. Who cares about a few whistles? No, no wonder when aggression is rampant. players, coaches, fans. Neutral spectators wave away, but are not represented at all. Because of: Emotions are part of it?! Almost only appearing as aggression. Of course, everything has to do with the “result football” given by the media. Doesn’t anyone ask how you won? Yes, because there is no longer anyone who could ask a question.
8. Evidence Technique
   Suggestion would be: processing of scenes that are to be judged for foul or not foul, in which one cannot see where the action took place. Would the decisions be analogous to those made in the game? No! There would be a clear imbalance – to the detriment of the strikers, to the detriment of the scenes worth seeing.
9. Wrong decisions
   Wrong decisions that allow a goal are hotly debated. The referee as a scapegoat. Wrong decisions, which prevent a goal situation, occur much more frequently, but have a subordinate importance, perception. The referee is protected with a “was also difficult to see…” But: goal actions are constantly called back, made impossible – and often enough erroneously.

10. The referee’s fear of the goal action
    Goal situations are stopped as soon as they arise with an “irrelevant” whistle. Because: the referee doesn’t want to let a critical situation arise in the first place. If the ball is in the penalty area, he gets such a “difficult, critical” action. So: it’s better to blow the whistle beforehand, nobody cares. Everything with the consequence: no goal scenes, no goals, no tension, no action, no (neutral) spectators.
11. Fair play
    Fair play practiced today is a farce. It doesn’t exist. For the benefit of football? No. Player stays injured, ball has to be played wide, good counterattack prevented, injured player has nothing, continues to play. No sanctions. Instead: only advantages. For the practitioner of this. However, the losers are obvious: football, justice, attractiveness. The soul of the people boils, whistles to vent its displeasure. Apparently no one cares about this either. Because: these are classified as “biased” because they are biased.
12. Throw-in – where?
    When throwing meters are flayed. There is no way to exorcise this from players? This would only be an example of rule violations against which there seems to be no remedy. Yes, there are.
13. The Back Pass Rule
    More of a kind of example: the introduction is good, but there is no more whistling. Is it because it is always adhered to? Not at all. Goalkeeper picks up the ball: then it was not a return pass. You know, referee? Again and again: to the advantage of the defence, to the detriment of the goals, the action, the tension, the attractiveness of the game.
14. Goalkeeper Protection
    Goalkeeper protection is greatly exaggerated. The observation provides the following simple statement: if a goalkeeper drops the ball, it was foul play. It can also be one of your own players. Free kick for the defense, no goal scene. For whose benefit? Not football.
15. Practical examples
    a. Alpay Fair Play Price
    Fair-play price for a failed emergency brake? That would be the ultimate indictment of football and fair play.
    b. Mark Mintal
    Also fits the advantage rule: foul on him in the penalty area, but still shoots. Post. No goal, no penalty. Advantage???
    c. Bye Akinbiyi
    Similar to Mintal.
    i.e. St. Pauli – Duisburg
    A wondrous 2:2. And then there are complaints…
    e. Chelsea-Liverpool
    Also curious: “To be on the safe side” imposed a penalty. Didn’t help.

Part 2: Reporting

1. Basics
   The media have the opportunity to make the game exciting and attractive, to uncover injustices, so that they are banned or remain. The claim: the coverage is unfavorable, for football and from an entertainment perspective. In addition, the reports tend to be biased, mainly based on results. Uninteresting, boring and inconsistent. That’s how football is. Many actions are good and still don’t lead to a goal. Sounds different in the reporting. If no goal: Attackers are doing something wrong. If so, Tor: Error chain analysis.
2. Evidence technique
   Here, too, there would be a possibility of uncovering a lack of orientation. As an example: a commentator would have to comment on individual scenes, a complete game, without the resolution of the goal situations. Where would he end up with the “fault analysis”?
3. “Rules” for reporters
   According to the view expressed here, the reporters disregard a lot of what constitutes good journalism. Research into causes, observations, effects, ideas for improvement.
4. Commonplaces
   Generalities are inappropriate. Steal the tension and bring no enlightenment. Apart from that: often wrong. “Mostly over the left.” What good does that do?
5. Sawn chairs
   Claim: the media does not succeed in presenting a game itself as exciting. So there are side events, which are brought to the fore, for example by rolling heads. The “laws that everyone knows” are just those installed and implemented by the media. Chairs sawn on and off.
6. Pretentiousness
   The rapporteurs want to raise themselves to eye level. With coaches, with players, with managers, with presidents. They pretend to know even better thanks to knowledge of the results. You can also see them displayed on an equal footing in the pictures. No, you are not the stars the viewer wants to see.
7. The international comparison
   Yes, it’s better. One would only have to look at England. You just never would. Because you always win against them on penalties?
   Two commentators, no subsequent commentary, tension created from beginning to end, emotions are not neglected. Feel it, get it across, you feel it. Why was Sky England able to buy Premiere? Because they still have money. Through good reporting.

8. The tone of voice
   A number of attributes are presented which make commenting intolerable.
9. Questions for the rapporteurs
   A few questions for the rapporteurs – as the title suggests. Just waiting for answers. Sure: they are placed in such a way that they force you to think – and do not allow a standard replica.
10. The meaning of good and bad luck
    Lucky here, bad luck there – or vice versa – are essential parts of the game of football. Ignoring them brings no benefit. Emotions are an essential part. You get lost in the process. “You were pretty unlucky” would be sympathy, but “you were too stupid” is the standard statement. As always: causes, effects, examples, ideas for improvement.
11. When the Emperor speaks
    Franz Beckenbauer made a few fateful statements. Must read. The football world, however, takes its cue from them. Doesn’t matter to him. Has he achieved everything, can say what he feels like?
12. The king of reporters
    Definitely when he was active. Marcel Reif. Here’s an example of what he came up with. In essence: nonsense in higher potencies.
13. The Interviews
    Equality is suggested. Or even the reporter puts himself on a slightly higher level. Outrageous questions based only on results. The interviewees react in a reserved manner. The viewer learns nothing.
    The question already suggests: the questioner allows only one answer anyway. Lost because… bad. It leads to a kind of self-talk.
14. Neutrality
    Why must more come from Stuttgart when they play against Gladbach? Germany – France, ok, you can be biased. But in a Bundesliga game? It’s still common practice.
15. The prefix “to”
    Violation of language and logic to increase errors. If you have done “too little”, wouldn’t it be ok if you had only done a little? A little is ok, but that was TOO little.
16. Clichés
    The speaker could just as well comment on a live game blindfolded if phrases are lined up. “Tell me the score and I’ll explain the next action. 0:1? Ah. Then I already know: it won’t work like that.” Playing the tape would also work.
17. Being smart is everything
    It doesn’t matter how many viewers switch off or do it right away: the main thing is that you’re smart. 2-0 and still six minutes to play? “I know the winner” one is told. What is that please? “That’s it, cover it.” Yes, on the egghead.
18. Judging by results
    There is no differentiation. The only one that exists: how did it end? One game, one championship, one action. The principle applies everywhere. She/it will be judged on the basis of the result. A chain of errors is often shown, which in the end leads to a goal conceded by a deflected bumpy ball. What if the ball that wasn’t even a shot on goal had NOT resulted in a goal? Are the errors still there? No. “The strikers lack effectiveness.” Ridiculous.
19. True Prophets
    It is a well-known fact that true prophets await events.
20. Game Action
    A game with German commentary takes place without game action. As a player prepares to take a shot at goal, you learn how much he paid to move from Düsseldorf to Rostock two years ago. The ball hits. The “and then he’s in” he listens to alone. He no longer has any listeners.
21. The successful campaign
    Otto Rehhagel already knew that: there is no such thing as a successful action. Either no goal: the strikers are missing something. But goal: collective failure of the back team. The speakers would have to construct a scene in which they would be satisfied in the end?!
22. Reporter German
    A few more examples of sports commentator jargon. Even if the phrase “compressed boredom” contains a certain pun: do you watch a game THAT’S why?
23. Dream job football commentator
    yes it has to be Be smarter than everyone else all day long. Because you know results and tables.
24. Practical examples
    a. “All games – all goals” from 23.10.2010
    A complete program recorded by Sky. The comments are commented and analyzed and alternatives are offered.
    b. Bochum – 1860 Munich
    An exciting and outstanding second division game. What was made of it, what could have been made of it?
    c. Markus Babbel dismissed as coach
    One of the campaigns against a coach, recorded and annotated.
    i.e. Karlsruher SC vs VfL Bochum
    Another good league game. 20 minutes of live commentary recorded and commented.

e. DFB Cup Eintracht Frankfurt – FC Bayern Munich 28.10.2009
An example of how speakers are never satisfied.
f.Wigan-Wolves
A Sunday lunch game from England. Completely recorded. Once with English, once with German commentary. Contrasting the two, with translation and commentary on the commentary.
G. FC Basel – AS Roma
An exciting and good European Cup game. Commented and analyzed. There was a Swiss comment here.
H. FC Barcelona – FC Chelsea, CL Semifinals 2009
Another game commented from the professional bettor’s point of view.
i. An invented crisis
A similar example to Babbel’s dismissal.
j. Thierry Henry
The much-commented handball, analyzed a little differently here.

Part 3 : the betting market

1. The link reporting – betting market
   Apparently there is a lack of understanding, especially on the part of the rapporteurs. “Thou shalt not bet” continues to be promoted everywhere. On the other hand: you should definitely look. Who would you have as a reliable viewer? the weather itself.
2. Introduction
   An introduction to betting. How does this even work?
3. Historical
   The development of the market from 1990 to 2017.
   The Asian Betting Market
   The driving force in today’s betting market. The basic concept was ingenious and needs to be explained. The size and success of this market is no coincidence. The fairest and best concept.
4. The fairness of the market
   “If you want to bet, you also want to cheat”? That needs to be cleaned up.
5. The traditional “European” betting market
   Has endured to this day. Relevance: low. So to speak, for “hobby players”. But: that could be the big crowd at the same time. Not in terms of volume for the market but as a support for marketing, as a potential viewer.
6. What can you bet?
   There are a lot of different betting offers. With different meanings for the market. What is there, how does it work?
7. How is a quota created?
   A little more math. But also important: how is the market doing?
8. Betting Systems
   There are quite a few different options. Single games or combos for example? Advantages disadvantages?
9. How to play successfully?
   In principle, there is only one correct approach. Must be explained.
10. Betting Fraud
    There’s a lot to tell there. How did this happen, how did the scam work? Today’s meaning? Who was responsible?
11. Practical examples
    Examples of some exciting and curious bets and their outcomes. Also in financial terms.
12. Dubious games
13. A few examples. But it’s not about betting fraud.

a. Bayern Munich vs. SSV Ulm, 1964
Never heard? “Knubbel” Müller was discovered. In a strange way.
b. FRG – GDR World Cup 1974
What were the consequences of the 0:1? Who benefited?
c. Argentina-Peru, World Cup 1978
Bad mode revealed here.
d. Germany vs Austria, World Cup 1982
Maintaining the mode despite the 1978 experience? So who is responsible?
e. Germany vs Denmark, World Cup 1986
Never noticed? The consequences of the 0:2 are particularly curious. A fool who thinks badly of it?!
f. Borussia Mönchengladbach – Bayer Uerdingen, Bundesliga 1989/90, 34th matchday
0:0 How boring can a game like this actually be? Then why is it here?
g. Tenerife – Real Madrid, Spain 1992, 1993
The consequences are curious: Abolition of the ban on third-party winning bonus payments.
h. FC Barcelona – Dynamo Kyiv, 1995
Who needed which result here?
i. Denmark vs Sweden, Euro 2004
Surely everyone knows. And smiles? What was really behind it? A very different perspective here. Morten Olsen: “Of course there was an agreement.” Clever.

Part 4 : Biography

There is an extensive biographical section. Mostly from the life of the player. Whether that belongs here, goes beyond the scope?