I still have a strong feeling he was lying, trying to look cool and create controversy for people to buy the book. Police didn't investigate or take any actions. I just don't see why a footballer would spot fix with all the money they already own UNLESS they are heavily involved in gambling (most likely poker I imagine) and got into debt despite the money they are earning. In which case on the pitch scenarios are outcomes they can control and make money on. Lundekvam is definitely a very dodgy character with alcohol and drug problems. Such a terrible role model like a lot of those Saints players at the time who regularly went out drinking and making idiots of themselves. If there was any spot fixing my guess is it was purely Lundekvam doing it because he clearly has a screw loose
Tiss probably placed a small bet for fun because he could, then failed when Shipperley stopped the ball. So no conspiracy there. He has now come out and said there was no betting conspiracy going on at Saints. Lundekvam may have been doing it and all shame on him for letting us down, especially if it involved penalties. He's trying to look better by saying that it was a major thing and coudn't be avoided.
It wouldn't suprise me if it was true and other players may well have been kept in the dark for fear of exposure. At that time there were players with well documented social problems such as gambling, alcohol and drug abuse. They had too much time on their hands after a couple of hours training and with too much money to blow. Pretty sure spread betting was a fairly new method of betting at the time, so wouldn't raise any alarm bells and as Claus says one which doesn't directly affect the outcome of the game (penalties aside). Its happened in cricket and I am sure more stories will come to the fore with the cricket anti corruption unit so prevailant now. Italian football is rife with match fixing as are leagues in Eastern Europe. I think it would be pretty ignorant to dismiss these allegations and think that English football is in some sort of bubble away from all the illegal gambling. Le Tiss admited he done it once and it didn't come off so never done it again. So is it that hard to imagine the same people Le Tiss was involved with in that isolated incident weren't more persuasive with Claus. He is obviously easily influenced and not strong willed due to his documented drug and alcohol problems.
I don't doubt that (like many people who stupidly believe they can make money by gambling) loads of footballers have lost a great deal of money to the bookies and this would seem to be a rather nice little scam to get some of it back.
However, they don't cheat the bookies (who would have to pay out to somebody anyway), they are cheating the other punters who think they are betting on a level playing field. What has always puzzled me is why anyone in India and Pakistan bet at all when it's so crooked. Mind you, gambling and brains are mutually exclusive.
Nothing new today as I suspected. Repeat this is all old news. They won't find any evidence and after a few days it will all go away. As some-one said earlier in the 60's you could have pulled off a sting but not these days.
How will we react if ex-players get arrested and charged though? I bet there would be a lot of condemnation of Claus and support for Le Tiss. Apologies if someone has mentioned this earlier, but I couldn't see it; there is a slim possibility that Matt's name could be tarnished. I don't think anyone on here would like that. It'll be interesting to see what happens, if anything. I hope, as suggested, this is a tea cup with high winds.
Bookies records, times of bets placed, which leads to evidence of irregular betting patterns, credit card details of bets placed, who they work for, cctv evidence of who placed the bets. Bookmakers have long memories. The players who did these deeds, at various clubs, not just Southampton, have moved on or retired altogether. The people who placed the bets for them, if the story is to be believed, probably still work for the same teams. They are the ones who should be worried if all this is true.
On the point of why a footballer would get involved in spot fixing when they are already making thousands, why would a banker or company director earning a similarly big salary do insider trading? In my profession I regularly see frauds where over a year it amounts to little more than £1000, which when you consider they invariably lose their job when caught makes you question why they did it. My feeling is that money is money, and no matter what they have some (a lot of) people will always want more. Especially if they think they are getting that money for nothing.
It's plainly obvious that he's lying now. A number of ex-Saints have said they have no idea what he is talking about, some of them are still in football. Now either Claus is lying, and all the rest are. Benali speaks articulately and seems a little upset by the claims. Also we are talking about the pre-internet days when you had to actually get a person to walk into a shop, the bookmakers have a fleet of people whose job it is to find this kind of stuff and if they had even a tiny suspicion that some big spot bets were coming off in a specific location, they'd have no hesitation in investigating.
Spot on Qwerty. I've spoken to a couple of old contacts in the spread firms this morning and as far as they are concerned this is just mud raking with no substance. Once we have beaten Man City we will get the right headlines!
Yep... "lucky Saints" on the 5th page of the sports pull out (bottom half). Lawro still sending us down on MOTD2. Wouldn't have it any other way
Couple more quotes to contribute, first Dave Jones: "I know nothing about what Claus has said, I never heard anything like that discussed in the dressing room either. I'm sure I would have heard the tiniest whispers if it had been anything like a common occurrence." And former team-mate David Hirst: "I was never aware of anything taking place like that, not at Southampton or Sheffield Wednesday or Barnsley - or England for that matter. I have never been involved in anything like that and I have never heard of players doing it anywhere."
I see Claus is now saying it was in the 96/97 season and was only for a short time. The amounts bet seem to be decreasing as well! That was the year we beat United 6 - 3 and got stuffed 7 -1 by Everton. As I suspected this story is beginning to die a death.
Claus claimed that they would bet on who started the match with the ball. Except the rule was changed so captains didn't get the choice any more in...1995.
