So who you putting your money on then?

Come on. If you know who is going to win, why not tell us all...

you're mistaking human error for grand design. all that has happened this world cup is that some referees have fucked up some decisions. that happens at all levels of football – hell, all levels of pretty much any sport.

another thing – if the winners of the world cup have already been decided by the major companies investing in it, such as adidas and coca-cola, wouldn't it make economic sense for the winner to benefit those companies? now i admit i know relatively little about global economics, so feel free to tell me i'm wrong, but…

the argument that the world cup is fixed by multinationals to further serve their needs is based on the belief that the winning nation will show an increased interest in football and, therefore, the products of the associated sponsors, right? of the remaining four nations in the world cup:

turkey – not the first nation you think of when discussing european economic powerhouses or sleeping giant markets.

brazil – pretty much all of south america has more important things to spend their money on than soft drinks and sport equipment at the moment.

germany – major european economy, but i'd guess that the popularity of football in germany ( or pretty much any south american or european country, for that matter) is saturation level.

south korea – i think south korea is probably the nation you regard as the world cup being fixed in favour of. growing economy, massive potential to develop interest in football (and by association, blah blah blah…) and whatever. that's why the big european clubs look to the asian markets when they want to expand their fanbase.

but i don't think that means south korea winning the world cup would be of greatest value to the multinationals. as a nation, south korea (and i'd imagine pretty much any of the asian nations except china) couldn't match the united states in terms of the size of the market. plus china has nothing like the disposable income of the us. yeah, it might kick off a bit of interest in south korea, but would you argue either that:

1) germany, for example, winning the world cup would create a boom in interest in football across europe, or

2) the south korea economy could match the us' in terms of attractiveness to the multinationals?

just a though…

who cares this nation looks up to a thug in fact cheered him on when he broke anothers nose in a worrd cup match 2 weeks ago his initals DB the captin why didnt he get sent off?
footbal =circus as in bread and circus's to keep you from thinking to much
football is for thugs and morons to keep you fighting amonst yourselves

Under the guise of 'human error' fraud becomes generalised. As ifmillions of dollars of investments would rely on human error. When trains breakdown, this doesn't affect the companies running them precisely because they have built in clauses guaranteeing profit no matter what...

Kickbacks, payoffs, tainted refs are my imagination then?

I dont know which team has the most sponshorship and where investements are most heavily made. What I do know is that like the Olympics before them modern football has acquired the status of t Gladiatorial fights in Ancient Rome. 4 billion are expected to see the final and like the Gladiatorial matches which were mostly pre-fixed the same rule applies to football. The fact that you cant see it doesn't mean it isn't there.

the argument that the world cup is fixed by multinationals to further serve their needs is based on the belief that the winning nation will show an increased interest in football and, therefore, the products of the associated sponsors, right? of the remaining four nations in the world cup:

South Korea doesn't need to win the World Cup. Arriving in the quarter finals is enough to create a national patriotic mood for a country bedevellived by Latin American style corruption and economic decay. Spending billions on football stadiums when haalf their buildings are on the verge of collapse and housing is cramped is politically aimed to distract people from everyday concerns. The fact that you dont see it again is my concern.

just like the salem witch trials – you'll find corruption wherever you look for it because you interpret events to suit your preconstructed beliefs. i'm not saying that sporting events are not subject to kickbacks, payoffs or bribery – former south african cricket captains spring to mind. what i'm saying is that conspiracy theorists rarely seem to come up with their arguments before the event – they wait until afterwards and then say: "i told you so." anyone can do that, it doesn't prove anything.

the investment of public money in south korea on the necessary infrastructure to host a world cup rather than on public services and housing was misguided, but it's the unfortunate contract that any host nation agrees to when they are given the "honour" of hosting the competition. the argument that south korea has "bought" the world cup to distract its citizens from the harsh realities of their lives should, therefore, have been a fairly obvious one to make for at least a year before the games began. why is it only now that you start shouting "fix"?

your arguments would be far more persuasive if you weren't making them post-event. if you had said before the games began "watch out for the referee bias in favour of south korea" you'd seem a lot less like you were jumping on a band-wagon.

and one more thing – "as if millions of dollars of investments would rely on human error…" what world do you live in? millions of dollars are wasted by multinationals every year in launching products that flop, buying advertising that doesn't work and promoting themselves to the wrong markets. why? human error…

paging on the guardian two years ago, i saw advertised the offer from three uni's from holland for postgrad studies on the dep of social sciences. i saw it very exciting if only for knowing more about their programs and what exactly they were like. i contacted and requested info on the ma's and others. i saw titles like "football and the community... football as education... football. society in context..." well, this world cup has served to me as an enlightening arcane for what all that bullshit was really like.