(edit title) Sneaky Swedens own Goal. (CHEATERS! As reported in the Sunday times. Options

[byke]

Reading the Sunday times today, and there is a story regarding Swedens game against England.

Apparently svenska dagbladet spied on the England team through a skylight with binoculars when Roy was prepping the team hours before the game in regards to the tactics for the game and which player was assigned to which tactical play.

This information was then leaked, and the Swedish management went as far as to thank the reporter "thanks for the help, that was great".

So not only did Sweden loose, they have now been found out to have cheated.

Talk about dirty.

[byke]

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/u...cle1062698.ece#

[*Trowbridge H. Ford*]

Sounds to me more like a dirty set-up where someone with reporter credentials leaks this information to the Swedish team, and it practices how to cope with it - what would explain why the Swedes didn't have a clue about how to deal with the unexpected formation on the field, and what made me so demoralized about its chances, given its lack to thought and play at the begining,

[byke]

what would explain why the Swedes didn't have a clue about how to deal with the unexpected formation on the field, and what made me so demoralized about its chances, given ... (show full quote)

what would explain why the Swedes didn't have a clue about how to deal with the unexpected formation on the field, and what made me so demoralized about its chances, given its lack to thought and play at the begining, ... (hide full quote)

What would explain it?
How about just a team that was either super pants ... or not wanting to let on.
"We know ... but we don't want you to know, that we know"

[byke]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/...cs-exposed.html

[*Trowbridge H. Ford*]

The lack of thought and initiative by the Swedish team would be explained by it being told to expect something far different, and when it didn't appear, it was at a loss about what to do.

Certainly, your explanation doesn't make much sense because with the expected English formation not appearing, it would make no sense for it to hold back in the hope that what was still planned would soon appear.

Looks more to me like deliberate English cheating which the Swedish team should have said it didn't want to hear anything about rather than develop plans against it.

[byke]

Are you suggesting the Swedish media and Swedish football teams admission of information is a lie?

[byke]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/25716...N-ENGLAND-CAMP/

[*Trowbridge H. Ford*]

No.

I am suggesting that the Swedes took a plot so seriously that it led deservedly to their downfall - what SD Ola Billger has the greatest hutzpa to admit, and should be in big trouble from having done so.

The whole spying looks like a set-up from the outset with his getting all kinds of details about play and formations in a most exposed environment until he is spotted, and then the process continues with blankets being raised to cover later details - to give the ploy more legitimacy.

It seems like just a new kind of match-fixing to me.

[byke]

Ok, so lets get this straight ....
You think England knew it was being spied on, and fed wrong information out deliberately.

And so if the swedish team uses such stolen information from the use of "cheating/spying" and are tricked, then you consider it bad play and "match-fixing" by those who have been spied on?

[*Trowbridge H. Ford*]

Yes, and from reading accounts of how the goals by both sides were scored, it sounds like everything, like everything else about these games, went according to plan aka...ah...

[Jamtjim]

Sound to me that, as usual, Trowbridge "Fantasy" Ford has absolutely no clue what he is talking about!

Now I am just waiting to hear how Sweden's loss is connected to the Palme assassination, Trowie's phantom poisoning and how it proves without doubt he is such a great guy!

Haha... what a wally..

[dockmandock]

So not only did Sweden loose, they have now been found out to have cheated.. Talk about dirty.

No. They have not cheated.

Yes, someone spied in on a tactics session, but that's nothing new. Clubs have always done this, one way or another. Any club would welcome inside training info with open arms. It's up to the club to keep their training secret, not up to the opposition not to look at it.

What about John Beck as manager of Cambridge (and Lincoln), where he made sure the away team dressing room was unkempt, pulled out the plug sockets so they couldn't listen to music and gave them deflated practice balls. Dirty? Maybe. Cheating - no.

Or the old classic of a "fire alarm" at an away team's hotel at 4.30am. Is this cheating? No. Is it dirty? Sure.

[byke]

I love to see some of the replies trying to justify such dirty cheating LOL

But what really surprises me, is why did this story come to light? (especially after the game)
We know the reporter who was able to spy on the team, reported directly to the Swedish football camp. So his first allegiance was to that of the Swedish football team over that of the newspaper who was paying his salary.

So why report on such cheating after the game?
Why not keep such actions under your hat instead of incriminating himself and the team he obviously favors?

The information had already been passed over and no one was the wiser.
Some could suggest that it was a petty way coming to terms with loosing and getting eliminated in the first round. Sort of a "you beat us but we got our own back by stealing your watch" mentality.

If this is the reason for such a story, then it really does highlight a pikey mentality.
First the team cheats, then even with such an advantage they loose ... and then its co-conspiritors they try to lick their wounds by exposing their clandestine behavior in attempt to save face.

So far we have seen ...

Spying
Cheating
Loosing
Self exposure of such behavior.

What a swell team.
Must make so many proud.
And these are the ambassadors of the sport to Swedish children?
What great role models.

[dockmandock]

Nothing to justify as I've already explained in one post. "Spying mission" is even an accepted term in football.

It's no different to standing outside the dressing room to listen to the half-time team talk/rant.

And I can't see that the "spy" would have gleaned anything advantageous that couldn't already be established from knowledge of the team's previous games and likely tactics for set situations.

You've decided to suit your own agenda that they "cheated" when in fact they did nothing of the kind.