科学网

 找回密码
  注册

tag 标签: 假球

相关帖子

版块 作者 回复/查看 最后发表

没有相关内容

相关日志

东道主 人气 赌球 假球 ?
SXWZX 2014-6-24 23:26
现在的世界杯到底是谁在决定比赛的结果? 球员?本队球员还是对方球员? 裁判?边裁还是主裁? 赌球公司? 球迷? 这些问题是不是很多余无聊!是不是很有趣!很可悲!很无奈!世界球迷正在发呆、瞅着呢。。。。。。 “FIFA每场比赛都宣传什么‘公平竞争’,但又玩弄这些阴谋诡计,这不是什么好事。”荷兰队的个性主帅范加尔炮轰国际足联。是什么让范加尔如此恼火?世界杯赛程。B组的两场比赛在北京时间0点进行,而A组的两场比赛在凌晨呢4点进行,这蕴含着“巴西挑1/8决赛对手”的可能性! 如今正在火热进行中的2014巴西世界杯,近日蒙上了一层假球阴影。尤其是6月24日凌晨,东道主巴西与喀麦隆的一战被媒体爆出可能被亚洲博彩公司操控,世界杯“假球疑云”被推向了高潮。著名足球评论员董路更是以其20年专业足球评论员的身份断言:“巴西与喀麦隆一战绝对是假球!”  再看B组的情形:荷兰全胜6分5个净胜球,智利6分4个净胜球两对提前携手出线,悬念就在谁是小组头名。两场比赛都安排在北京时间24日凌晨0点进行。   “阴谋论主义者”认为,两个小组比赛时间存在4个小时间隔,A组晚开球是最大受益者。如果说荷兰战胜(平)智利,他们就是小组头名,对手是A组第二。那么A组的巴西、墨西哥、克罗地亚会力争头名避开荷兰。对于巴西来说,避开荷兰的唯一选择就是战胜喀麦隆,最好是大比分取胜,力压墨西哥成为第一。 让我们再来看看巴西和喀麦隆之间的表演,当 比赛进入到80分钟之后,同组的墨西哥队已经在克罗地亚身上拿到3-0的领先优势,而此时巴西队和喀麦隆的比分还是3-1,两队的净胜球已经持平,墨西哥在已无斗志的克罗地亚身上再进球的话,巴西队就要将小组头名让出,1/8决赛不得不面对状态极佳的B组头名荷兰。关键时刻,又是费尔南迪尼奥,禁区前沿喀麦隆快发出的任意球,喀麦隆17号轻易的将球“失误”传给巴西队员,然后才有南迪尼奥将球交给队友的情况下立即插入禁区,喀麦隆守门员表演式的扑救于事无补,最终凭借费尔南迪尼奥的进球,巴西再次在和墨西哥比拼净胜球的竞争中处于上风。 可见视频: http://2014.qq.com/a/20140624/016070.htm 我这么分析是不是很无趣!没办法,只好这样。
个人分类: 时事评论|3516 次阅读|0 个评论
[转载]Lai Jiang:Why great Olympic feats raise controversies
xpzhan 2012-8-8 02:10
两位可怜的中国羽球姑娘因为打球不卖力,受到了重罚。但是在奥运会到底多卖力才算卖力? Lai Jiang妙文再欣赏: 'Shamelessness profiling' could help to dispel uncertainties. At the Olympics, trying how hard is hard enough? That question has dogged (狗狗有个习性,就是散步时不时要撒泡尿。它可没有尿频的毛病;这本来是它为了防止迷路的本能,利用他发达的嗅觉,可以轻易找到家的;可是即使有主人陪伴,此习依旧。‘dog’在此是非常诙谐的用法,形象、生动而风趣)British cyclist Philip Hindes after the 19-year-old (这个英国佬因为第一次始发不好就假摔以便得到重来的机会,这算什么回事?) won the three-lap race against the French with his two teammates on Friday by crashing at the first bend and securing a restart. In the aftermath of that race, Hindes reportedly said that the strategy in the team sprint final was "if we have a bad start, we need to crash to get a restart." However British Cycling suggested the comments were "lost in translation". His statement predictably stirred up conversations on whether a premeditated tactical crash is ethical and should be allowed. The International Olympic Committee declared that it agreed with the International Cycling Union and the result is not in question. “The race took place and I believe we could clearly say that best efforts were made in that competition by the British team.” said IOC spokesman Mark Adams. The resulting debate has been tinged with racial and political undertones, but little science. Unscientific Nature examines whether and how an athlete's subtlety and the limits of human sense of shamecould be used to determine if the "best efforts" have been made. Is intended crash despicable? Yes. It is a direct violation against the Olympic spirit, which is best expressed in the Olympic Creed: "The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well." Intended crash is by definition not to take part in cycling, not to experience the struggle of trailing behind competitors, and not to fight well by forfeiting a losing battle. Doesn't IOC endorsement rule out the possibility of "not using one's best effort"? No, says Xiaoer Wang, an player in the Chinese men's football team. Athletes are all very excited to compete in the Olympics and always try to perform the best they can. "Everyone plays to their limits at the Olympic games. Hardly anyone has the attitude of merely entertaining oneself,” Wang says. Audience satisfaction is more likely to determine if athletes play up to their potential and the spectators’ expectation, he says, but it is not feasible to survey every audience after each match. Tracking an athlete over time and flagging anomalous shameless behavior would help morality-upholding authorities to make better use of resources, says Zhouzi Yuan, an anti-fraudulent expert living in the Xinhua News Agency employee apartment, who authored several 2012 netblogs proposing that shamelessness profiling be used as an anti-fraudulent tools. “I think it’s a good way and a cheap way to narrow down a large group of athletes to suspicious ones, because after all, the result of any loophole exploiting is unusual lower moral standard,” Yuan says. The ‘moral passport’, which measures characteristics of person's speech and behavior, works in a similar way to shamelessness profiling. After it was introduced in 2011, public intellectuals flagged irregularities in the blog entries of Nuan Nuan, a Chinese racing driver, and targeted analysis turned up evidence of the banned leftist nationalist ideology. How would shamelessness be used to nab those who degrace Olympics? Morality-upholding authorities need a better way of flagging anomalous behavior or patterns of audience response, says Yuan. To do this, sports scientists need to create databases that — sport by sport and event by event — record how the moral standard of athletes degrade with age and experience. Longitudinal records of athletes’ shameless loophole-exploiting would then be fed into statistical models to determine the likelihood that they tried too little in an event, given their past results and the limits of human sense of shame. The Weibo bashing, an everyday sport that combines fishing and name-calling, has dabbled in shamelessness profiling. In a pilot project, scientists at Lanxiang Institute of Technology developed a software program that retroactively analysed the response of 1000 celebrities with the so-called V statue to public events, over four years to identify those most likely to have not tried hard enough to promote the ideal the freedom and democracy. The Chinese Elite Federation now uses the software to target its members for shame testing. Could an athlete then be disciplined simply for exploiting the rules? “That would be unfair,” says Wang. “The final verdict is only ever going to be reached by mood of those in power.” In recent days, badminton authorities have successfully disqualified athletes for depriving the audience of a contest, even when specific condition of “not making best efforts to win a match” is not given. But irregularities in shamelessness is too far removed from not trying hard enough and influenced by too many outside factors such as whether one got a hold of the 150,000 free condoms that the organizer dispensed the night before the game to convict someone of dishonoring the Olympic spirit, Wang says. “When we look at this young cyclist from England who crashes at the first bend of the race and got a restart that his team won, that’s not proof of anything. It asks a question or two.” --
个人分类: 随想杂谈|2537 次阅读|0 个评论
今年的奥运会有些无语
yuliping 2012-8-3 12:06
体制机制问题不仅仅是我们经济社会中的问题,在体育比赛中一样存在。今年的奥运比赛中,中国的负面消息震动很大,大大影响了其取得的成绩。教练也好,运动员也好,其实都是中国体育体制机制的牺牲品,何况是运动员的家属。只不过以前这样玩没有玩出大纰漏,这次玩得过分了一点。其实国内比赛也有类似问题,只不过大家心知肚明,都不计较而已。 类似的问题还有,就是中国普遍存在的运动员特招上大学问题,许多高校都在放水,以便让他们拿到学分,顺利毕业,不要以为这是个别现象,而是明显荒唐的普遍现象。 这些问题的出现本身就是可喜的进步,必然能撼动某些东西,当撼动的因素越来越多以后,国家才会有进步。 2012.8.3俞立平 于宁波
个人分类: 生活其他|3188 次阅读|0 个评论
“让球”使运动员成为最大的受害者
热度 3 taol 2012-8-3 01:12
这几天伦敦奥运会赛场的“让球”风波确实掀起了不小的波澜。各种口水、吐槽也是一浪高过一浪,规则、爱国主义、假球、奥林匹克精神、体育精神等名词夹杂在其中。今天实在忍不住掺和掺和。 关于规则 。 任何让输家获利的规则必然会导致“让球”的发生。这是句废话,但废得好。既然是竞技,首先要有规则,谁赢谁输肯定要规定得很明白,那么中间有输掉比赛获利的规则,那必然会导致大家争相输掉比赛以取得对自己有利的结果。所以,伦敦奥运会几对选手争相输球首当其冲的原因是规则制定的不合理,当然说严重一点就是,傻缺。 这里我想说, 不同意 李侠老师《 于洋的奥运之旅是无法避开的死局 》文中“ 按照规则(中国人钻空子是世界第一,五千年的恶劣生存环境已经让中国人熟悉了一切让自己利益最大化的策略,亚洲中国文化圈都是如此)” 这个观点用在此处。此观点放在别的地方是否正确我不清楚,但是此处我看不出来。 “利用规则”是竞技必然包含的东西,竞技体育中欧洲列强“利用规则”损人利己的例子比比皆是,这次羽毛球赛场的让球更多的算是“利己”。 奥林匹克精神/体育精神·假球 。 几对选手是否“违反”奥林匹克精神/体育精神,是否是“假球”?我本来没有看那场比赛,但是以我的一贯的习惯——不看球不评论,更不会不去看球只看赛后的“评论”去发表评论,那样很不负责。(正如足球比赛后,很多人习惯于只看了集锦和赛后的一些门户网站的体育评论就开始劈头盖脸地批评和赞扬球员和教练,可笑。)特意去找到了比赛视频,只能说 太假了 ,尽管我羽毛球的水平很差,但还是看过羽毛球比赛的。我的理解是,如果一方正常,一方想输球,也许还不会这么假,双方都想输球,这戏就没个演了……当然平时估计也没有这方面的演技训练,即使有像双方这样的情况也得“心领神会”才行。 因此,这场比赛,“假球”相信不会有太多争议。当然了,既然是“假球”,肯定违反奥林匹克精神。 利用规则,当然合理;违反奥林匹克精神,当然不合情。这件事,合理不合情。 对于这件事,打个比方:迫于形势,路人甲持刀将路人乙杀死。形势即规则,对自己有利的就是杀死路人乙。运动员是持刀的手,路人甲呢?不说也罢,大家都懂是哪些人。 这事怪谁?怪谁都行,但与运动员半毛钱关系都没有。 写在后面 运动员如果不去让球是否有更好的结果?李侠老师在博文《 于洋的奥运之旅是无法避开的死局 》中提到了“良心型死局”,认为结果也许更好,我倒是认为结果未必更好。还记得那个“小山智利”么?
个人分类: 看法|4012 次阅读|5 个评论
奥运女羽假打被阴谋水落石出:西方四对选手受益
热度 3 laserdai 2012-8-2 19:48
西方媒体玩弄舆论的计俩很简单,熟悉的人(比如博主我)一眼就看明白了 ,为了利益,玩弄一些小手段还是很值得的,四两拨千斤技巧,西方早就玩得得心应手了。你去哭吧,挂拍吧,别人可在笑啊! 最新消息表明,西方四对选手受益了。各位,这一课(lesson)很深刻而简单吧? 奥运羽毛球女双比赛召回落选球队 在世界羽联因消极比赛取消伦敦奥运羽毛球女子双打比赛4对参赛球员的比赛资格之后,已经在小组比赛中落选的4对选手重新获得参赛资格。 此前分别在A组和C组被淘汰的 俄罗斯、加拿大、澳大利亚和南非4对球员获准参加四分之一决赛 。 根据伦敦奥运官方网站公布的信息,俄罗斯和加拿大选手已经分别战胜南非和澳大利亚选手,进入半决赛。 奥运羽毛球女子双打比赛B组和D组并没有受到这次消极比赛风波的影响,4对出线球员分别来自台北、日本、丹麦和中国。 最新战况显示,日本和中国选手已经分别战胜丹麦和台北选手进入半决赛。 星期四(8月2日)半决赛的对阵形势是,中国的田卿/赵芸蕾对俄罗斯的维斯洛娃/索罗金娜,日本的藤井瑞希/垣岩令佳对加拿大的布鲁斯/李文珊。 国际羽联妙——“杀人于无形”! http://club.mil.news.sina.com.cn/thread-516374-1-1.html
个人分类: 社会文化历史|3788 次阅读|7 个评论
中国女双打假球令人发指!
热度 4 周可真 2012-8-1 22:21
中国女双打假球令人发指 遭全场狂嘘 那场“比赛”实在是太丑陋了,让人忍无可忍! 邵明飞 2012-8-1 21:32 假球打到奥运会,丢人丢到家。
个人分类: 散文.随笔|4613 次阅读|19 个评论
好玩:假打假闹被识破,四对奥运羽毛球女双选手
热度 2 laserdai 2012-8-1 17:22
伦敦奥运女子羽毛球双打预选赛上,四对选手已经进了1/4赛,之后玩弄猫腻, 为了避开下一轮中强的对手,或者节省体力,结果被识破,顿时傻了 等着挨板子吧。看看报道如下, Olympic female badminton players face charges The Badminton World Federation has charged eight female Olympic doubles players with "not using one's best efforts to win a match". Four pairs of players - two from South Korea, one from China and one from Indonesia - could be disciplined. China's Yu Yang and Wang Xiaoli and South Koreans Jung Kyung-eun and Kim Ha-na are among those facing charges. Both pairs were already through to the quarter-finals. Reports have suggested they both wanted to lose to secure an easier draw. The unseeded South Koreans eventually won their match against China's Yu Yang and Wang Xiaoli on Tuesday, meaning they would next play China's Tian Qing and Zhao Yunlei. The South Korean pair did not comment, but Yu said she and Wang were saving energy for the knockout stages. China's Olympic sports delegation launched an investigation into the alleged "deliberate losing" by its badminton players, saying it opposed any behaviour violating "sporting spirit and morality", as reported by state media. A later match between South Korean third seeds Ha Jung-Eun and Kim Min-Jung and Indonesian pair Meiliana Juahari and Greysia Polii is also under scrutiny by the Badminton World Federation. Both pairs of those teams had also already qualified for the knockout stages, with the winner of Group C to play Yu and Wang and the Korean pairs to face each other if Ha and Kim lost. At one point the referee, Berg, again intervened and brandished a black card to disqualify the players. However, he then rescinded his decision following protests from the two teams. Both teams appeared keen to lose and therefore not play the Chinese in the next round, but the Koreans eventually won by two sets to one. A statement from the BWF confirmed that all four pairs would face charges of "not using one's best efforts to win a match" and "conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport". 中文报道连接, 羽联指控8名运动员消极比赛 于洋王晓理或受罚, http://2012.sohu.com/20120801/n349572058.shtml http://news.eastday.com/gd2008/s/2012/0801/2713564709.html
个人分类: 社会文化历史|4317 次阅读|8 个评论
给相关部门:假球和假论文
杨学祥 2010-1-29 12:50
评论:一根枯藤,N个苦瓜。缺少质量监督,行行忙于造假。 给相关部门(猜一猜,是给哪几个部门的): 其一 年年无果年年开, 谎花争春掩青苔。 忽如一夜秋风劲, 万紫千红变尘埃。 其二 年年救火年年伤, 不防灾害防心慌。 跟风权威成正果, 只怪老天不帮忙。 其三 职业创收是祸首, 以权谋私为源头。 学校医院高收费, 幕后交易多假球。 原文: 学者陈安 发表于2010-1-29 5:19:05 时论 中国科学界与中国足球界:比比看   中国科学界与中国足球界,真是两个中国最发愁的界啊,记得以前就有学者对二者进行过比较。   俺们觉得,最近两界的相似度好像在增加,要不,今儿咱们也试着比比看?   先说相同点吧:   1,都想冲出祖国,走向世界,让人家认可认可。   可是,都非常困难。   科学界只是论文数量冲出去了,可是基本上没有实质性的科学贡献,就给外国人查缺补漏了。偶有个把能为人家认可的,也属于稀有事件。   足球界也时常和外国队来个友谊比赛热身赛啥的,可是,基本属于陪太子读书。偶尔冲出去一回,很快就一球不进铩羽而归了。   2,都不断派年青人到海外去学习。   结果,这些年青人在海外表现都还可以,可是多数人一回国就完蛋,同流合污的速度那叫一个快,甚至还不如不出去呢。   3,都不断地请外援。   开始时请来外国人当教练,后来觉得不过瘾,也请了运动员过来。   结果,来当教练的拿把钱就走,甚至还是兼职的。德国那把乙级队带到甲级第六名的教练施拉普那,都用德语声称了很爱中国,报纸也不断宣传他的爱国情操,可是现在理性地去看,他似乎更爱中国的工资。   如果是请来运动员呢,就期待着他们好好踢,也带带我们的人,结果不说了。   4,足球界踢假球赌球已经成为风气,科学家发表假论文或抄论文成为习惯。   且两界中的很多个人都用这个假的东西换了很多真金白银。   5,足球界从高层就烂得不行,还天天出台这个宣布那个,可是根本性的问题没人管。   科学界呢?手段也有很多,不断地在宣称要使用,可是,最基础的问题没人操心。   当然,两界也有不同的地方   1,足球已经开始从高层抓起了,科学界还从小萝卜头开始惩罚   2,足球我们已经可以随便开口骂人了,包括CCTV也开始骂;可是,科学界还是不让随便说话 本文引用地址: http://www.sciencenet.cn/m/user_content.aspx?id=291059
个人分类: 科技点评|3163 次阅读|0 个评论

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )

GMT+8, 2024-6-3 13:09

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部