Do you always think of conspiracy theories when betting on sports?

[Onyeeze]

My point exactly, even though there is a chance that all those things that they talk about match fixing is real it is wrong to assume that whenever losses comes in or a bet doesn't go according to how it was predicted then it's because they sold the game. Football is a game of probability, anything can happen.

It's not only those who stake high or bet on the game that look beyond what just happened on the pitch and judge because they can't accept the loss. Some viewers and fans for the love of the game also demand fairness and when something doesn't appear right, they have the right to question it, and it shouldn't just be about the amount staked.

actually some people are bias for judging their clubs even though they didn't stake to win, they will like not to expose the fault they found against their team, why they are some people who always says the truth in gambling neither it's their team or not, but most of the viewers judge football based on a sentiment, that why most people are confused when referee make his decision on a pitch, basically we that's watching football need to observe football match more than a referee who is in pitch officiating football match, but people who are viewing football is on better position to judge the attitude referee and players

[rachael9385]

I never think of conspiracy theories when betting on sports. I prefer to leave that sort of thing for after I lose a bet. Then obviously there must have been some massive conspiracy that led my bet astray…

More seriously, my only big conspiracy when it comes to sports is that the NBA Draft is rigged.

Bettors think that when they lose a game it means that there's something that went off because of a referee or other factors but they forget to ask themselves how sure they are about it. Most of the matches we bet on that goes sideways are not rigged especially if these clubs are from prominent leagues. Even in NBA the popular leagues cannot really do anything crafty.

[Orpichukwu]

It is not the case of the referee alone when you want to determine the outcome of a game, the referee can be an obstacle for a team to successfully win their match but if the players are determined to tackle their opponents by playing and focusing on scoring, they can finally get a good outcome that will lead to their winning.

If a team is focused and has the determination of winning, the referee can still appear to be an obstacle, as every little thing which is not supposed to be seen as a crime will be flagged for a free kick against the team the referee is against. Players have their role to play, the most important one, but there could still be obstacles which can prevent that from happening, and a referee is one of them that should not be undermined.

[Futurexxx]

It is not the case of the referee alone when you want to determine the outcome of a game, the referee can be an obstacle for a team to successfully win their match but if the players are determined to tackle their opponents by playing and focusing on scoring, they can finally get a good outcome that will lead to their winning.

It is not every game in football that the referee can have a major influence on, because there are some games that the referee might easily decide the fate of each teams, especially if the teams are of equal strength or they are close to, but if a particular side is way stronger than the other team, just know that the referee may be powerless in influencing the game into the favor of the weaker team.
Sometimes the referee might issued a red card to a stronger team, just to make things difficult for them, but if they are strong enough, they can still win even with a man down, even though it's not an easy task to carry out.

[Chibit01]

Bettors think that when they lose a game it means that there's something that went off because of a referee or other factors but they forget to ask themselves how sure they are about it.

Bettors don't really need to be sure before they think how wrong a game can be it's their mind and we have the right to question things when it don't make sense to us, but not to the extent of always shifting blame each time we lose a bet, there are times which are worth such questioning other time you accept it, because it's an event which the outcome is beyond the control of few persons.

[viljy]

Of course, there are manipulations in sports. This should be kept in mind. Anyway, the term "conspiracy theory" itself was coined as a way of ridiculing, declaring a crazy person who revealed the real state of things. Over time (especially nowadays), it turns out that a lot of "conspiracy theories" from the past turned out to be true.

This mainly applies to politics and economics, but you can draw an analogy with sports betting. No one, even the highest level of the league, guarantees against manipulation. Rather, the opposite is true. And the more arguments there are about control and honesty, the greater the risks of manipulation. When there's a lot of money at stake, nothing else matters.

[sompitonov]

Bettors don't really need to be sure before they think how wrong a game can be it's their mind and we have the right to question things when it don't make sense to us, but not to the extent of always shifting blame each time we lose a bet, there are times which are worth such questioning other time you accept it, because it's an event which the outcome is beyond the control of few persons.

A player who has placed a bet will believe anything, as long as that bet wins. This also works the other way around: if a player loses, they can come up with any conspiracy theory in their head, claiming everyone is to blame but not them. This is also called abdicating responsibility, although in reality, every player bears responsibility, since they placed the bet themselves, with their own hands, and wagered their own money; no one else did it for them. Sometimes, players should also start with themselves and reflect on why they placed the bet and who influenced them.