World Cup
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Not really a spread punter but looking at the total goals spread with SI they have gone 159-161.5. There have only been 3 World Cups with 64 games played. 1998 = 171, 2002 = 161 and 2006 = 147. Looking at teams that qualified only 14 of the 31 covered the required average of 2.5. I would presume the drop in goals is down to the rise of the holding midfielder and the shift to 4-5-1/4-3-3. Thinking of going under, has anybody got any thoughts on this or advice before i get carried away and lose the cats supply of Whiskers for the month of June.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 13
|
By:
90 mins only as well which is in your favour and should be worth about 3-4 points to you.
|
|
By:
most world cups played in seering heat -this one won't be -could mean more goals than average
|
|
By:
Germany 2006 was hardly played in searing heat
|
|
By:
oh yes it was
|
|
By:
The average temperature over the course of that WC for some of the cities involved was
19 deg - Munich 19 deg - Stuttgart 18 deg - Berlin 20 deg - Hamburg |
|
By:
there are some awful teams in this world cup which could mean some real hammerings. Toss of a coin. Interest bet only.
|
|
By:
i agree big jesus but the groups seem balanced enough and there are always hammerings in the World Cup, Argentina 6 Serbia 0 in 06 as an example
|
|
By:
true enough, i take your point, North Korea could be in for 3 humiliations if their team is a poor as reported.
|
|
By:
The min the North Korean plane touches down they will all defect
|
|
By:
lol, from what i have read, if it is true, i would leg it!
|
|
By:
the alleged poorer teams will have worked hard on the defence and probably will be delighted if they only concede 2 or 3 so as there willbe some low scoring tactical games i would be going under
|
|
By:
The new ball could be worth a couple of goals if the reports are anywhere near true.
|
|
By:
Total gamble IMO too many imponderables
|