Insider info from the almighty??
- Thread starter Dave G
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
No, me neither. This is the problem with online betting. Studge never would have been comfortable in an old school bookies shop, full of unkempt and haunted looking men with the smell of drink about them, rolled up newspapers in their back pockets and little blue pens behind their ears. Bloody internet.
Fuck me. Whatever happened to keep your fucking mouth shut and deny everything? I guess its now spill your guts, hand them volumes upon volumes of evidence, then give a ridiculously weak denial that will never wash. Retards. We've learned nothing.
Yep. Categorically denies betting. He may have told his mates the team news etc who then made a fortune off it though.
Apparently he told his family that he was going on loan to West Brom. Shortly after a flurry of bets on that move were placed. Unless he deliberately advised his family to place bets themselves, it seems pretty unfair to hold him responsible for that. It almost certainly happens all the time that a player will tell family and close friends if they're moving. They surely can't control what happens by word of mouth.
This is shite, bookies have all sorts of connections to agents and journalists to get inside info and stack the deck against punters. When a punter uses an inside connection to fleece the bookies we are supposed to think its somehow corrupt, bollox to that. If they want to have betting markets on transfers and team line ups then they will just have to accept they are going to get stung every once in a while. Fuck them
You all seem to be forgetting the last time one of our players did nothing wrong, explained what he had said to the FA, and they used the information to murder him. He just had to keep his mouth shut and deny saying anything to anyone. The flurry of bets could have come from the tea lady for all they know. Instead, he has now admitted he passed on information, then a bunch of bets were made, and the FA have charged him with being involved in those bets. If you honestly think he's going to get away with it, you haven't been paying attention.
Lolz.. Didn't we all know in Jan he was going? There was a story about a flurry of bets in the west midlands.
Has he admitted it? The assumption is that he told his family. He hasn't said anything other than he hasn't bet on anything.
Then it's a good thing he's a devout Christian, when his mates and family members are tragically killed in various accidents he can tell himself they're all in a better place. I can't see any other way out of this.
Maybe I am reading too much into fully cooperating with the FA. Let us pray you are right.
Apparently it is from last January. Some bleeding bookmakers whining how they have lost money on his loan deal ( the reality is, you can't get more than somewhere around the £100 mark on from one account ). Soon as 2 or 3 bets of that size are placed, the odds are automatically reduced and would continue to do so for every few big bets placed. Bookies will have lost no more than about 10k on this. The crap it stirs up is laughable when you think of all the other shit they could look in to.
News of who is going where, in any single transfer window, must lead to bets all over the place. Hundreds of players move, most of them tell friends and family, and by word of mouth that reaches pubs etc, and bets follow - the number of suspicious bets must be huge. Unless the FA can pinpoint direct and intentional tips from the player to a gambler I don't see how they can take action without being open to the innumerable similar cases all around the country.
Hahaha is this the twilight zone? The FA do not have to prove intention. If he provided information and bets were made, then that's all she wrote he is going down.
Have you wandered in from Softly feckin Softly? Or just from shite legal drama. Wind your neck in.
Yeah perhaps you want to check the wording of the rule he has breached, and then the fate of poor studge will reveal itself to you...
- Rule E8(1)(a) - a participant shall not bet, either directly or indirectly, or instruct, permit, cause or enable any person to bet on - (i) the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of, or occurrence in or in connection with, a football match or competition; or (ii) any other matter concerning or related to football anywhere in the world, including, for example and without limitation, the transfer of players, employment of managers, team selection or disciplinary matters.
- Rule E8(1)(b) - where a participant provides to any other person any information relating to football which the participant has obtained by virtue of his or her position within the game and which is not publicly available at that time, the participant shall be in breach of this Rule where any of that information is used by that other person for, or in relation to, betting.
Lighten up lads he'll more than likely get a slap on the wrists. Barton got a fine and a ban because he placed over 1200 bets!!!!
The fact Studge didn't actually place the bets I'm saying this will be water under the bridge.
Fish and chip paper by tomorrow
The fact Studge didn't actually place the bets I'm saying this will be water under the bridge.
Fish and chip paper by tomorrow
The other week, Carra's dad told one of my mates son's that Henry was being appointed villa manager, done deal. The fact Jamie knows him through Sky and Christian Purslow who is now Villa CEO lived in the same block as Carra's dad made everyone think was a dead cert. My son backed it at 6/1. By the time I saw the text half an hour later he was 1/5, and a few hours later it was in the papers. Then it didn't happen (thankfully, if you're a villa fan, have you seen the mess Henry has made of Monaco?).
I bet this kind of shit happens all the time and the bookies make more out of it than they lose. As if you wouldn't tell your mates or your mum if you thought you were about to sign for someone.
I bet this kind of shit happens all the time and the bookies make more out of it than they lose. As if you wouldn't tell your mates or your mum if you thought you were about to sign for someone.
Hopefully it shouldn't even amount to a slap on the wrist, on further investigation the FA conveniently omitted this part of the rule form their charge....
(c) It shall be a defence to a charge brought pursuant to sub-paragraph E8(1)(b)
if a Participant can establish, on the balance of probability, that the Participant
provided any such information in circumstances where he did not know, and could
not reasonably have known, that the information provided would be used by the
other person for or in relation to betting.
(c) It shall be a defence to a charge brought pursuant to sub-paragraph E8(1)(b)
if a Participant can establish, on the balance of probability, that the Participant
provided any such information in circumstances where he did not know, and could
not reasonably have known, that the information provided would be used by the
other person for or in relation to betting.
Exactly. We were given the same info ( from different source, John Terry's old fella ) and hammered it to the tune of about £800 across as many accounts as we could use at prices from 6/1 to 2/1. It didn't happen. Do you see the bookies whinging about this info? Do you shite!
Totally unrelated but fuck it... we had a trade launch of some beers in The Lion Tavern on Moorfields the other day, and the boss there is a season ticket holder, and we were discussing old away trips, and me and my bro were talking about the Real Madrid pre season tournament in 2002ish, because of the fucking mess we ended up in and resulting embarrassment, and the boss there said he'd gone to that too with Carra's dad, and the next morning he'd said to him, it was good to see Jamie back in the side last night, and his dad had said 'did he play did he?' He'd been that drunk he hadn't noticed his own son play.
Maybe you need to revisit some of your (totally justified) cynicism earlier in the thread regarding the sweet FA. A pound to a penny (oh dear, does that count as betting?) says they'll decide he could reasonably have known the info in question would be used in that way.
- Status
