Stanley promise full cooperation in betting probe | Football | The Guardian
hope you don't get a major punishment, but it aint looking good for you guys
hope you don't get a major punishment, but it aint looking good for you guys
fa probe
- Thread starter shakers08
- Start date
What do you mean major punishment ? It aint looking good for you guys ? If the game was fixed then it takes two teams to fix a game. So let's hope you don't get a major punishment.
Me thinks the F.A are investigating that some idiot actually put a tenner on stanley winning a home game!!!!
From Sky sports
The Football Association is to investigate Accrington Stanley's 2-0 loss to Bury on Saturday after it was alerted to 'a very unusual betting pattern'.
Bookmakers William Hill and Coral closed their book on the League Two match while betting exchange Betfair reported action far exceeding fixtures of a similar profile.
FA director of communications Adrian Bevington said: "This was a very unusual betting pattern - if the allegations are true. We were made aware of the situation on Friday.
"We will look very closely at the information Betfair and other bookmakers provide and take any subsequent action with the Football League and the two clubs concerned."
No proof
Stanley chief executive Rob Heys said: "The club was aware that betting was suspended on Friday on the Accrington v Bury game.
"At this moment in time we have no evidence to suggest any wrongdoing.
"We are going to investigate it fully and any wrongdoing will be severely dealt with.
"Nobody has confirmed to the club anything that has happened but we would welcome any further information."
Stanley manager John Coleman added: "There's no proof, we could see out there that we wanted to win the game."
Football League spokesman John Nagle told the People: "An issue has been raised with us regarding a match through existing monitoring arrangements."
<!--/ss-art-body/-->
The Football Association is to investigate Accrington Stanley's 2-0 loss to Bury on Saturday after it was alerted to 'a very unusual betting pattern'.
Bookmakers William Hill and Coral closed their book on the League Two match while betting exchange Betfair reported action far exceeding fixtures of a similar profile.
FA director of communications Adrian Bevington said: "This was a very unusual betting pattern - if the allegations are true. We were made aware of the situation on Friday.
"We will look very closely at the information Betfair and other bookmakers provide and take any subsequent action with the Football League and the two clubs concerned."
No proof
Stanley chief executive Rob Heys said: "The club was aware that betting was suspended on Friday on the Accrington v Bury game.
"At this moment in time we have no evidence to suggest any wrongdoing.
"We are going to investigate it fully and any wrongdoing will be severely dealt with.
"Nobody has confirmed to the club anything that has happened but we would welcome any further information."
Stanley manager John Coleman added: "There's no proof, we could see out there that we wanted to win the game."
Football League spokesman John Nagle told the People: "An issue has been raised with us regarding a match through existing monitoring arrangements."
<!--/ss-art-body/-->
Me thinks the F.A are investigating that some idiot actually put a tenner on stanley winning a home game!!!!
I actually laughed at that one
whoever wagered the sums of money being mentioned will have an account with the bookie.
The bookies, not being ones to like 'being fleeced' will co-operate and release the names of the people involved. If a link is found it will be quickly and will involve immediate loss of employment and criminal proceedings.
I don't think that 'we' have anything to worry about, although an individual or two elsewhere may have. The top and bottom of it is that the price for Bury was way too high given their form, our poor home form and the fact that we had played inexperienced players in the previous game and were likely to do so again. Much of football has commented on the fact that the average bets placed total between 5-10k per game yet ours was £284k. Nobody seems to have picked up that the MK Dongs v Morecambe was over £200k and Posh v Darlo was £184k. It seems to me that whoever was in charge of odd setting for the bookies must have gone on holiday early and left all sorts of good prices around for the away wins.
The bookies, not being ones to like 'being fleeced' will co-operate and release the names of the people involved. If a link is found it will be quickly and will involve immediate loss of employment and criminal proceedings.
I don't think that 'we' have anything to worry about, although an individual or two elsewhere may have. The top and bottom of it is that the price for Bury was way too high given their form, our poor home form and the fact that we had played inexperienced players in the previous game and were likely to do so again. Much of football has commented on the fact that the average bets placed total between 5-10k per game yet ours was £284k. Nobody seems to have picked up that the MK Dongs v Morecambe was over £200k and Posh v Darlo was £184k. It seems to me that whoever was in charge of odd setting for the bookies must have gone on holiday early and left all sorts of good prices around for the away wins.
I'm with Macca on this one.........
Being a betting man myself, I find it incredible that the bookies actually offered 2/1 at one point for Bury ( one of the top performing sides based upon recent form) to beat a Stanley side that has been truly dreadfull at home ALL season, losing 14 home games prior to this fixture. We also had the worst defence in the Division and had scored very few goals in all our games since New Years Day.
As Macca has said, we also fielded a few of the youngsters in what the end proved to be an inconsequential game (as far as deciding any promotion or relegation matters go!! )
As Coley says, anyone who watched the game would have seen that the lads tried to compete. The fact that they were beaten (albeit comfortably) by an in form side, doesn't detract from the fact that we did try to make a game of it, had numerous chances to score and were undone by a definate penalty and a quality finish by one of the better strikers in the division.
When all's said and done, If you like a bet and you had some money to wager, with bookies offering silly prices like 2/1, it was a bit of a no brainer wasn't it...
The one thing that makes me sick is the fact that I never looked at the fixed odds coupon last week, in fact I never had a bet this weekend. Otherwise, had I noticed the bookies offering such a ridiculous price, Id have broken one of my own rules, backed against my own side, lumped a bundle of bunce on and made a tidy profit.
I'ts my own opinion, but it smacks to me of the bookies spitting out their "collective dummies" and trying to hide their own embarrasment at a rather large, overpriced mistake.
Being a betting man myself, I find it incredible that the bookies actually offered 2/1 at one point for Bury ( one of the top performing sides based upon recent form) to beat a Stanley side that has been truly dreadfull at home ALL season, losing 14 home games prior to this fixture. We also had the worst defence in the Division and had scored very few goals in all our games since New Years Day.
As Macca has said, we also fielded a few of the youngsters in what the end proved to be an inconsequential game (as far as deciding any promotion or relegation matters go!! )
As Coley says, anyone who watched the game would have seen that the lads tried to compete. The fact that they were beaten (albeit comfortably) by an in form side, doesn't detract from the fact that we did try to make a game of it, had numerous chances to score and were undone by a definate penalty and a quality finish by one of the better strikers in the division.
When all's said and done, If you like a bet and you had some money to wager, with bookies offering silly prices like 2/1, it was a bit of a no brainer wasn't it...
The one thing that makes me sick is the fact that I never looked at the fixed odds coupon last week, in fact I never had a bet this weekend. Otherwise, had I noticed the bookies offering such a ridiculous price, Id have broken one of my own rules, backed against my own side, lumped a bundle of bunce on and made a tidy profit.
I'ts my own opinion, but it smacks to me of the bookies spitting out their "collective dummies" and trying to hide their own embarrasment at a rather large, overpriced mistake.
F.A Investigation.
Allegedly according to the lancashire telegraph all the bets placed on Stanleys game versus Bury where placed in LIVERPOOL!! draw your own conclusions from this. I just hope its nothing to do with anyone connected to the club as we could be in serious trouble if anything to point the finger can be proven!
Allegedly according to the lancashire telegraph all the bets placed on Stanleys game versus Bury where placed in LIVERPOOL!! draw your own conclusions from this. I just hope its nothing to do with anyone connected to the club as we could be in serious trouble if anything to point the finger can be proven!
Re: F.A Investigation.
And this one will go this same way if it gets libellous.
And this one will go this same way if it gets libellous.
Re: F.A Investigation.
I would think that's libellous enough.
Allegedly according to the lancashire telegraph all the bets placed on Stanleys game versus Bury where placed in LIVERPOOL!! draw your own conclusions from this. I just hope its nothing to do with anyone connected to the club as we could be in serious trouble if anything to point the finger can be proven!
I would think that's libellous enough.
Re: F.A Investigation.
Boring, as it's already been said and done.
Boring, as it's already been said and done.
Re: F.A Investigation.
boring , it's already been said and done
oh hang on! so has that!
boring , it's already been said and done
oh hang on! so has that!
Re: F.A Investigation.
this is just idiocy .stanley matchfixingbookie says this match stinks.yes you should have been there to watch it
bookies will try anything to try and avoid paying out.they are only moaning cause they got stung...
this is just idiocy .stanley matchfixing
bookie says this match stinks.yes you should have been there to watch itbookies will try anything to try and avoid paying out.they are only moaning cause they got stung...
Re: F.A Investigation.
exactly my thoughts aswel, thats all it is, weird you never see em moaning when they take the money off us, lol
this is just idiocy .stanley matchfixing
exactly my thoughts aswel, thats all it is, weird you never see em moaning when they take the money off us, lol
Re: F.A Investigation.
if I remember correctly, BBC match stats gave Stanley a total of about 15 shots to Bury's 5 - funny way to 'chuck' a match don't you think ? Really surprised the FA seem to be considering the allegations - it's a 'no brainer'.
if I remember correctly, BBC match stats gave Stanley a total of about 15 shots to Bury's 5 - funny way to 'chuck' a match don't you think ? Really surprised the FA seem to be considering the allegations - it's a 'no brainer'.
Re: F.A Investigation.
And yet we didn't score any of them. Looks suspicious to anyone outside looking in. However, for those of us who've had to watch weak finishing all season, it doesn't come as any surprise.
And yet we didn't score any of them. Looks suspicious to anyone outside looking in. However, for those of us who've had to watch weak finishing all season, it doesn't come as any surprise.
A bet on Stanley to lose at home! You'd be mad wouldn't you!!!!