Wankers
Will the bookies apologise?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
OneEyedSainter77
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3792
- Joined: Tue 02 Aug 2005 10:24pm
Why should they?
It really irks me when people think it's the bookie's fault for the odds. The idiots who started piling the money on the hawks MADE the odds go down - and when we lost seven of our top seven, of course they kept lowering the odds for the hawks.
Bookies will be too busy laughing their way to the bank to apologise.
It really irks me when people think it's the bookie's fault for the odds. The idiots who started piling the money on the hawks MADE the odds go down - and when we lost seven of our top seven, of course they kept lowering the odds for the hawks.
Bookies will be too busy laughing their way to the bank to apologise.
-
Moods
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4824
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 313 times
- Been thanked: 436 times
Exactly my point! THey won. The saints won! Yet they bagged the saints during the week, b/c they were petrified that they might lose some money. THought the saints should have let the footy world know about their injuries, so they could set their books.OneEyedSainter77 wrote:Why should they?
It really irks me when people think it's the bookie's fault for the odds. The idiots who started piling the money on the hawks MADE the odds go down - and when we lost seven of our top seven, of course they kept lowering the odds for the hawks.
Bookies will be too busy laughing their way to the bank to apologise.
Wankers
Re: Will the bookies apologise?
I never heard one Bookie winge , they know it can go either way and thats the risk they take so maybe your the wanker for starting a post like thisMoods wrote:
Wankers
-
OneEyedSainter77
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3792
- Joined: Tue 02 Aug 2005 10:24pm
Really?Moods wrote:Exactly my point! THey won. The saints won! Yet they bagged the saints during the week, b/c they were petrified that they might lose some money. THought the saints should have let the footy world know about their injuries, so they could set their books.OneEyedSainter77 wrote:Why should they?
It really irks me when people think it's the bookie's fault for the odds. The idiots who started piling the money on the hawks MADE the odds go down - and when we lost seven of our top seven, of course they kept lowering the odds for the hawks.
Bookies will be too busy laughing their way to the bank to apologise.
Wankers
Didn't think bookies could be so unprofessional.
Carry on.
-
Moods
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4824
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 313 times
- Been thanked: 436 times
Font Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Peter Lalor | August 08, 2009
Article from: The Australian
THE farce of bottom-of-the-table tanking has taken another twist with a betting agency slamming the league, and ladder leader St Kilda, after the club axed at least six of its stars from tomorrow's game against Hawthorn.
The club revealed yesterday that Sam Fisher would not be taking the field, amid rumours that key midfielder Nick Dal Santo would also be missing after he did not catch the plane to Launceston for the game.
St Kilda is undefeated this year and was $1.30 favourite but betting markets were suspended twice this week after punters plunged large amounts on Hawthorn at $3 or more.
On Thursday, the Saints revealed that captain Nick Riewoldt (concussion), Leigh Montagna (elbow), Brendon Goddard (knee), Steven Baker (knee) and Lenny Hayes (back) would not play.
Betting agencies are fuming after taking huge bets early in the week on the Saints as most of the injured players managed to complete last Saturday night's match and are suspected of being rested before the finals series.
Other clubs may not be happy with the side either, as last year's premier Hawthorn is 10th and in competition for a finals berth with Port Adelaide and Essendon.
The Hawks are coming into form and may pose a September danger to all sides in the eight, but those who stand to lose money are bleating the loudest.
Tab Sportsbet suspended betting on Tuesday when a punter placed $25,000 on Hawthorn at $3 and another claimed to be holding significant bets on the club at similar odds.
Betstar slammed the club and the AFL for a lack of transparency yesterday, saying both had let down the agencies and punters who took St Kilda at short odds.
"While the AFL or St Kilda Football Club were offering no indication of St Kilda's plans to withdraw six high-profile players from tomorrow's match, the money coming for Hawthorn did the talking for them and we suspended betting on the game," Betstar's Alan Eskander said.
The agency has moved St Kilda from $1.30 at the start of the week to $2.60 after the announcement of its depleted playing list.
"Like the stockmarket, betting markets rely on a clear and controlled flow of information," Eskander said. "The money that came for Hawthorn prior to St Kilda announcing their omissions highlights the severe deficiencies within the AFL."
Tab Sportsbet spokesman Gary Davies said: "The Hawks were $3.15 and now they could come into $1.40 or so, which is the biggest turnaround since TAB Sportsbet started betting on AFL in 1991."
St Kilda coach Ross Lyon, who had criticised Geelong for resting players from an earlier match, denied he was doing the same thing, claiming the match against Sydney had taken its toll.
"The Geelong game was a brutal game," he said. "Then we flew to Subiaco ... and we played Adelaide at the Dome (Etihad Stadium) off Subiaco and I think they'd lost one game in 10.
"Off a six-day break we played the Western Bulldogs, who'd lost two games in 10 weeks as well. And then off the back of that we flew up to Sydney and played interstate, in a brutal night game. We're trying to improve our football every week and it's the same attitude this week but we certainly need to give our club the best opportunity to capitalise on the work that's been done. And if that means not playing players that need to be needled then that's the way it's going to be."
An AFL spokesman rejected the betting agencies' complaints.
"The betting fits around our competition and our competition does not fit around the betting," the spokesman said.
Hawthorn coach Alastair Clarkson says his side would approach the game unchanged.
"Despite the fact key guys have gone out of their side, it's the way they're playing together now which is a great feature of their side," he said.
Additional reporting: Agencies
Just for you blokes who don't read the papers
Article from: The Australian
THE farce of bottom-of-the-table tanking has taken another twist with a betting agency slamming the league, and ladder leader St Kilda, after the club axed at least six of its stars from tomorrow's game against Hawthorn.
The club revealed yesterday that Sam Fisher would not be taking the field, amid rumours that key midfielder Nick Dal Santo would also be missing after he did not catch the plane to Launceston for the game.
St Kilda is undefeated this year and was $1.30 favourite but betting markets were suspended twice this week after punters plunged large amounts on Hawthorn at $3 or more.
On Thursday, the Saints revealed that captain Nick Riewoldt (concussion), Leigh Montagna (elbow), Brendon Goddard (knee), Steven Baker (knee) and Lenny Hayes (back) would not play.
Betting agencies are fuming after taking huge bets early in the week on the Saints as most of the injured players managed to complete last Saturday night's match and are suspected of being rested before the finals series.
Other clubs may not be happy with the side either, as last year's premier Hawthorn is 10th and in competition for a finals berth with Port Adelaide and Essendon.
The Hawks are coming into form and may pose a September danger to all sides in the eight, but those who stand to lose money are bleating the loudest.
Tab Sportsbet suspended betting on Tuesday when a punter placed $25,000 on Hawthorn at $3 and another claimed to be holding significant bets on the club at similar odds.
Betstar slammed the club and the AFL for a lack of transparency yesterday, saying both had let down the agencies and punters who took St Kilda at short odds.
"While the AFL or St Kilda Football Club were offering no indication of St Kilda's plans to withdraw six high-profile players from tomorrow's match, the money coming for Hawthorn did the talking for them and we suspended betting on the game," Betstar's Alan Eskander said.
The agency has moved St Kilda from $1.30 at the start of the week to $2.60 after the announcement of its depleted playing list.
"Like the stockmarket, betting markets rely on a clear and controlled flow of information," Eskander said. "The money that came for Hawthorn prior to St Kilda announcing their omissions highlights the severe deficiencies within the AFL."
Tab Sportsbet spokesman Gary Davies said: "The Hawks were $3.15 and now they could come into $1.40 or so, which is the biggest turnaround since TAB Sportsbet started betting on AFL in 1991."
St Kilda coach Ross Lyon, who had criticised Geelong for resting players from an earlier match, denied he was doing the same thing, claiming the match against Sydney had taken its toll.
"The Geelong game was a brutal game," he said. "Then we flew to Subiaco ... and we played Adelaide at the Dome (Etihad Stadium) off Subiaco and I think they'd lost one game in 10.
"Off a six-day break we played the Western Bulldogs, who'd lost two games in 10 weeks as well. And then off the back of that we flew up to Sydney and played interstate, in a brutal night game. We're trying to improve our football every week and it's the same attitude this week but we certainly need to give our club the best opportunity to capitalise on the work that's been done. And if that means not playing players that need to be needled then that's the way it's going to be."
An AFL spokesman rejected the betting agencies' complaints.
"The betting fits around our competition and our competition does not fit around the betting," the spokesman said.
Hawthorn coach Alastair Clarkson says his side would approach the game unchanged.
"Despite the fact key guys have gone out of their side, it's the way they're playing together now which is a great feature of their side," he said.
Additional reporting: Agencies
Just for you blokes who don't read the papers
-
Moods
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4824
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 313 times
- Been thanked: 436 times
Re: Will the bookies apologise?
No worries Gurgman - apology acceptedGurgman wrote:I never heard one Bookie winge , they know it can go either way and thats the risk they take so maybe your the wanker for starting a post like thisMoods wrote:
Wankers
-
cowboy18
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5795
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:05pm
- Location: in my duffle coat
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 5 times
I've seen some major league whining from Eskander in the SMH too.
It begs the question - what possible responsibility would have a club or the competition have to cater to bookmakers or punters? If someone is stupid enough to frame a market on football or even more stupid and think they'll make money betting on them - let them go for it.
It begs the question - what possible responsibility would have a club or the competition have to cater to bookmakers or punters? If someone is stupid enough to frame a market on football or even more stupid and think they'll make money betting on them - let them go for it.
Re: Will the bookies apologise?
The ones i heard on radio were not worried at all , so i stand by what i said and no apologyMoods wrote:No worries Gurgman - apology acceptedGurgman wrote:I never heard one Bookie winge , they know it can go either way and thats the risk they take so maybe your the wanker for starting a post like thisMoods wrote:
Wankers
-
therabbitinthehat
- Club Player
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Tue 09 Jun 2009 2:11pm
- Has thanked: 13 times
- Been thanked: 52 times
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12706
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 719 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
Re: Will the bookies apologise?
So on that logic Gurgman, because you didn't actually see/hear something means that it didn't occur?Gurgman wrote:The ones i heard on radio were not worried at all , so i stand by what i said and no apologyMoods wrote:No worries Gurgman - apology acceptedGurgman wrote:I never heard one Bookie winge , they know it can go either way and thats the risk they take so maybe your the wanker for starting a post like thisMoods wrote:
Wankers
-
Moods
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4824
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 313 times
- Been thanked: 436 times
Re: Will the bookies apologise?
Most bizarre logic I've ever read. What a world you must live in. As long as YOU didn't hear it, it mustn't have happened, and gives you carte blanch to tee off on anyone who actually knows the facts.Gurgman wrote:The ones i heard on radio were not worried at all , so i stand by what i said and no apologyMoods wrote:No worries Gurgman - apology acceptedGurgman wrote:I never heard one Bookie winge , they know it can go either way and thats the risk they take so maybe your the wanker for starting a post like thisMoods wrote:
Wankers
-
golden hawk
- Club Player
- Posts: 1136
- Joined: Tue 02 Nov 2004 10:58am
- Location: in the outer
the afl are looking into bets made on a backman i think a lions player for first goal big bets were put on him for last weeks game and he did kick the first goal .
anyway stupid person to put so much money on the hawks when they have been up and down , i just wished i put some on you guys at the $2 plus price !
funny thing i don't bet anyway but one day i will give it a go
anyway stupid person to put so much money on the hawks when they have been up and down , i just wished i put some on you guys at the $2 plus price !
funny thing i don't bet anyway but one day i will give it a go
your friendly neighbourhood hawk
-
asiu
-
golden hawk
- Club Player
- Posts: 1136
- Joined: Tue 02 Nov 2004 10:58am
- Location: in the outer
that is soooo right if they don't like it don't take bets on afl games !backit wrote:An AFL spokesman rejected the betting agencies' complaints.
"The betting fits around our competition and our competition does not fit around the betting," the spokesman said.
If the bookies don't like it don't accept bets on AFL simple.
your friendly neighbourhood hawk
-
saintdooley
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4571
- Joined: Mon 20 Feb 2006 2:32pm
yep!OneEyedSainter77 wrote:Why should they?
It really irks me when people think it's the bookie's fault for the odds. The idiots who started piling the money on the hawks MADE the odds go down - and when we lost seven of our top seven, of course they kept lowering the odds for the hawks.
Bookies will be too busy laughing their way to the bank to apologise.
when i was at the game yesterday i walked past the betfair tent and saw the hawks at $1.41 and stkilda st $3.01. if i had a spare $10 i would of gone for us, but i didnt, and when i do we lose.
but yes, the bookies dont make the odds, its the people who put money on them
"Another storied win in Robert Harvey's career. They say he is the embodiment of their motto of strength through loyalty, and on the day he became just the tenth man to play 350 league games the saints reward him with a seemingly impossible victory."
The lions backman being Daniel Merritt was just bought up on the the Offsiders on the ABC and confirmed the former Chairman of the club won a good deal of money on Merritt kicking the first goal and donated it to charity, also stated that Voss had to speak to his players about the issue being bought up during the week. The AFL is investigating the incident.golden hawk wrote:the afl are looking into bets made on a backman i think a lions player for first goal big bets were put on him for last weeks game and he did kick the first goal .
anyway stupid person to put so much money on the hawks when they have been up and down , i just wished i put some on you guys at the $2 plus price !
funny thing i don't bet anyway but one day i will give it a go
-
golden hawk
- Club Player
- Posts: 1136
- Joined: Tue 02 Nov 2004 10:58am
- Location: in the outer
that won't look good a former chairman of the club they can not do anything to him can they being a former chairman ???backit wrote:The lions backman being Daniel Merritt was just bought up on the the Offsiders on the ABC and confirmed the former Chairman of the club won a good deal of money on Merritt kicking the first goal and donated it to charity, also stated that Voss had to speak to his players about the issue being bought up during the week. The AFL is investigating the incident.golden hawk wrote:the afl are looking into bets made on a backman i think a lions player for first goal big bets were put on him for last weeks game and he did kick the first goal .
anyway stupid person to put so much money on the hawks when they have been up and down , i just wished i put some on you guys at the $2 plus price !
funny thing i don't bet anyway but one day i will give it a go
your friendly neighbourhood hawk
-
chook23
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7259
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:31am
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 136 times
Why do so many posters keep on with
'Poor old bookies'
they would have cleaned up
the "bookies" pushed the plunge by suspending etc
advertise large bets.....for hawks... to get the mug dollars (which really add up) form the herd that follow the money.
A lot of bookies claim huge bets.....but were they really put on....just suck people in.
'Poor old bookies'
they would have cleaned up
the "bookies" pushed the plunge by suspending etc
advertise large bets.....for hawks... to get the mug dollars (which really add up) form the herd that follow the money.
A lot of bookies claim huge bets.....but were they really put on....just suck people in.
saint4life
-
desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10347
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 183 times
- Been thanked: 689 times
whatever the bookies are - the punters that backed the hawks are 'friars'!therabbitinthehat wrote:you believe wrong. Shmuck is a slang term for idiot/moron. Shmeckel is a 'prick' as in the thing dangling between your legs.westy wrote:I believe that shmuck is yiddish for prick. So, a lot of bookies are shmucks!
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "