liverpool betting scandal

[Shrivvy Road]

Umm i think there is isn't there? Isn't that what he's being charged with? I might be wrong.

Hus may be different. If he put a bet on hinself or asked others too for him then yeah he has taken the piss. But if you were speaking to your best mate and he says he has a medical at derby and you decide to put a bet on it i think that is tough shit. On that basis papers should stop printing rumours etc

[Paolo69]

Maybe it's should be but i think there's still rules from what i've read. If there wasn't he wouldn't be being charged.

Shamelessly pinched from a BBC article:

An FA statement said the charge against him was "specifically in relation to Rule E8(1)(a)(ii) and Rule E8(1)(b)" which are:

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.

[bamboonoshop]

So it's really the latter rule he's guilty of in the sense. I suppose the difficult thing is actually proving it? Surely it is just word of mouth and one word against another. Unless he was silly and actually messaged the info to someone. That'd serve him right really.

[Wobbly Bob]

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.

Didn't take long for Richie Wellens name to appear as bookies favourite for the Town job. 

[Batch]

that's January's transfer budget paid for then

[Paolo69]

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.

Didn't take long for Richie Wellens name to appear as bookies favourite for the Town job. 

It's certainly a rule i wasn't aware of but then i guess to a lot lesser extent it's along the same lines as the insider dealing rules in the City. It must happen all the time, maybe Sturridge is being used as the test case?! Who knows?!

[chalkies_shorts]

If a bookie is stupid enough to offer odds on a Sturridge move to West Brom they deserve to be taken to the cleaners. Some of the bets nowadays are fucking daft. Don;t offer the fucking bets.

[singingiiiffy]

If a bookie is stupid enough to offer odds on a Sturridge move to West Brom they deserve to be taken to the cleaners. Some of the bets nowadays are fucking daft. Don;t offer the fucking bets.

i was waiting to see if Jon Parkin would eat a pie on the bench on saturday, especially after his bbc interviews highlighting his prematch diet and what happened in the cup last year