Video doesn't tell you much, tbf. Ball to the LW was on, Villa's break looked good. The handball looked odder to me.
I'm also unfussed by Twitter betting conspiracy experts. There will be a million posts that come to nothing every weekend. And he doesn't say which market.
As much as the odds reflect the overall amount staked, I find it believable that someone who had a good view of both teams and their likely tactics view could have him as much more likely to become a tactical fouler than would normally be the case. Grasping at straws, the question is, was there a wider pattern beyond these accounts? Could that have provoked others looking at the markets to get involved?
But....the multiple accounts. That really takes a fair bit of explaining. That implies a more concerted effort, than just a regular heavy gambler going about their normal business, perhaps with a new account.
So far tho, this seems like a circumstantial case.
Trippier and Sturridge recieved bans after the FA were presented with text message records showing both sent the information to the people related to the accounts in quesiton. Toney was caught red handed placing his own bets.
However, if there are multiple incidents involving multiple accounts, then depending on the association between the players and the account holders, and the patterns involved, governing bodies might not think that final piece of evidence is required to prove that an infraction took place.