Paqueta Charged By The FA.

Jordie said:
Just shown all 4 cards on sky and seriously the ginger rag used to do worse than them every week and pundits just said it was bad timing.
I can only assume he has connections where there has been unusual betting patterns.
Click to expand...
Exactly the case. Those odd betting patterns have tied him circumstantially to a serious fraud. Very unlikely we will ever see this guy in a City shirt I would think.
 
jonmcity said:
Impossible to prove unless they have emails and witnesses that he had agreed to go ahead with this. What is mad is that its legal to bet on crap like this in the UK.
Click to expand...

Could be very easy to prove, if there’s enough of them, particularly in a small region and they’re totally oblivious to how closely betting patterns are monitored all over the world these days.
 
CTID1988 said:
How do they find this stuff out? Seems like it should be really easy to get away with, unless a mate has grassed on him or something
Click to expand...
Unusual betting patterns I think. Loads of bets going on in his home town it raises a red flag and alerts bookmakers all over the world
 
I think it’s total bollocks tbh . The guy is worth millions so there is no financial gain and when you see him play his game style does get him booked but fa wankers are a law ti the themselves so they have found him guilty .
 
If it comes down to a statistical argument, he'll get off IMHO.

Around 1 in 5 males bet on sports online last year in the US. Some of them will be fiends, betting on every last thing.
It will be the same on that island. It's only 3000 people, but that could include 200 football mad punters, a handful of whom place hundreds of bets weekly on different accounts.

Imagine lining up 200 adult men who placed bets last year - how many utter fiends you think there are among them? How many bets do fiends make? All the bets. On what? Everything. How many bookies, how many accounts? In the online world - not betting - I have and use more accounts than I can ever remember. Hundreds upon hundreds. And I am very much against unneccessary accounts or sign ups. Moreover, people who feel a connection by hometown to a participant are surely more likely to bet on an event he is in.

Surely there is something more to this case than was originally reported.

Plus, Roy Meadow and all that.

Don't know what to think about it going to charges. If there isn't any more to the case, and the FA aren't really convinced, they might want it looked at on the record by independent judges anyway to cover their back - if they just dropped it, it might leave a suspicion and rumour that would tarnished the league's reputation.

On the other hand he might be bang to rights.
 
Last edited:
jonmcity said:
Impossible to prove unless they have emails and witnesses that he had agreed to go ahead with this. What is mad is that its legal to bet on crap like this in the UK.
Click to expand...

They would of looked at betting patterns when he deliberately got booked in games
 
Ptolemy's Hairdo said:
If it comes down to a statistical argument, he'll get off IMHO.

Around 1 in 5 males bet on sports online last year in the US. Some of them will be fiends, betting on every last thing.
It will be the same on that island. It's only 3000 people, but that could include 200 football mad punters, a handful of whom place hundreds of bets weekly on different accounts.

Imagine lining up 200 adult men who placed bets last year - how many utter fiends you think there are among them? How many bets do fiends make? All the bets. On what? Everything. How many bookies, how many accounts? In the online world - not betting - I have and use more accounts than I can ever remember. Hundreds upon hundreds. And I am very much against unneccessary accounts or sign ups. Moreover, people who feel a connection by hometown to a participant are surely more likely to bet on an event he is in.

Surely there is something more to this case than was originally reported.

Plus, Roy Meadow and all that.

Don't know what to think about it going to charges. If there isn't any more to the case, and the FA aren't really convinced, they might want it looked at on the record by independent judges anyway to cover their back - if they just dropped it, it might leave a suspicion and rumour that would tarnished the league's reputation.

On the other hand he might be bang to rights.
Click to expand...

Not sure that you appreciate how habitual the vast majority of gamblers are. And how red flags start going off all over the place if they suddenly change those habits.

Especially if it is a one off bet at vastly increased stakes than is their norm, on a market they’ve no history of playing on.

And if multiple people in the same location simultaneously set those same red flags off. And it’s a market that can be directly influenced by one person. And that one person also happens to be from that location.

Well, I think you can see where I’m coming from here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.