well

the other bookmakers only have one side of the trade to worry about.

as i said they've experienced problems before.

where is the market please? I cannot find it on Betfair

and as you know this aint a bookie site it's an exchange. so you have people who think they're laying the next permanent manager to people who think they're backing the guy who'll be in charge for the next game, and they aint always one and the same.

they had a situation once where a geezer was given the job on a long[ish] contract, but wasn't called as a permanant appointment.

there was murders over that one.

i understand that jason

but bf normally operate a next PERMANENT manager mkt, and i dare say they want to see how the land lies before they get involved.

the reason it's differnt for other bookmakers is because they are laying , rather than acting as an exchange, so they only have responsibilities to one lot, whereas bf ,in the case of disputes have both sides of each trade with a point of view.

and usually they both reckon they've won.

no that is not the way it is.

you get differnt markets with differnt rules.

that's why i posted a warning earlier.

you could have the situation where bf are bretting on the next permanent manager, and the high streets pay out on the geezer who's in charge for the holland match.

it's happened before.
and it's pandemonium.

as i said earlier. they've had people trading/arbing across differn#t sites and they've settled differnt bways.

it has been kmnown to end up in court.

so they are very circumspect with these markets nowadays.

I heard you. And it doesn't change the fact that, ultimately, every punter is in the same situation - whether they back,lay or trade. It all comes down to whether the rules of the market(s) that they have used match what they thought.

They're being overly cautious imo

Some bookie have stopped taken bets on Redknapp.

you may well be right that they're being overly cautious.

but it's understandable as they've had quite a bit of trouble with these markets in the past.

I disagree mex - it's easy to be cautious but get the market up. A nice clear rule about it on the page would suffice.


Biscuit... that's taken care of

i haven't looked at any other sites.

are they betting on who'll be in charge for the next match, the euros, next permanant , or next full time?

cos they could all be the same candidate,but they could be 4 differn't people.

Next match has already been announced as Pearce hasn't it, so it's unlikely the betting is for that.

i would have thought that the fact that there could be confusion, and people trading/arbing acroos differn't markets thinking they're the same , when in fact they are differnt backs up their policy about being very carefull about the way they word their market.

we are in a situation where there could be more than one person managing england in the next few games, and experience tells me that causes bf problems in these kind of markets. so that's probably why they're being extremely cautious.

i take your point rosie and agree with you.

but as i said they tread very carefully in these mkts.

I'm fully aware of that.

But so many things today are restricted because a minority are affected. People should take responsibility for their actions and check the rules before they bet - as the other bookies have clearly suggested.

That's not actually the case biscuit... if you were quick off the mark

that's fair comment.

but bookies only have the punters to worry about, if there's a dispute they sling the rules at them and settle.

bf ,as you know is differn't if there's a dispute they are right in the middle and have to deal with clients on both sides.

add to this people who are maintaining a position across various sites [who can all settle slightly differntly] amd as i said it  can be pandemonium.

mex - they're still punters of betfair, no difference, just more of them.