Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 426 comments are related to the topic:
Gambler claiming 250k from C0ral tells court bookie 'cheated' by claiming Rangers weren't relegated
Gambler claiming 250k from C0ral tells court bookie 'cheated' by claiming Rangers weren't relegated
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 426
|
By:
makes sense to me SD but other people have different views on this
|
|
By:
Invariably in cases such as this, and speaking as a long-term bookmaker/layer, you just look at the guy trying it on and know that he's trying it on. That silly **** with his Federer bet, that complete moron Graham Calvert, all of them.
This guy is clearly trying it on - let's face that fact before we start. There would be no reason for a sentient being EVER to suspect that Rangers could be relegated from the Scottish Premier League because there were eight or ten football teams in Scotland better than them. But unfortunately for Coral, that is the entire crux of the matter. The sequence of events, if you've never been in a Coral shop, is this: You write your slip, present it at the counter, and if it is a bet that needs a price not available in the shop, or it is to take out an amount over a figure clearly written on a poster for the staff behind the counter, it is referred to their traders. It is ludicrous to imagine that this guy has presented a slip to the cashier, she's written 2500/1 on it, taken his £100, and everyone's just gone about their business for the rest of the day in the safe knowledge that a bet has been struck and will be honoured. The bet has been referred. At this juncture, if you are the Coral trader, the choice is yours: You take a bet that rips £250k from the firm's bottom line, or you don't. If you are a competent trader, then the first question you have to ask yourself is, can this possibly happen? So you conclude it can't happen, of course it can't, how the **** could it ever happen? Obviously, the Coral trader has left it at this point, and just stood the money. Rangers are at worst, in any given year except about ten, the second best team in Scotland since their sorry League began. He has failed to ask himself a couple of questions: 1) Why would someone throw a ton at a result that is not possible? 2) Maybe someone knows a bit more than me? The bare facts are these - Rangers were indeed relegated. This guy has backed such an outcome. In any sporting context, they began the following season in a lower division and thus they were relegated. He has taken the trouble I suspect to look at Coral's Ts and Cs - which they and every other firm in the world are so fond of quoting when it suits them - and found no impediment to his reading of the situation. The man has proffered his wager, and a designated risk assessor has signed it off. He must be paid. |
|
By:
The bare facts are these
They aren't fact's they are nonsense. |
|
By:
Rangers were relegated. There is no semantic difference between them being demoted in the way they were, and them being dropped a division because they couldn't win a game. There is no linguistic differentiation in the word 'relegated.' It means, essentially, what we both know it means. And all definitions, in all dictionaries, will tell you the same thing. Even the nature of the word itself - for Rangers to have been relegated, someone must have relegated them. To relegate is to assign something to a lower rank - that is what happened to Rangers. It does now have subclauses related to off-field activities.
|
|
By:
**it does not have subclauses** mea culpa
|
|
By:
Coral have had the chance to refuse the bet, and they have had the chance when they are offering 2500/1 about an event they are willing to lose a quarter of a million punds sterling on to write the conditions in plain and unquestionable terms.
In both cases they have failed. They got lazy. They pay. The law will find as such. |
|
By:
You're talking nonsense Jed. They weren't relegated. Another team was relegated. They went bust and were basically for a period no longer in any league because they didn't exist in any league and had to apply to the other leagues. Regardless of anyones view about Rangers/Sevco on a gambling basis nobody can present a logical argument for Rangers being relegated.
|
|
By:
My 1.25 post deals with your - and Coral's - attempt to welch on this bet. They were relegated. Dress it up however you wish. If, as I suspect it must, it comes down to an interpretation of the word 'relegated' then Coral will pay.
|
|
By:
No it didn't. Check the definition of Relegated. It doesn't include went bust, left the national leagues and reapplied then only got accepted in to the bottom league.
Do you seriously expect Coral to pay out on a team that gets relegated and a team that doesn't exist in a league becuase it's pumped out of all the leagues then reapplies to a lower league and get's accepted? |
|
By:
That's the whole point shrewd_dude. I don't expect them to pay out on anything they can possibly find a way of not paying out on. But here they will pay. I'm not here to tell you what I think, and whether it is right or wrong, only how the law must read the case. The law does not exist to redefine words - it interprets them. And it will find no distinction between one way of being relegated and another. I hope this does not vex you too much, truly.
|
|
By:
What price do you want to give me on no payout?
|
|
By:
The law does not exist to redefine words - it interprets them. And it will find no distinction between one way of being relegated and another.
It will find a difference Jed but that's not the point. Is it reasonable for the customer to think relegation included demotion in this manner will be one question the judge will consider. I'd like to see him paid but I'd always favour the punter tbh. Chances are slim to nothing I'd guess. |
|
By:
Is it reasonable for the customer to think relegation included demotion in this manner will be one question the judge will consider.
I realise that there is a difference of opinion re whether they are or aren't the same and a lot of that is trying to get one man upmanship but you don't really believe they were demoted do you? |
|
By:
It certainly wasn't relegation but can be classed as a demotion in the sense that Rangers were voted out of the league albeit into a state of limbo.
|
|
By:
Aka you know they they weren't voted out of any league. They asked to be voted in to leagues. The 3rd devision was the only one that let them in.
|
|
By:
Not much difference to be honest but demotion means a loss of status.
Rangers weren't folded by the SFA/SPL but left without a league and had to reapply. |
|
By:
BTW when the SPL teams voted some made there decision based on the 'big tax' case that hadn't yet decided.
Turnbull for one referenced it when entering Hampden to cast his vote. Anyways feck them all for their shortsightedness and stupidity. No more from me on the subject. |
|
By:
If he,d gone on Corals and asked what the odds on Rangers not being in the premier league next season, the guy who assessed the bet would have thought "mmm, what does that mean" and worked out the other possibilities. Lesser odds maybe,but wouldn't be in a courtroom now. That's where it may come unstuck unfortunately. Still hope he wins it mind.
|
|
By:
ALBERT for VICTORY
PAY THE MAN CORAL MUST PAY FOR HS TAXI TO AND FROM COURT ALSO PLUS LUNCH MONIES  |
|
By:
And free Werthers originals for a year
|
|
By:
It is open to the Court to go either way imo. It could easily find that something other than relegation occurred, esp where the corporate entity was wound up.
It is by no means an open and shut case and that's why i think it could be settled at the last minute. Neither party can be sure of the result, Corals will not want the headlines and potential 250k payout and a precedent set if they can agree a figure and make a confidential settlement. They should be prepared to make a decent offer before it is left in the hands of the judge, the way the case has gone so far. Kinloch is a savvy punter and will be weighing up his chances of winning the case v any last minute offer made by Corals. If an offer is made for 100k he will take it imo. He has to be aware, having gone on about how he is such a savvy punter, that the Court could find that such a savvy punter must have known the price was way off and that he knew he was pulling a fast one at all times. |
|
By:
Would I be correct in saying that this bloke's legal team are on a no win no fee basis?
|
|
By:
ANYONE ?, is the case continuing today ?
|
|
By:
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman
|
|
By:
Good Luck Albert!!
|
|
By:
cheers for the link pat.
 |
|
By:
Counsel asks McKenzie if he had a good knowledge of SPL rules
"I suspect I am the person with the best knowledge. He replies Poole asks if Rangers were put out of the SPL in "accordance with the rules"? McKenzie says they were McKenzie: SPL rules shown not those when Rangers left spl "They are the ones in force when the bet was placed" counsel replies "Oh" Brilliant!! Counsel "when solicitor for Coral contacted you did they give you a list of things they wanted you to swear to.' McKenzie "they drafted the document and I revised it and sent it back." Punter getting paid must be going odds on with these jokers...... |
|
By:
I would think so stew
Like Lukrka says i can see either a win for Albert or some kind of deal being made |
|
By:
If he,d gone on Corals and asked what the odds on Rangers not being in the premier league next season, the guy who assessed the bet would have thought "mmm, what does that mean" and worked out the other possibilities. Lesser odds maybe,but wouldn't be in a courtroom now. That's where it may come unstuck unfortunately. Still hope he wins it mind.
surely it is job of bookie to frame market, and they have rules which govern markets you can read what relegation means to betfair in betfair rules if he asked for a different market before backing this i would think he would lose this case instantly other teams have suffered relegation due to points deductions etc how did coral settle the relegation market from county championship div one last season when durham were relegated in place of hampshire ( i dont know answer) |
|
By:
his lawyers are probably on a no-win no-fee and will be biased towards a settlement if they are
|
|
By:
Coral write the rules. They must assume responsibility for them if they don't suit.
You would hope someone would have done that sort of research (durham). Corals may not have taken a shillings on that market though. |
|
By:
indeed
|
|
By:
his lawyers are probably on a no-win no-fee and will be biased towards a settlement if they are
They didn't go into this blindfolded so there must be some confidence in the air one would think. |
|
By:
Dunfermline were challenging for promotion when they went into administration lost points and all their best players and ended up relegated. When pricing relegation you have to take into account a clubs financial stability surely.If you hear that say Hibs have gambled on getting promotion so much so that if they fail to do so they will be up the creek you wouldnt want to go 1000/1 that they were relegated.(I appreciate its an example). Only this week Cowdenbeath issued a statement saying they were in hard times,they wouldnt be a big price to go down the swanny.
Its quite funny for years since the liquidation Rangers fans argue that they are the same team now many of them have changed their tune in order to counter the guy getting paid  |
|
By:
Quite hilarious that the bookies still might have a cash out offer in a courtroom
|
|
By:
It's over, the judge is siding with those horrible vile cants
 |
|
By:
What gets me is that all the bookmakers have had ample opportunity to update their rules clearly.
Have Coral even now updated their rules to clarify e.g. relegation? If not, and a quick scan suggests they haven't, this makes them more culpable. |
|
By:
This pro gambler stuff is BS.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Just googling the case...
All the news is from Scottish papers. Have Coral managed to keep it out of the English ones? |