Had a small bet on each keeper to make 1+ save in each half in Austria Turkey game. 1st half, a shot come cross from Arnautavic was gathered by the keeper. If he hadn't then it would have gone in. Stats show no shots on target.
These stats based bets are riddled with these inconsistencies
Bookies have kids on string with build a bet...
If that's not a save then ask for a refund.
These stats based bets are riddled with these inconsistenciesBookies have kids on string with build a bet...If that's not a save then ask for a refund.
A gathering of the ball doesn't sound like a save to me unless the ball was going directly in if he hadn't of gathered it. Not that this helps, but I wouldn't bet on this type of cack tbh. Kind Regards.
A gathering of the ball doesn't sound like a save to me unless the ball was going directly in if he hadn't of gathered it. Not that this helps, but I wouldn't bet on this type of cack tbh. Kind Regards.
It would have gone in had he not gathered it but I guess the cross come shot means it was not intentional. Tho they do go in or need saving imo but c'est la vie
It would have gone in had he not gathered it but I guess the cross come shot means it was not intentional. Tho they do go in or need saving imo but c'est la vie
"Never bet on anything where the result is open to interpretation because the interpretation will always go against you!" From The Sayings of Dr Slicer, available at all not very good bookshops nowhere in the country.
"Never bet on anything where the result is open to interpretation because the interpretation will always go against you!" From The Sayings of Dr Slicer, available at all not very good bookshops nowhere in the country.
Sadly, an adjudication of this type of bets by bookies is opened to interpretation (as verified by IBAS), and can differ greatly between bookies eg to me a "save" would mean had the keeper not prevented it from crossing the goal line a goal would have been scored. Of course, bookies might not see it that way eg a shot heading into goal (on target) and the keeper picking it up without too much bother.
As we're on this subject did England have more shots on target against Slovenia? I know the match finished 0-0.
Sadly, an adjudication of this type of bets by bookies is opened to interpretation (as verified by IBAS), and can differ greatly between bookies eg to me a "save" would mean had the keeper not prevented it from crossing the goal line a goal would hav
'Aspro', thank-you. The reason I asked was 365 had England more shots on target boosted from 1/3 to 'evens'. But, I cannot remember whether it was for the 1st half or full game.
I hope Mr Southgate has a helmet ready on Friday in case England play pants, and exits the tournament due to his glaringly lack of tactical nous, his exaggerated decision/timing with subs and obsessive loyalty to non-performing senior players.
'Aspro', thank-you. The reason I asked was 365 had England more shots on target boosted from 1/3 to 'evens'. But, I cannot remember whether it was for the 1st half or full game.I hope Mr Southgate has a helmet ready on Friday in case England play pan
Yeah as said very subjective market. Belguim France, De Bruyne whipped in a free kick which was a cross shot, the keeper bizarrely kicked it away off his own line, didn't count as a shot but apparently counted as a save. For the record betfair use whoscored.com for settling on these bets.
Yeah as said very subjective market. Belguim France, De Bruyne whipped in a free kick which was a cross shot, the keeper bizarrely kicked it away off his own line, didn't count as a shot but apparently counted as a save.For the record betfair use who
Why do bookies not use the same outfit as adjudicators for these special bets? This will mean a set of rules for everyone regardless of who punters bet with.
Why do bookies not use the same outfit as adjudicators for these special bets? This will mean a set of rules for everyone regardless of who punters bet with.