|
By:
The TGC weren't the ones that decided that (if you are referring to in-play)
|
|
By:
The TGC weren't the ones that decided that (if you are referring to in-play
Who cares if you are right? It's one of the daftest decisions around and I doubt too many will be trying to take credit for it. The TGC certainly did not prevent it. |
|
By:
It is not a decision, it's written in the Interactive Gambling Act
|
|
By:
FINE AS FROG HAIR
16 Jul 11 21:47 It all depends on how they spend the extra monies raised I would think, don't you ?. Lots on here are saying that their track record on this is pretty appalling, and that is a valid matter to be debating sensibly. But just to say that BF wants these monies for some sort of pure greed target is just nonsensical imo. And I say that anyone who doesn't think greed is the main reason for PC is very naive. |
|
By:
Joel,
having just wasted my time perusing that Act I am none the wiser. And I still don't know which of us is right. And I don't care. Whether it is some garbage that Senator Harradine inflicted on us, or other garbage the TGC did, it doesn't really matter. It's still garbage. |
|
By:
Why?
|
|
By:
Why?
My initial remark was an aside. If you genuinely agree that the Sport of Kings is not a sport, then that is your deluded right. |
|
By:
Jousting?
|
|
By:
I do agree with you it is a sport, in the IGA they list Racing, Harness, Greyhounds and Sport as different things, but when they list things prohibited for inplay it is just sports....I am guessing when the IGA was written they did not even conceive that people would bother betting on racing inplay.
|