formerly known as ivan Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 Being invested for deliberately getting booked with high value bets being put on him. https://x.com/xmonicamusic/status/1692623968203608540?s=46&t=Nmk5VGsjVveZetscixCB6A Simple question is… why?! £100k a week is enough to support you and your family for a lifetime over and over. Why do something so stupid to make more money. Blackmail maybe, or threats against his family? Anything else is unforgivable! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 53 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said: Being invested for deliberately getting booked with high value bets being put on him. https://x.com/xmonicamusic/status/1692623968203608540?s=46&t=Nmk5VGsjVveZetscixCB6A Simple question is… why?! £100k a week is enough to support you and your family for a lifetime over and over. Why do something so stupid to make more money. Blackmail maybe, or threats against his family? Anything else is unforgivable! Betting man who throws it all away like so many of them, Keith Gillespie springs to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnzFM Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 This is worse than Toney imo, he’s directly influencing this game - the betting was odd that day apparently, a player to only have 3 yellows all season odd on to be booked seems really off and then he did this…. How stupid, on the verge of joining Man City and making millions and millions down the drain so that he can make someone thousands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReds Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 Initial analysis showed that on that day several new accounts were created at Betway, account linked with people close to Paqueta, with users depositing the maximum amount allowed. These accounts made a married bet to increase the winnings: the authors would only receive the money if Paquetá took yellow against Villa and if the striker Luiz Henrique, from Betis, received the card against Villarreal, on the same day on March 12. As a betting man who has had some fairly decent wagers over the years, that statement is just something all betting firms would use, and it looks worse to someone looking in. How does Betway even know these people are close to the player - same Country, agents, friends names, social media? As for the maximum stakes allowed, I would say with a new account the limits would be tiny, nobody would be getting on tens of thousands, be lucky to get a couple of hundred on. It could easily be someone who had a view on a bet and to get anything fairly decent on, multiple accounts are used (but still only one punter). I used to bet the same horses with about 25 different accounts, nothing dodgy on the betting front so to speak, just to try and get the money on. Not to say he isn't guilty mind, but Betway would have systems in place to pick up any strange betting activity and could easily void the bets before they even start, I would guess they let them all run hoping they would either lose and keep the money, or wait and if they won then they void the bets and not payout any winnings. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerly known as ivan Posted August 19, 2023 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 2 minutes ago, TheReds said: Initial analysis showed that on that day several new accounts were created at Betway, account linked with people close to Paqueta, with users depositing the maximum amount allowed. These accounts made a married bet to increase the winnings: the authors would only receive the money if Paquetá took yellow against Villa and if the striker Luiz Henrique, from Betis, received the card against Villarreal, on the same day on March 12. As a betting man who has had some fairly decent wagers over the years, that statement is just something all betting firms would use, and it looks worse to someone looking in. How does Betway even know these people are close to the player - same Country, agents, friends names, social media? As for the maximum stakes allowed, I would say with a new account the limits would be tiny, nobody would be getting on tens of thousands, be lucky to get a couple of hundred on. It could easily be someone who had a view on a bet and to get anything fairly decent on, multiple accounts are used (but still only one punter). I used to bet the same horses with about 25 different accounts, nothing dodgy on the betting front so to speak, just to try and get the money on. Not to say he isn't guilty mind, but Betway would have systems in place to pick up any strange betting activity and could easily void the bets before they even start, I would guess they let them all run hoping they would either lose and keep the money, or wait and if they won then they void the bets and not payout any winnings. For this to come out in the way it has, surely Betway would have to be pretty certain of dodgy dealings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 He looks damned here. They wouldn’t come out in this way without evidence. Could be jail time for fraud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 Way worse than Toney One must imagine some kind of third party pressure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 (edited) Starts at a life ban if found guilty. Could be reduced if mitigated, and if it's a one off offence that will factor in, but recent cases have seen 10 years be levied, which obviously is as good as a lifetime ban from playing. Edited August 19, 2023 by ExiledAjax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 Maybe West Ham should have accepted the too good to be true, £100m offer from Man City! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prankerd Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 29 minutes ago, TheReds said: Initial analysis showed that on that day several new accounts were created at Betway, account linked with people close to Paqueta, with users depositing the maximum amount allowed. These accounts made a married bet to increase the winnings: the authors would only receive the money if Paquetá took yellow against Villa and if the striker Luiz Henrique, from Betis, received the card against Villarreal, on the same day on March 12. As a betting man who has had some fairly decent wagers over the years, that statement is just something all betting firms would use, and it looks worse to someone looking in. How does Betway even know these people are close to the player - same Country, agents, friends names, social media? As for the maximum stakes allowed, I would say with a new account the limits would be tiny, nobody would be getting on tens of thousands, be lucky to get a couple of hundred on. It could easily be someone who had a view on a bet and to get anything fairly decent on, multiple accounts are used (but still only one punter). I used to bet the same horses with about 25 different accounts, nothing dodgy on the betting front so to speak, just to try and get the money on. Not to say he isn't guilty mind, but Betway would have systems in place to pick up any strange betting activity and could easily void the bets before they even start, I would guess they let them all run hoping they would either lose and keep the money, or wait and if they won then they void the bets and not payout any winnings. I know for footballers its against the rules to bet on football but surely these betting companies must have gdpr rules in place? Like with ivan toney, surely his betting history is his private data? Seems it benefits them i guess to get their money back from scams like paqueta but seems like they shouldnt be sponsering football in the first place surely? I work in a bookies and the government seem to be working on killing all shops to help safer gambling, yet dont seem bothered about the online side because it makes so much profit and tax for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 He started cheating before he'd even joined Man City? Must have been keen... 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReds Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 1 hour ago, prankerd said: I know for footballers its against the rules to bet on football but surely these betting companies must have gdpr rules in place? Like with ivan toney, surely his betting history is his private data? Seems it benefits them i guess to get their money back from scams like paqueta but seems like they shouldnt be sponsering football in the first place surely? I work in a bookies and the government seem to be working on killing all shops to help safer gambling, yet dont seem bothered about the online side because it makes so much profit and tax for them. I don't know how they stand with GDPR rules in general, because they will happily pass on customers information between different firms and will send cctv photos around their own shops of people they don't want betting with them (assume the internal photo sending is legal though). Bookies want it all one way, I struggle to get £10. £20 on a horse race but how much can I have on the slots, roulette, blackjack etc - as much as I want. Plenty of stories out there where they wait until the result of a race, football match etc and then they void them for "betting patterns". Betfred and the Accrington Stanley game from a few years ago spring to mind as . We are also at the point where you try to withdraw winnings and then they want you to take selfies with your passport etc or they won't pay you, It's all for verification purposes, yet they don't ask when you are giving them the money in the first place. I have no issue with identification of everyone before they take a bet but not after, now some have to prove where the income comes from and it makes no sense with the actual rules they use. I don't think the sponsorship is the worst thing, it's the adverts before, during and after the games that rake in the money and gets people hooked and people betting in the pubs whilst drinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReds Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 2 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said: For this to come out in the way it has, surely Betway would have to be pretty certain of dodgy dealings? I would say he probably is screwed as naming him from their point of view is surely a bit of a risk, but I was just pointing out that the same thing happens all the time with the bookies claiming all sorts of stuff, and doing what they can to void bets. I mean how do they know the people betting are connected to the player, how would they? Unless they all have the same surname, family name, agent name - if they have then they really are dumb? They may well have all the evidence they need, I'm certainly not saying they haven't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 2 hours ago, prankerd said: I know for footballers its against the rules to bet on football but surely these betting companies must have gdpr rules in place? Like with ivan toney, surely his betting history is his private data? The Gambling Act 2005 specifically lists the bodies with which data can be shared including enforcement bodies (such as The National Crime Agency and The Serious Fraud Office) as well as governing bodies (such as the FIFA, UEFA and The Football Association Limited). GDPR (as enshrined via the Data Protection Act 2008) also contains public interest exemptions including where the data is shared for the prevention or detection of unlawful acts. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReds Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 19 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said: GDPR (as enshrined via the Data Protection Act 2008) also contains public interest exemptions including where the data is shared for the prevention or detection of unlawful acts. So how do bookies get away with passing personal information to other bookies of punters that are simply beating them but doing nothing unlawful? The same with photos being passed around, albeit only within that company, I guess this is actually legal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniper Posted August 19, 2023 Report Share Posted August 19, 2023 I'd also be investigating all the players that have had red cards when playing the GAS, oh wait, I forgot that they are cheating diving wanchors on the orders from the Stella drinker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted Thursday at 15:43 Report Share Posted Thursday at 15:43 Charged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen hump Posted Thursday at 15:48 Report Share Posted Thursday at 15:48 On 19/08/2023 at 09:39, TheReds said: Initial analysis showed that on that day several new accounts were created at Betway, account linked with people close to Paqueta, with users depositing the maximum amount allowed. These accounts made a married bet to increase the winnings: the authors would only receive the money if Paquetá took yellow against Villa and if the striker Luiz Henrique, from Betis, received the card against Villarreal, on the same day on March 12. As a betting man who has had some fairly decent wagers over the years, that statement is just something all betting firms would use, and it looks worse to someone looking in. How does Betway even know these people are close to the player - same Country, agents, friends names, social media? As for the maximum stakes allowed, I would say with a new account the limits would be tiny, nobody would be getting on tens of thousands, be lucky to get a couple of hundred on. It could easily be someone who had a view on a bet and to get anything fairly decent on, multiple accounts are used (but still only one punter). I used to bet the same horses with about 25 different accounts, nothing dodgy on the betting front so to speak, just to try and get the money on. Not to say he isn't guilty mind, but Betway would have systems in place to pick up any strange betting activity and could easily void the bets before they even start, I would guess they let them all run hoping they would either lose and keep the money, or wait and if they won then they void the bets and not payout any winnings. Like you say the bookies would of smelled at rat straight away’ I bet with bet mgm’ if I try to put a bet on of over £200 it’s gets sent for approval’ they usually accept it or ask for my stake to be reduced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bert tann Posted Thursday at 16:19 Report Share Posted Thursday at 16:19 I’m limited to a fiver a time with Jack Tully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted Friday at 09:33 Report Share Posted Friday at 09:33 Not looking good for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.