All Bets are off!!!!

[AndyJR 0]

NCFC.

 

"NO IRREGULAR BETTING" - STATEMENT

Posted on: Fri 17 Oct 2008

THE CLUB has received the following press release from The European Sports Security Association (ESSA) and the Association of British Bookmakers (ABB):

ESSA and the ABB find no irregular betting patterns in the Norwich City vs Derby County match.

Brussels, 17 October 2008: The European Sports Security Association (ESSA) and the Association of British Bookmakers (ABB) today announced that none of their members found any irregular betting activities and no reason to suspect anything inappropriate during the Norwich City vs. Derby County football match that was played on 4 October 2008.

 

"After a thorough investigation, I''m pleased to report that none of our members found anything unusual about the Norwich City vs. Derby County game" said Khalid Ali, the Secretary General of ESSA.

"Our association is comprised of the leading online sports book operators in Europe and along with the ABB, who are an associate member, we are working together to contribute to sports being clean and free of corruption" he added.

 

So we were just rubbish and could''nt beat 10 men, what a relief.

[Zachariah Lovespoon 0]

My money is on the wizard to be the first to say it''s a cover up!

[Camuldonum 0]

I think you will find this just refers to EU bookmakers in those particular organisations - the bets under investigation were placed from the Phillipines and that area generally.

 

There was at one time a great deal of money on the game most of it placed through two major bet sites well outside the EU. 

That''s all I''m going to say about it on here.[;)]

[Green and Yellow 0]

[quote user="Zachariah Lovespoon"]My money is on the wizard to be the first to say it''s a cover up![/quote]

Lost your money, its a cover up. 

[Camuldonum 0]

FA Statement

Friday, 17 October 2008.

The FA can issue the following clarification in relation to comments made by Norman Lamb MP:

An FA spokesman said: "The FA began its investigation into a recent fixture between Norwich City and Derby County as soon as an allegation was received about unusual betting patterns around the match. Our inquiries have been on-going since then and will be conducted with appropriate confidentiality.

"We totally reject accusations that we have been complacent in any way on this matter."

[Syteanric 1]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

I think you will find this just refers to EU bookmakers in those particular organisations - the bets under investigation were placed from the Phillipines and that area generally.

There was at one time a great deal of money on the game most of it placed through two major bet sites well outside the EU. 

That''s all I''m going to say about it on here.[;)]

[/quote]

According to R5 tonight although bookmakers in the Philippines were used it doesn''t necessarily mean the bets originated from there; it is not unknown for the Far East to be used by punters in other parts of the world who want to cover their tracks.  It''s a global network.  Apparently the bets ran into millions.

 

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I''m not sure I understand your drift.  Is there some new information I''ve missed?

 

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I''m not sure I understand your drift.  Is there some new information I''ve missed?

 

[/quote]

The authorites have said there was nothing untoward with the betting... im just summising but the people who mentioned it concerened the red card were just speculating themselves... there has been nothing said publically about that... all that there wa a large amount staked on the game... large enough to alert the authorities...

 

they have found nothing wrong.. so im just guessing it was people who placed money on us to come back and win..... i dont know.. just my guess...

jas :)

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I''m not sure I understand your drift.  Is there some new information I''ve missed?

 

[/quote]

The authorites have said there was nothing untoward with the betting... im just summising but the people who mentioned it concerened the red card were just speculating themselves... there has been nothing said publically about that... all that there wa a large amount staked on the game... large enough to alert the authorities...

 

they have found nothing wrong.. so im just guessing it was people who placed money on us to come back and win..... i dont know.. just my guess...

jas :)

[/quote]

Are you referring to the OP on this thread?  Camul has explained that this organisation only covers European bookmakers.  As far as I know there''s never been any suggestion that European bookmakers were involved, it was bookmakers in the Philippines.  Their statement is therefore irrelevant to the investigation.

 

[xxxx 0]

Nothing has been cleared up its just a statement saying there was nothing suspicious in this country and Europe which nobody ever said there was , a very poor attempt at a bit of good spin from NCFC . As for the bets they were placed at half time and not when the goalkeeper got sent off , that is why it was so suspicious, Norwich it seems were backed to around 6/4 from 9/2 at the interval which does seem to imply a lot of people were pretty sure there was going to be a comeback .

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Dictator Smith"]Nothing has been cleared up its just a statement saying there was nothing suspicious in this country and Europe which nobody ever said there was , a very poor attempt at a bit of good spin from NCFC . As for the bets they were placed at half time and not when the goalkeeper got sent off , that is why it was so suspicious, Norwich it seems were backed to around 6/4 from 9/2 at the interval which does seem to imply a lot of people were pretty sure there was going to be a comeback .
[/quote]

Exactly.  It''s not as though we''ve got anything to hide even if the allegations turn out to be true, so why bother? 

 

[Camuldonum 0]

 

 

 

The upsurge in betting was  when you were 1-0 down, and suddenly everybody thought you were going to win...............................lots and lots and lots of people who suddenly put on lots and lots and lots of money. Not in the UK however. But so much money that the alarm bell went off...........one bet was the UK equivalent of £50k.

 

 

 

Who knows?[:|] 

 

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

The upsurge in betting was  when you were 1-0 down, and suddenly everybody thought you were going to win...............................lots and lots and lots of people who suddenly put on lots and lots and lots of money. Not in the UK however. But so much money that the alarm bell went off...........one bet was the UK equivalent of £50k.

Who knows?[:|] 

[/quote]

I feel sick.

 

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="Camuldonum"]

The upsurge in betting was  when you were 1-0 down, and suddenly everybody thought you were going to win...............................lots and lots and lots of people who suddenly put on lots and lots and lots of money. Not in the UK however. But so much money that the alarm bell went off...........one bet was the UK equivalent of £50k.

Who knows?[:|] 

[/quote]

I feel sick.

 

[/quote]

. . . but not as sick as all those punters!!! 

 

[Camuldonum 0]

The bookmakers are happy[;)]

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

The upsurge in betting was  when you were 1-0 down, and suddenly everybody thought you were going to win...............................lots and lots and lots of people who suddenly put on lots and lots and lots of money. Not in the UK however. But so much money that the alarm bell went off...........one bet was the UK equivalent of £50k.

Who knows?[:|] 

[/quote]

Point of info Camul:  I read somewhere that the type of bet they used would have paid out on the draw as well as the win - a "handicap" or something . . . can you throw any light on this?

 

[SWP = Poor Mans Ruel Fox!! 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

The bookmakers are happy[;)]

[/quote]

I would say so Cam!!!!

If the bets were for us to win then obviously as a club we are in the clear, it would not be possible for us to fix to win a game, as clearly that is what we should be doing in the first place. 

[Herb 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]If the betting was that Norwich would win after Derby''s keeper was sent off then it''s entirely understandable, but then again if they''d done their homework properly they''d have seen that Norwich hardly ever beat 10 men. I heard it alluded to in a certain tabloid today that the fuss was alledgedly about about bets which backed Derby to win after their keepers dismissal.Who knows where the truth lies. Like the last enquiry of this sort of thing, we''ll end up none the wiser as to the full sp.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="Camuldonum"]

The upsurge in betting was  when you were 1-0 down, and suddenly everybody thought you were going to win...............................lots and lots and lots of people who suddenly put on lots and lots and lots of money. Not in the UK however. But so much money that the alarm bell went off...........one bet was the UK equivalent of £50k.

Who knows?[:|] 

[/quote]

Point of info Camul:  I read somewhere that the type of bet they used would have paid out on the draw as well as the win - a "handicap" or something . . . can you throw any light on this?

 

[/quote]

 

Handicap betting (which is Asian betting) is terribly complex,.  This is handicap betting, not dear old Ardee''s bit for the Academy.  Much of Asian betting is handicap betting and the level of bets placed around half time when Norwich were 1-0 down is out of sequence with normal events.  The average in handicap betting on coming back to win after being 1-0 down is apparently 37pc - so many punters piled into this at half time that 62 per cent (or nearly 100 per cent more) were convinced you would win with levels of betting not normally seen outside of the Premier League. 

 

  The problem seems to be that EVERYBODY in Asia suddenly thought you had that chance before the Red Card incident and they suddenly pitched in enormous sums of money while Glenn was giving his half time talk.

Some would have won on a draw (like normal betting) but the money suddenly surged on a win.

I suppose one possible explanation is that Good News Gordon found his way on to an Asian soccer board................

It is very complex.  The betting was not this end but it was so outrageous "that end" that the alarm went off.

But, as of two hours ago, the FA inquiry continues.

No one has ever suggested that High Street bookmakers were hit.  They were not.  Betting levels on the game in this country were nothing unusual - that is not what is being investigated.

The tractor driver from Neatishead who put a quid on you winning is not in any way involved.

Worse still, UEFA have offered to help.

[8-|]

Uefa offer to help Football Association with betting inquiry

Uefa have described match-fixing as a "cancer of the game" and are offering to share their investigative resources with the Football Association in the inquiry over allegations surrounding the Oct 4 game between Norwich and Derby.

 

By Duncan White
Last Updated: 9:27PM BST 17 Oct 2008

Last summer, Uefa allocated a budget to set up a special investigative unit to tackle alleged corruption in European football, adding to the team of investigators looking at 15 games across the Continent.

"The president [Michel Platini] is very keen on tackling this area," said a Uefa spokesman, "because if the game is no longer believable then everything is lost. Look at cycling and doping – it has left cycling a dying sport. The credibility of the sport is at stake here. Whether it is doping or match-fixing, it is as much of a cancer.

"The games we are investigating are often in the preliminary rounds of the Uefa Cup or the InterToto cup. They often involve smaller teams, often based in eastern Europe. So it certainly would be worrisome if organised crime – and this is what we are talking about in most cases – had got as far as the Championship in England.

"The hard part is that you can spot the strange betting patterns, you can even have absurd scoring patterns, but finding the smoking gun? That is not easy, especially if the investigation falls out of your jurisdiction. Then you can go to the players, the coaches and the referees, but if you don''t have powers of interrogation it is hard to make someone confess."

The offer of support will be welcomed by the FA, who issued a statement yesterday denying they were dragging their heels in the investigation. "The FA began its investigation as soon as an allegation was received about unusual betting patterns around the match in question," said a spokesman. "Our inquiries have been ongoing since then and will be conducted with appropriate confidentiality. We totally reject accusations that we have been complacent in any way on this matter."

The FA were given a document by The Sunday Telegraph eight days ago outlining extraordinary betting patterns in the game and made their decision to launch a formal investigation on Thursday, after two Norfolk MPs tabled Parliamentary questions about the matter and named the match.

Glenn Roeder, the Norwich manager – whose team lost the game 2-1 – said he was certain his players were clean. "I don''t know the exact details of what''s been said, and the accusations being made about that particular game, but I would be 100 per cent certain there is no one at Norwich City that''s involved in anything at all," Roeder said.

"I don''t know enough about how it became public. In life, people have to do what they think is right. Whether it is right or wrong is for other people to decide. So when I find out exactly how this has all broken, I''ll decide whether I want to say anything publicly or keep my own counsel. "

Derby also claim there was nothing untoward about their players'' actions in the game.

[SWP = Poor Mans Ruel Fox!! 0]

I struggle to remember the last time a Norwich match was so high profile before it happened, let alone after!

[The Butler 0]

Bet I can!!

[Herb 0]

I think Walker chewing nonchalantly on his gum as we went 2 up against Bayern raised a few eyebrows and caused a few headlines too.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Herb"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]

If the betting was that Norwich would win after Derby''s keeper was sent off then it''s entirely understandable, but then again if they''d done their homework properly they''d have seen that Norwich hardly ever beat 10 men. I heard it alluded to in a certain tabloid today that the fuss was alledgedly about about bets which backed Derby to win after their keepers dismissal.
Who knows where the truth lies. Like the last enquiry of this sort of thing, we''ll end up none the wiser as to the full sp.
[/quote]

The betting happened around half time BEFORE the Red Card.

[claud 0]

I thought that the betting switched massively to a Norwich win at half time, when we were 1-0 down to eleven men. It could be that then, suddenly, shock horror, Derby lose their keeper, and concede a penalty to boot. Suddenly, perhaps,  the half time bets don''t seem so stupid, until reality hits that it''s Norwich.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Herb"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]

If the betting was that Norwich would win after Derby''s keeper was sent off then it''s entirely understandable, but then again if they''d done their homework properly they''d have seen that Norwich hardly ever beat 10 men. I heard it alluded to in a certain tabloid today that the fuss was alledgedly about about bets which backed Derby to win after their keepers dismissal.
Who knows where the truth lies. Like the last enquiry of this sort of thing, we''ll end up none the wiser as to the full sp.
[/quote]

The betting happened around half time BEFORE the Red Card.

[/quote]

but it still doesnt mean the betting CONCERNED the red card does it Cam... as has been said if it was a large amount of money on Norwich to win then so be it.... its still nothing untoward and would render the fact that Carroll wass sent off ireelevant to the entire investigation.

jas :)

[komakino 282]

Lets face it, you would back the Dennis Waterman XI to beat Norwich at the moment, and they probably haven''t played in 20 years! :) :)

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Herb"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Potless Percy "][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

i mentioned during the week i thought it was all coincidence... a large number of bets placed when a Goalkeeper is sent off.... it makes sense as the goalie is a specialist position so losing him would hurt a team..... also, Given Derbys recent poor form before the match suggested we might of been in with a shout.. no foul play... all good

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I thought the betting movement occurred before the sending off?

 

[/quote]

obviously not.... if it did the bets obviously didnt concern the red card.. perhaps it was just a large amount staked on Norwich to win and people read to much into the events of the game....

 

jas :)

[/quote]

If the betting was that Norwich would win after Derby''s keeper was sent off then it''s entirely understandable, but then again if they''d done their homework properly they''d have seen that Norwich hardly ever beat 10 men. I heard it alluded to in a certain tabloid today that the fuss was alledgedly about about bets which backed Derby to win after their keepers dismissal.
Who knows where the truth lies. Like the last enquiry of this sort of thing, we''ll end up none the wiser as to the full sp.
[/quote]

The betting happened around half time BEFORE the Red Card.

[/quote]

but it still doesnt mean the betting CONCERNED the red card does it Cam... as has been said if it was a large amount of money on Norwich to win then so be it.... its still nothing untoward and would render the fact that Carroll wass sent off ireelevant to the entire investigation.

jas :)

[/quote]

No it doesn''t jas.  Everyone will have to wait until this investigation is completed.  What seems to have set off the bells this end is that it was extraordinarly high betting on what was a routine Championship game with nothing at stake - the sort of betting levels you see for very high profile games at International or Premier League level.

It is unfortunate for both clubs - it is quite possible that both will come out of it totally unscathed.  The best anyone can hope for is that the FA try and get some sort of report out quickly but sadly they don''t have a reputation for doing that although, in fairness, this looks as if it could be very complex. And if UEFA do get involved that will no doubt slow things down still more.

I do smell a rat somewhere here simply because the amount of money being put on was so very high. At the very least it is "worth a look" as they say.  If the MPs hadn''t got involved, the FA would not have named the clubs involved, although I''m afraid it was an open secret and the story would probably have come out anyway - probably abroad.

One small (pedantic) point: the spread betting people didn''t leak it to the Telegraph.  The Telegraph found out about it through their City department - the spread betting lot would have reported it of their own volition.  I think the betting organisation is required to report "unusual levels" whether in football betting or share betting by the rules of the Gambling Commission.