Skip to main content

has match-fixing found the SPL?

Worrying signs north of the border as Scottish football has had some very unusual matches of late, backed up by suspicious betting patterns. The common denominator in both matches: Hearts.

Motherwell midfielder Steve Jennings is in the spotlight this week after his red card in Tuesday night's match against Hearts was predicted by a lot of punters, particularly new ones, wanting to have bets well above the average for this usually trivial market. Several bookmakers have reported clusters of bets being placed on 'A Red Card to be awarded' at 10/1 on this match, far and above the average for a televised SPL match, with a widespread of accts, lumpy bets and numerous new accounts, particularly from the Liverpool area, where Jennings has links from one of his previous clubs, Tranmere.

SPL - Jennings in betting probe over red card

Motherwell midfielder Steve Jennings has denied any wrongdoing after bookmakers began an investigation into betting patterns over the red card he picked up against Hearts at Fir Park on Tuesday.

The Association of British Bookmakers acted after a number of bets were placed on there being a red card during Motherwell's 2-1 defeat.

Jennings, after being booked by referee Stevie O'Reilly for a foul on Kevin Kyle, was shown a straight red card seven minutes from the end after putting his hand on the official's shoulder and speaking to him about a rejected penalty claim.



Hearts were also involved in a suspicious match last month against St Johnstone. Hearts won the match 2-0, but it was the first goal that caused the controversy. Kevin Kyle scored from the spot, but the penalty itself was given away by Jamie Adams, whose sister Kyle got engaged to during that week.

Sounds innocent you say, purely coincidence? This game wasn't available for live betting with many European firms as it wasn't televised, but Asian bookies who bet on just about any match via the RunningBall service (live spotters at the ground), had Hearts priced significantly under the standard pre-match odds, even after an hour when the score was 0-0. By that stage the draw should have shortened significantly, pushing the odds for both teams out noticeably. Generally, these price moves are all automated by algorithms according to the score and the clock. When they aren't, it invariably means something dodgy is up. You'll never get an official statement out of Asian bookies, but the prices tell the story. As McCririck would say 'they knew', but this time it might actually be right.

So what's the explanation behind it? Is it football's version of spot-fixing, or perhaps it's part of an evil plan to push Hearts up the table to increase their sale price or get them into the Europa League. Perhaps Jennings wanted to get pissed at Xmas didn't fancy playing against Celtic and Rangers over Xmas-New Year and told a few folks about it.

Who knows, other than there will be investigations into this, but knowing most of the lame football match-fixing investigations in the past in the UK, I doubt we'll see any guilty party locked up for a considerable period of time....

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla