Finlay Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Well put Jaggy. ALso says a lot for the well fans and Jenno's stature that no one thinks for a second the lad got himself sent off on purpose. Not sure that is true either mate. I've certainly spoke to a couple (not posters on here) who believe he is guilty. Personally, I've not made my mind up either way. A lot of that is down to the underhanded finger pointing by the bookies/media then refusing/not being allowed legally (which should have made the snidy allegations unable to happen but there you go) to disclose the info that they claim to have. On the flip side I think there must be something worth making all the initial fuss over and I'd like to know the lot of it asap so I can make my mind up/get the whole thing put to bed one way or another. I have a feeling we might hear more about this before the 9th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 It was paid out, that's part of the investigation. When the bet paid out the winners withdrew all the money from their accounts, seemingly this is a sign of foul play. So as a general rule the bookmaking industry deems it impossible for some party to honestly open up an online account, place a bet which wins and then decides to close that account? Such an occurrence would simply be unknown? How odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texanwellfan Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 I don't recall anyone being suspicious on the nigt of the game that he had somehow managed to get himself sent off. Only after the bookies started crying was there supicion cast upon him and I believe with no concrete evidence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finlay Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 I don't recall anyone being suspicious on the nigt of the game that he had somehow managed to get himself sent off. Only after the bookies started crying was there supicion cast upon him and I believe with no concrete evidence There was no 'cause' too though. Whether there is legitimate cause I don't know. If anyone was suspicious before the allegations were made then you would need to question every sending off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texanwellfan Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Well we won't solve it here but whoever is running the investigation needs to wrap it up one way or another quickly. Either they have evidence or they don't as I havestated on here the evifdence needs to show that jenno got sent off on purpose. I do not know how that can be proved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well_Jaggy Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 It's a crock of sh1t. If there was evidence that he was guilty, not only would the bookies and the SPL have hauled him over the coals, the police would have arrested him too. Its b0llocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Made Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Why wait until the game is in progress to put on a bet that a Motherwell player would be sent off, when they could've done it before and may have got higher odds. Surely as the game plays out and a player that has a habit of not dodging out of tackles gets booked early in the game, should lower the price? No? As I have said earlier I thought about putting a bet on when Jennings got booked but it would've meant opening a new account and yes, may well have seen me close the account as soon as it was paid out. (I ain't a gambler per se but I had a bad habit with gambling way back in my Army days. If I left the account open it would be too easy a route to go back down again.) So bearing in mind that would've been placed in the North Lanarkshire area would that go against Jenno as well? I hope all those that won money with Scott Brown's sending off weren't from Glasgow and Edinburgh with new accounts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coylealan Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 You're only allowed to have/open an account if you don't win Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 So.... with this being breaking news in mid December, us being told that the evidence is strongly stacked against Jennings, with the SFA asking us to ban him until they or the bookies finish their investigation (thankfully we told them where to go as he's been excellent for us) are they any closer on getting the answer for us all? Or have they just decided to sweep it under the carpet as the bookies have fuck all on Jennings and fucked up on their odds setting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadywellToi Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 There was just enough room under the carpet with the Green Brigade's Remembrance Protest. The betting regulator/industry can't just go and potentially ruin someone's career on hearsay and conjecture. To release "inside information" to the press within 24 hours was grossly misjudged and unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gullane Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I was just thinking about the Jennings enquiry walking out of the ground yesterday. Last month, steve was Scottish football's social leper. Four weeks later, he's man of the match at Hampden. Given the publicity this story got, there should at least be a statement issued from the bookies on the outcome of their enquiry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I was just thinking about the Jennings enquiry walking out of the ground yesterday. Last month, steve was Scottish football's social leper. Four weeks later, he's man of the match at Hampden. Given the publicity this story got, there should at least be a statement issued from the bookies on the outcome of their enquiry. +1 Surely the scope of this investigation is limited? Given that you'd think things would have been concluded by now. Had we acceded to the SFA's request not to play Steve Jennings how long would he be sitting on the sidelines for? Its time this was put to bed either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfc88 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 To be fair the bookies never actually said they have evidence against Jennings. The papers/ media said that. Reading between the lines though all they really said is they had evidence to take the investigation further...could mean anything really. Still doesnt answer the question why they haven't gotten any further with it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 As ras as I can recollect one paper, I think it ws The Times, did suggest that the bookies can link the person who opened the account with the player. I would expect that the bookies will be considering their next step, as that alone will not convict Jennings. 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.