Last Rolls Of The Dice? The FA Charge Kettering’s “Saviour”

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Tom Smith says:

    Betting was NOT suspended in 2008 for the Rushden V Weymouth game. Weymouth fielded their Youth Team because the 1st Team had all been sacked, this was long before George Rolls had even heard of Weymouth. Lots of Supporters bet against Weymouth as it was obvious they were going to get beat, the bookies stupidly kept the books open right up until Kick off, they didn’t see it coming.
    Weymouth have been told this morning that the charges against Mr Rolls are personal to him, and if found guilty the club will not face any punishment whatsoever.

  2. Keith says:

    How rule E8 (a) affects George Rolls might be clearer using this version of the Rule which is found in the download of FA Rules from the FA website:
    A Participant shall not, either directly or indirectly, bet, or instruct, permit or enable any person to bet, on the result, progress or conduct of a Match or Competition in which the Participant is participating, or has participated in that season, or in which the Participant has any influence, either direct or indirect.

  3. Ian says:

    Tom, as indicated in the link that I have added, one of the larger betting chains did suspend betting on the game on the day of the match. I think you’re right to say that it was stupid of bookmakers to keep this book open, though. Rumours were widespread of what was going to happen that day.

    The BBC’s report of the match makes no reference to the players being sacked at the time:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_conf/7886474.stm

    And it’s not something that I recall having happened.

    Good news that the clubs have already been advised that this is nothing to do with them. Stupider oversights have certainly been made before.

  4. Iain D says:

    The first team’s insurance had lapsed for the game, which led to them understandably refusing to play. It was for that reason that the under 18s team was fielded. As has been rightly pointed out, the situation was common public knowledge locally and elsewhere with the Dorset Echo carrying the story the previous evening. It was no surprise that as a result of this a great many people took the opportunity to take the bookies to the cleaners.

  5. Mick says:

    The bookies can often get caught out with betting on ‘non-league’. They pay great attention to the Premier League, but I guess their own resources don’t have the time to trawl through the ins and outs of NL.
    As a lot of non-league clubs are very closely associated with their own fans, it is often easy to find out ‘information’ that the FL and PL clubs like to ‘keep secret’. Hence us fans often have an edge on the bookies. Like others have said earlier, I knew that Weymouth were to field a team of kids a day earlier, yet the bookies were still happy to give reasonably good odds on a Rushden win !

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>