no, I get all that

the crucial question - re whether we could be blamed for anything - is whether the bets were purely on the 2nd half score, or on the overall result in some way.

Look at it this way.

*If* there was a scam, the scam was that the punters would pile on Norwich at HT, and then someone on the Derby side would do something in the 2nd half to shift things in our favour. Big edge for the punters.

*But* - imagine that the betting was about the FINAL result.

And imagine that Norwich had been 3-0 up at HT already.

Then the whole thing would have been pointless - there would have been no money to make on a Norwich win whatever Derby did early in the 2nd half.

In that case - the sting would be much more sensible if you were confident that Norwich would be losing at HT, wouldn't it?

Whereas - if the bet was purely about who the 2nd half winners would be, then you wouldn't give a toss about what happened in the first half. And there'd be nothing to accuse us of.

Mind you, even if the former were the case, Marshall obviously wasn't in on anything....

Posted By: Tricky Hawes, Oct 17, 13:52:37