Perth Breakers

You are completely missing my point, completely.....

What i am saying is, why was there extreme money on the over? Not the line, not the head to head, just the over and it got smashed............The over was locked in by 1/4 time????

The same on Sunday?

As Coute said, what were the factors? If Penney came back, then yes, completely understand, if a player was a late rule out or a late inclusion, COMPLETELY understand.......

The lineups were known a week ago, everyone knew Penney wasnt back.......Perth have the same team, NZ have the same team,

I made note players were getting molested on Sunday with no calls, today, a player got looked at and it was a foul........

I am sorry, to me, this is like the Tandy situation........

I was commenting on this when Perth were way in front.....so it has nothing to do with this.......

Do you know what my avatar is in reference to?

You are completely missing my point, completely.....

What i am saying is, why was there extreme money on the over? Not the line, not the head to head, just the over and it got smashed............The over was locked in by 1/4 time????

The same on Sunday?

As Coute said, what were the factors? If Penney came back, then yes, completely understand, if a player was a late rule out or a late inclusion, COMPLETELY understand.......

The lineups were known a week ago, everyone knew Penney wasnt back.......Perth have the same team, NZ have the same team,

I made note players were getting molested on Sunday with no calls, today, a player got looked at and it was a foul........

I am sorry, to me, this is like the Tandy situation........

I was commenting on this when Perth were way in front.....so it has nothing to do with this.......

A bookie this year when all the shit about the Tandy incident came up said that the Tigers , Storm game at leichardt was dodgy.........Everyone remember that?

The bookie said that game was dodgy...........

U see, that game was NOT dodgy, the storm RESTED a number of players and the public got hold of that info BEFORE the books did......Stiff shit to them......Why was the bookmaker even talking about that game?

NOW, this game, no late exclusions or inclusions. When u see LARGE LARGE bets, they are generally on H2H or Line.......Very very rarely do u see a large movement on a O/U.....Especially when there are no changes.....

I just dont get it...........

I reckon, bookmakers look for tax write offs from time to time, what better way to show a loss by washing money through bets......

If i was a boommaker and wanted to do the dodgy, i would befriend a player(s), then organise them to go over like tonight in a game, use my money to place the bet through various accounts.........pay the money out and there u have the tax loss.......U have effectively washed your money for a nice tax loss, pay off whoever u have to....When u are dealing in tens of millions like these books are, u are left with a nice some that u dont have to pay the taxman......

How high did the total get in-play? Looks like I might have missed a great under.

I was sceptical about this game hence the smaller play on it, but hope the books react and post totals in the 160's again. This was a one off. Looking at the matches over the weekend, I can't see another high scoring one to be honest.