Why is this even being debated? The result is the result (regardless of any var mistakes) If you had a bet at a bookies they would have paid up. Man up GB.
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
yes. as you and pgmol both agree.. the goal should have stood..
and as you say, pgmol can't retrospectively allow that goal, so the game finished 2-1, not 2-2, thus the var mistake changed the result.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feck me you scousers are as thick as two planks. The result will go in the history books as a 2-1 defeat for Liverpool and will still be the result in a trillion years time.
GB welched on a bet the coward.
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 21 minutes ago
GotRicher
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gotwanker.
Got One Over Sandy
Sandy not even reading his own T&Cs and good ol’ GB has done him like a kipper
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 hours, 4 minutes ago
There was a boy welched on a £100 bet with Fan on the Scottish boards. He never came back - that we know of - our boards are chock with returners that ‘forgot’ their original usernames.
Seems a decent compromise - welch then depart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have my suspicions 😏
comment by 8==Divock - LFC High Reputation Board Member (U22339)
posted 15 minutes ago
Got One Over Sandy
Sandy not even reading his own T&Cs and good ol’ GB has done him like a kipper
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bah GB is your typical Scouser, lower than a sewer rat. Not to be trusted. Sounds like you are similar.
comment by 8==Divock - LFC High Reputation Board Member (U22339)
posted 4 hours, 17 minutes ago
Actually, I’d say the way that sandy and his cronies have ganged up on you I wouldn’t hold it against you to just cancel the whole thing. The cockney caaant has made a farce of this
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GB should pay up
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Hawkeye78 (U22468)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
Why is this even being debated? The result is the result (regardless of any var mistakes) If you had a bet at a bookies they would have paid up. Man up GB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookies would most certainly not pay until it's impossible for Liverpool to beat Spurs twice this season.
a) sandy has never been in peace ever.
b) gb should pay up
if you can make bets then honour them
comment by K7-0ptimus Primal (U1282)
posted 8 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by Hawkeye78 (U22468)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
Why is this even being debated? The result is the result (regardless of any var mistakes) If you had a bet at a bookies they would have paid up. Man up GB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookies would most certainly not pay until it's impossible for Liverpool to beat Spurs twice this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookies would pay because like GB they would know the bet was made on the two Prem games, and not some maybe mythical pairing in the FA Cup.
GB is a coward that has welched on a bet.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 11 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
yes. as you and pgmol both agree.. the goal should have stood..
and as you say, pgmol can't retrospectively allow that goal, so the game finished 2-1, not 2-2, thus the var mistake changed the result.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feck me you scousers are as thick as two planks. The result will go in the history books as a 2-1 defeat for Liverpool and will still be the result in a trillion years time.
GB welched on a bet the coward.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
firstly.. well done for resorting to insults.. the typical response of someone who has no valid points on which to base his argument.
and well done for insulting an entire group of people base on where they were born.. your so big and hard making these insults to people you don't know and will never see....
but the problem is.. i'm not a scouser.. i was born a couple of miles from your beloved spurs stadium.. so i'm more local than 99.9% of your fans.. so if your insult still applies to me, you've also just insulted the entire local fanbase of your own club... go you.
and as for the result that goes down in the history books... yes.. that's the whole bloody point.. the var mistakes changed the final result..
thank you for confirming i was actually right..
as for your bet with gb.. you've been on here long enough to know what he's like.. and it's idiotic to make bets with random people over the internet and expect every one of them to honour the bet..
also, i don't know exactly what was agreed between you.. league games may have been explicitly mentioned, only implied.. or you just assumed...
but in your own words;
He wagered a £20 bet with me that Liverpool would beat Spurs twice,
no mention of league at all.. if that's the bet you agreed on, tough luck.. you should have got the full terms of the bet explicitly set beforehand.. it's your fault if you didn't. based on your own words, he can still technically win.. so no need for him to pay yet.
Didn’t GB call the bet “null and void” because of thf PGMOL statement? Where is that in the”still technically win” scenario?
it's not.. but as i said, i don't know exactly what was agreed.. but based on sandy's own words..
gb can still technically win the bet..
of course.. if sandy wants to agree with gb that the bet is 'null and void' so he avoids any possibility of losing the bet, he's free to do so...
but i suspect sandy will just start throwing out more insults... or deleting/blocking posts from anyone who has the temerity to have a different opinion to him.. at least, that's been his typical modus operandi in the past.
There’s only one poster appearing to welch on the bet 🤷♂️
GB called the bet null and void in their mind because of PGMOL. Do you support/endorse that position?
I have no idea who the sandy poster is, but a bet is a bet. And if anonymous internet forum is to operate effectively, people who make bets, need to honour them. That’s hardly controversial.
gb has case for calling the bet 'null and void' if. and i repeat.. if. the major betting companies also agree that bet's placed with them on the result of the game are all considered null and void..
other than that.. should he honour the bet.. yes. but as, repeatedly stated.. we don't know what the exact terms of the bet were, only what sandy has written.. and from what's he's written, the best is still active and winnable by both sides.. he appears to have made the assumption , or thought it was implied, that the bet was only on the league games..
until we all see the exact, explicitly agreed terms of the bet there's not one person on here who can legitimately state that gb has already lost the bet.
if sandy didn't get the terms of the bet to explicitly state it was based solely on the two league games, that's his fault, and his problem.
until and unless he can state unequivocally, that it did.. he should stop throwing insults and accusations around and admit he made a stupid bet and got caught out..
and if you don't want people to welch on bets.. there's a reason betting companies get the stake money up front... follow their example.
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
gb has case for calling the bet 'null and void' if. and i repeat.. if. the major betting companies also agree that bet's placed with them on the result of the game are all considered null and void..
other than that.. should he honour the bet.. yes. but as, repeatedly stated.. we don't know what the exact terms of the bet were, only what sandy has written.. and from what's he's written, the best is still active and winnable by both sides.. he appears to have made the assumption , or thought it was implied, that the bet was only on the league games..
until we all see the exact, explicitly agreed terms of the bet there's not one person on here who can legitimately state that gb has already lost the bet.
if sandy didn't get the terms of the bet to explicitly state it was based solely on the two league games, that's his fault, and his problem.
until and unless he can state unequivocally, that it did.. he should stop throwing insults and accusations around and admit he made a stupid bet and got caught out..
and if you don't want people to welch on bets.. there's a reason betting companies get the stake money up front... follow their example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have already been paid out on some other bets I had with Wiliiam Hill and Ladbrokes on a Spurs win. So GB does not have a leg to stand on, trying to weasel his way out of the bet.
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
it's not.. but as i said, i don't know exactly what was agreed.. but based on sandy's own words..
gb can still technically win the bet..
of course.. if sandy wants to agree with gb that the bet is 'null and void' so he avoids any possibility of losing the bet, he's free to do so...
but i suspect sandy will just start throwing out more insults... or deleting/blocking posts from anyone who has the temerity to have a different opinion to him.. at least, that's been his typical modus operandi in the past.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know full well what was agreed, the two Prem games that are set in stone. Not maybe some hypethical fixture that 99 per cent us never going to occur.
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
gb has case for calling the bet 'null and void' if. and i repeat.. if. the major betting companies also agree that bet's placed with them on the result of the game are all considered null and void..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Example of ANY betting company not paying out for this game???
Also, it’s largely irrelavent. Your boy made a bet. He should stick to it. Welching and weaselling is just embarrassing behaviour.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 15 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by 8==Divock - LFC High Reputation Board Member (U22339)
posted 15 minutes ago
Got One Over Sandy
Sandy not even reading his own T&Cs and good ol’ GB has done him like a kipper
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bah GB is your typical Scouser, lower than a sewer rat. Not to be trusted. Sounds like you are similar.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'in peace' lol
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
it's not.. but as i said, i don't know exactly what was agreed.. but based on sandy's own words..
gb can still technically win the bet..
of course.. if sandy wants to agree with gb that the bet is 'null and void' so he avoids any possibility of losing the bet, he's free to do so...
but i suspect sandy will just start throwing out more insults... or deleting/blocking posts from anyone who has the temerity to have a different opinion to him.. at least, that's been his typical modus operandi in the past.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know full well what was agreed, the two Prem games that are set in stone. Not maybe some hypethical fixture that 99 per cent us never going to occur.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
don't bloody tell me what i do or don't know..
all i've got to go on is your own words..
and all you stated in the OP is
He wagered a £20 bet with me that Liverpool would beat Spurs twice.
not a single mention of only involving league games..
if you took a bet, as worded by you in the OP with a bookies, they wouldn't pay out on that yet either..
i'm not claiming gb is in the right..
it's likely implied, or possibly even explicitly stated to be only for the 2 league games.. somewhere..
and if that's the case.. then yes.. gb should pay up.
but you've still provided no evidence of that.. so all i can go on is your original claim, and if you've left room for ambiguity in the stated terms of the bet, as you so plainly have in the op then that's all on you.
So disingenuous some of these responses.
It’s obvious Sandy and GB meant the two league games when they made the bet.
Otherwise every bet that gets made from now on will have to include a number of caveats and clauses which no one on here should be expected to include.
GB needs to stop being a fannny and pay up. Really poor from him especially as the beneficiary is a charity.
what's disingenuous about it?
it's not my fault if sandy is about as accurate as a darren england var offside decision in how he words his bets..
it's the same as any legal contract.. it doesn't matter what was meant.. what's important is what is actually stated.
if you leave loopholes and ambiguity, don't be shocked when they're used against you.
Sign in if you want to comment
Spurs fan in peace
Page 3 of 4
posted on 1/10/23
Why is this even being debated? The result is the result (regardless of any var mistakes) If you had a bet at a bookies they would have paid up. Man up GB.
posted on 1/10/23
GotRicher
posted on 1/10/23
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
yes. as you and pgmol both agree.. the goal should have stood..
and as you say, pgmol can't retrospectively allow that goal, so the game finished 2-1, not 2-2, thus the var mistake changed the result.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feck me you scousers are as thick as two planks. The result will go in the history books as a 2-1 defeat for Liverpool and will still be the result in a trillion years time.
GB welched on a bet the coward.
posted on 1/10/23
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 21 minutes ago
GotRicher
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gotwanker.
posted on 1/10/23
Got One Over Sandy
Sandy not even reading his own T&Cs and good ol’ GB has done him like a kipper
posted on 1/10/23
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 hours, 4 minutes ago
There was a boy welched on a £100 bet with Fan on the Scottish boards. He never came back - that we know of - our boards are chock with returners that ‘forgot’ their original usernames.
Seems a decent compromise - welch then depart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have my suspicions 😏
posted on 1/10/23
comment by 8==Divock - LFC High Reputation Board Member (U22339)
posted 15 minutes ago
Got One Over Sandy
Sandy not even reading his own T&Cs and good ol’ GB has done him like a kipper
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bah GB is your typical Scouser, lower than a sewer rat. Not to be trusted. Sounds like you are similar.
posted on 1/10/23
comment by 8==Divock - LFC High Reputation Board Member (U22339)
posted 4 hours, 17 minutes ago
Actually, I’d say the way that sandy and his cronies have ganged up on you I wouldn’t hold it against you to just cancel the whole thing. The cockney caaant has made a farce of this
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GB should pay up
posted on 1/10/23
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/10/23
comment by Hawkeye78 (U22468)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
Why is this even being debated? The result is the result (regardless of any var mistakes) If you had a bet at a bookies they would have paid up. Man up GB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookies would most certainly not pay until it's impossible for Liverpool to beat Spurs twice this season.
posted on 1/10/23
a) sandy has never been in peace ever.
b) gb should pay up
if you can make bets then honour them
posted on 2/10/23
comment by K7-0ptimus Primal (U1282)
posted 8 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by Hawkeye78 (U22468)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
Why is this even being debated? The result is the result (regardless of any var mistakes) If you had a bet at a bookies they would have paid up. Man up GB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookies would most certainly not pay until it's impossible for Liverpool to beat Spurs twice this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookies would pay because like GB they would know the bet was made on the two Prem games, and not some maybe mythical pairing in the FA Cup.
GB is a coward that has welched on a bet.
posted on 2/10/23
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 11 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
yes. as you and pgmol both agree.. the goal should have stood..
and as you say, pgmol can't retrospectively allow that goal, so the game finished 2-1, not 2-2, thus the var mistake changed the result.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feck me you scousers are as thick as two planks. The result will go in the history books as a 2-1 defeat for Liverpool and will still be the result in a trillion years time.
GB welched on a bet the coward.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
firstly.. well done for resorting to insults.. the typical response of someone who has no valid points on which to base his argument.
and well done for insulting an entire group of people base on where they were born.. your so big and hard making these insults to people you don't know and will never see....
but the problem is.. i'm not a scouser.. i was born a couple of miles from your beloved spurs stadium.. so i'm more local than 99.9% of your fans.. so if your insult still applies to me, you've also just insulted the entire local fanbase of your own club... go you.
and as for the result that goes down in the history books... yes.. that's the whole bloody point.. the var mistakes changed the final result..
thank you for confirming i was actually right..
as for your bet with gb.. you've been on here long enough to know what he's like.. and it's idiotic to make bets with random people over the internet and expect every one of them to honour the bet..
also, i don't know exactly what was agreed between you.. league games may have been explicitly mentioned, only implied.. or you just assumed...
but in your own words;
He wagered a £20 bet with me that Liverpool would beat Spurs twice,
no mention of league at all.. if that's the bet you agreed on, tough luck.. you should have got the full terms of the bet explicitly set beforehand.. it's your fault if you didn't. based on your own words, he can still technically win.. so no need for him to pay yet.
posted on 2/10/23
Didn’t GB call the bet “null and void” because of thf PGMOL statement? Where is that in the”still technically win” scenario?
posted on 2/10/23
it's not.. but as i said, i don't know exactly what was agreed.. but based on sandy's own words..
gb can still technically win the bet..
of course.. if sandy wants to agree with gb that the bet is 'null and void' so he avoids any possibility of losing the bet, he's free to do so...
but i suspect sandy will just start throwing out more insults... or deleting/blocking posts from anyone who has the temerity to have a different opinion to him.. at least, that's been his typical modus operandi in the past.
posted on 2/10/23
There’s only one poster appearing to welch on the bet 🤷♂️
GB called the bet null and void in their mind because of PGMOL. Do you support/endorse that position?
I have no idea who the sandy poster is, but a bet is a bet. And if anonymous internet forum is to operate effectively, people who make bets, need to honour them. That’s hardly controversial.
posted on 2/10/23
gb has case for calling the bet 'null and void' if. and i repeat.. if. the major betting companies also agree that bet's placed with them on the result of the game are all considered null and void..
other than that.. should he honour the bet.. yes. but as, repeatedly stated.. we don't know what the exact terms of the bet were, only what sandy has written.. and from what's he's written, the best is still active and winnable by both sides.. he appears to have made the assumption , or thought it was implied, that the bet was only on the league games..
until we all see the exact, explicitly agreed terms of the bet there's not one person on here who can legitimately state that gb has already lost the bet.
if sandy didn't get the terms of the bet to explicitly state it was based solely on the two league games, that's his fault, and his problem.
until and unless he can state unequivocally, that it did.. he should stop throwing insults and accusations around and admit he made a stupid bet and got caught out..
and if you don't want people to welch on bets.. there's a reason betting companies get the stake money up front... follow their example.
posted on 2/10/23
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
gb has case for calling the bet 'null and void' if. and i repeat.. if. the major betting companies also agree that bet's placed with them on the result of the game are all considered null and void..
other than that.. should he honour the bet.. yes. but as, repeatedly stated.. we don't know what the exact terms of the bet were, only what sandy has written.. and from what's he's written, the best is still active and winnable by both sides.. he appears to have made the assumption , or thought it was implied, that the bet was only on the league games..
until we all see the exact, explicitly agreed terms of the bet there's not one person on here who can legitimately state that gb has already lost the bet.
if sandy didn't get the terms of the bet to explicitly state it was based solely on the two league games, that's his fault, and his problem.
until and unless he can state unequivocally, that it did.. he should stop throwing insults and accusations around and admit he made a stupid bet and got caught out..
and if you don't want people to welch on bets.. there's a reason betting companies get the stake money up front... follow their example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have already been paid out on some other bets I had with Wiliiam Hill and Ladbrokes on a Spurs win. So GB does not have a leg to stand on, trying to weasel his way out of the bet.
posted on 2/10/23
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
it's not.. but as i said, i don't know exactly what was agreed.. but based on sandy's own words..
gb can still technically win the bet..
of course.. if sandy wants to agree with gb that the bet is 'null and void' so he avoids any possibility of losing the bet, he's free to do so...
but i suspect sandy will just start throwing out more insults... or deleting/blocking posts from anyone who has the temerity to have a different opinion to him.. at least, that's been his typical modus operandi in the past.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know full well what was agreed, the two Prem games that are set in stone. Not maybe some hypethical fixture that 99 per cent us never going to occur.
posted on 2/10/23
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
gb has case for calling the bet 'null and void' if. and i repeat.. if. the major betting companies also agree that bet's placed with them on the result of the game are all considered null and void..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Example of ANY betting company not paying out for this game???
Also, it’s largely irrelavent. Your boy made a bet. He should stick to it. Welching and weaselling is just embarrassing behaviour.
posted on 2/10/23
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 15 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by 8==Divock - LFC High Reputation Board Member (U22339)
posted 15 minutes ago
Got One Over Sandy
Sandy not even reading his own T&Cs and good ol’ GB has done him like a kipper
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bah GB is your typical Scouser, lower than a sewer rat. Not to be trusted. Sounds like you are similar.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'in peace' lol
posted on 2/10/23
Poor form from GB
posted on 2/10/23
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
it's not.. but as i said, i don't know exactly what was agreed.. but based on sandy's own words..
gb can still technically win the bet..
of course.. if sandy wants to agree with gb that the bet is 'null and void' so he avoids any possibility of losing the bet, he's free to do so...
but i suspect sandy will just start throwing out more insults... or deleting/blocking posts from anyone who has the temerity to have a different opinion to him.. at least, that's been his typical modus operandi in the past.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know full well what was agreed, the two Prem games that are set in stone. Not maybe some hypethical fixture that 99 per cent us never going to occur.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
don't bloody tell me what i do or don't know..
all i've got to go on is your own words..
and all you stated in the OP is
He wagered a £20 bet with me that Liverpool would beat Spurs twice.
not a single mention of only involving league games..
if you took a bet, as worded by you in the OP with a bookies, they wouldn't pay out on that yet either..
i'm not claiming gb is in the right..
it's likely implied, or possibly even explicitly stated to be only for the 2 league games.. somewhere..
and if that's the case.. then yes.. gb should pay up.
but you've still provided no evidence of that.. so all i can go on is your original claim, and if you've left room for ambiguity in the stated terms of the bet, as you so plainly have in the op then that's all on you.
posted on 2/10/23
So disingenuous some of these responses.
It’s obvious Sandy and GB meant the two league games when they made the bet.
Otherwise every bet that gets made from now on will have to include a number of caveats and clauses which no one on here should be expected to include.
GB needs to stop being a fannny and pay up. Really poor from him especially as the beneficiary is a charity.
posted on 2/10/23
what's disingenuous about it?
it's not my fault if sandy is about as accurate as a darren england var offside decision in how he words his bets..
it's the same as any legal contract.. it doesn't matter what was meant.. what's important is what is actually stated.
if you leave loopholes and ambiguity, don't be shocked when they're used against you.
Page 3 of 4