|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 21, 2017 18:43:16 GMT
It was probably his idea, the egotistical c*** They were saying on the Beeb that it was. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 18:43:28 GMT
My thoughts? Whatever!
|
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on May 21, 2017 18:44:53 GMT
Happy enough with it, been a great servant to them over many years, last game of the season and meaningless so ok. Sorry Joe, but as much as I agree with your sentiment here, it really makes me cringe when I hear Premier League footballers referred to as "servants". I know what you mean, extremely well paid player, but it could be construed as having "served" the team. Happy to settle for any other term that infers that he has been a player there for a long time and done well for them as well as himself. Ignoring of course bonking other players wives and girlfriends. Just can't think of one.  |
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on May 21, 2017 18:45:56 GMT
A little more alone time with his team-mate's wives!
|
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on May 21, 2017 18:48:05 GMT
My bet would have been London club doing something tacky, but as it is a guaranteed win week in week out, doubt anyone would take the bet but you do understand in the world of online gambling, you can bet on almost anything? under/over on corners and throw ins, handicaps, what precise minute some thing happens etc its not just win/lose/draw now if the teams have decided what is happening in a precise minute of the game, it is potentially defrauding gamblers and illegally influencing the game, and others with inside knowledge of this happening (22 on the pitch, others on the bench) then bets can be made to gain from this insider knowledge? Not a gambler so if you can bet on the exact time a particular player will be substituted then I agree. My undersanding of gambling is, you bet £10 ---you lose £10 |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on May 21, 2017 18:48:30 GMT
I didn't know about this until I read this thread.
All I can say is no wonder Sunderland were relegated if they could be so complicit in massaging the ego of a total bell end of a man.
|
|
|
|
Post by haway on May 21, 2017 18:50:56 GMT
Costa almost ordered Pickford to kick it out
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 18:54:10 GMT
but you do understand in the world of online gambling, you can bet on almost anything? under/over on corners and throw ins, handicaps, what precise minute some thing happens etc its not just win/lose/draw now if the teams have decided what is happening in a precise minute of the game, it is potentially defrauding gamblers and illegally influencing the game, and others with inside knowledge of this happening (22 on the pitch, others on the bench) then bets can be made to gain from this insider knowledge? Not a gambler so if you can bet on the exact time a particular player will be substituted then I agree. My undersanding of gambling is, you bet £10 ---you lose £10 fair enough stokiejoe, but i hope you can see the point that you don't want the outcome of your bet pre-decided by the teams to such a precise degree! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 18:54:16 GMT
Please god do not let this vile character anywhere near our club. Terry + Howe +Bournemouth = perfect bedfellows ! Ahem
|
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on May 21, 2017 19:08:14 GMT
Narcissism at its finest.
I'd rather us be even shitter than we've been this season than sign this wanker
|
|
|
|
Post by Stoke711 on May 21, 2017 19:15:16 GMT
i know this isn't stoke related, however i wanted to see what people thought It is alleged, David Moyes and Sunderland agreed to put the ball out of play on the 26th minute, just so Terry can have an elaborate substitution (Chelsea also agreed to this) now, have i got this wrong, but if you can influence an aspect of the match to this degree, and something you can bet on online, isn't this match/spot fixing? surely, if it is, then it will have major implications for those involved? My first thought was match fixing. I'd have been pissed off had I had JT to score anytime when both clubs had pre-arranged to have him subbed on 26. After all it is a league fixture not a friendly and I think the FA should look into it. |
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on May 21, 2017 19:16:16 GMT
He's been there over 20 years, played nearly 500 games for them at the very highest level. Nothing was at stake and everyone agreed it up front. What's the issue? Bet on Terry to be subbed at a certain time in the game. |
|
|
|
Post by samblano on May 21, 2017 19:20:15 GMT
He's been there over 20 years, played nearly 500 games for them at the very highest level. Nothing was at stake and everyone agreed it up front. What's the issue? its not the elaborate sub, its the fact 2 teams conspired to do something pre-match (which can be bet on) Is't that match fixing? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 19:23:28 GMT
its not the elaborate sub, its the fact 2 teams conspired to do something pre-match (which can be bet on) Is't that match fixing? well, thats what i think, but also why i was asking if you had made bet with the finer details of the of the match, you could well argue your money be refunded back. Couldn't you? |
|
|
|
Post by Will_75 on May 21, 2017 19:43:54 GMT
I heard it in the radio and was a bit sick in my mouth
|
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on May 21, 2017 20:07:50 GMT
I had no idea this took place before reading this thread, it is without doubt match fixing & anyone who is brushing it off as some nothing moment in a game with nothing riding on it is naive at best. Millions of pounds would have been staked on this match around the world & the players have 'set-up' a certain incident.
Just imagine if Chelsea had a corner only minutes before & Terry scored from it. Would that have been set-up? What if we were talking about Palermo or Napoli doing this, how about some Chinese club? How about a Pakistan bowler sending down a 'wide' ball in his sixth over? Everyone would be pointing the finger then.
There should be a massive enquiry into this, it wasn't some friendly, it was a Premier League match with millions of pounds riding on it!
|
|
|
|
Post by mrred on May 21, 2017 20:20:38 GMT
Meanwhile, Phillip Lahm also retired this weekend with no fucking fanfare DURING a match. Just fuck off.
|
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on May 21, 2017 20:27:05 GMT
Pathetic
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 21, 2017 20:30:01 GMT
If this is true, isn't it similar to the sub who ate a pie during that cup tie?
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 21, 2017 20:31:01 GMT
If this is true, isn't it similar to the sub who ate a pie during that cup tie? It's no different what so ever. |
|
|
|
Post by Uncle cheese on May 21, 2017 20:32:58 GMT
Narcissism at its finest. I'd rather us be even shitter than we've been this season than sign this wanker Really? aren't most footballers wankers? He's a winner and would improve us all day long |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 20:34:33 GMT
If this is true, isn't it similar to the sub who ate a pie during that cup tie? He did it for a bet though. There's no evidence or even a suggestion that what was done today was for a bet. |
|
|
|
Post by ratters on May 21, 2017 20:35:39 GMT
You can't bet on when a player is going to be substituted to the exact minute so lets just get that fact out of the way
Another fact Conte can make a sub whenever he wants, he could have come out before the game and have said im going to sub terry after 25 mins or so, so nothng wrong there.
If someone had put money on TJ to score anytime they have no right to feel aggrieved, as the only thing you could argue is wrong is sunderland agreeing to putting the ball out of play at the exact time, and as you can't actually bet on those permeations (unless its a special, which would have raised a red flag anyway).
But as none of this was in the public domain anyway prior to the game, and no betting laws have been broken, no real wrong doing (even if it was it still hasnt affected the outcome of the game regarding any bets)
Im not even sure you can bet on throw ins. you can't on Bet365
|
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on May 21, 2017 20:37:38 GMT
It's beyond tacky.
He's been linked to WBA - imagine him and Toxic in the same dressing room. A narcissist convention.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 21, 2017 20:45:51 GMT
You can't bet on when a player is going to be substituted to the exact minute so lets just get that fact out of the way Another fact Conte can make a sub whenever he wants, he could have come out before the game and have said im going to sub terry after 25 mins or so, so nothng wrong there. If someone had put money on TJ to score anytime they have no right to feel aggrieved, as the only thing you could argue is wrong is sunderland agreeing to putting the ball out of play at the exact time, and as you can't actually bet on those permeations (unless its a special, which would have raised a red flag anyway). But as none of this was in the public domain anyway prior to the game, and no betting laws have been broken, no real wrong doing (even if it was it still hasnt affected the outcome of the game regarding any bets) Im not even sure you can bet on throw ins. you can't on Bet365 Yes you can. You can bet on anything. It's match fixing. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 20:46:24 GMT
You can't bet on when a player is going to be substituted to the exact minute so lets just get that fact out of the way Another fact Conte can make a sub whenever he wants, he could have come out before the game and have said im going to sub terry after 25 mins or so, so nothng wrong there. If someone had put money on TJ to score anytime they have no right to feel aggrieved, as the only thing you could argue is wrong is sunderland agreeing to putting the ball out of play at the exact time, and as you can't actually bet on those permeations (unless its a special, which would have raised a red flag anyway). But as none of this was in the public domain anyway prior to the game, and no betting laws have been broken, no real wrong doing (even if it was it still hasnt affected the outcome of the game regarding any bets) Im not even sure you can bet on throw ins. you can't on Bet365 the points you made are valid, however, you can bet on any player of any team playing to score at a certain time, however, if they've all been briefed before hand to knock it out of play at this said certain time just so JT can have his subs spectacle, then it does raise questions you could also bet on a certain player to score, say in the second half, but the team have pre-agreed to sub him in the first half etc? lots of permeatations as to what can/can't have been bet on. its the actual agreeing to do something at a set minute, (so it matches his shirt number - very specific) between 2 teams beforehand, during a competitive match where millions are riding on the outcome that is the main worry. |
|
|
|
Post by StoKeith on May 21, 2017 20:48:27 GMT
You can't bet on when a player is going to be substituted to the exact minute so lets just get that fact out of the way Another fact Conte can make a sub whenever he wants, he could have come out before the game and have said im going to sub terry after 25 mins or so, so nothng wrong there. If someone had put money on TJ to score anytime they have no right to feel aggrieved, as the only thing you could argue is wrong is sunderland agreeing to putting the ball out of play at the exact time, and as you can't actually bet on those permeations (unless its a special, which would have raised a red flag anyway). But as none of this was in the public domain anyway prior to the game, and no betting laws have been broken, no real wrong doing (even if it was it still hasnt affected the outcome of the game regarding any bets) Im not even sure you can bet on throw ins. you can't on Bet365 Fair points. The only extra consideration is the time it took to do the guard of honour thing. If it took longer than a minute, then that wipes out that minute during which a goal could have otherwise been scored. Of course other events can occur that take up time, but they're generally not pre-planned. If I had a bet on first goal to be scored in the 26th/27th minute and I saw the guard of honour thing happening instead, I'd be pretty annoyed and would probably ask the betting company for money back seeing as neither team were actually making any meaningful attempt to score and were doing so in a pre-arranged manner. |
|
|
|
Post by superheroantonius on May 21, 2017 20:48:54 GMT
John ' the ego ' Terry can't get enough adulation.
He once organised a threesome, had two no shows and still had a great time.
The man loves himself, which is fair enough
But David Moyes and Sunderland have embarrased themselves today.
I pity Sunderland fans who went down to London thinking ' well it can't possibly get any worse ' only to find out amazingly it can.
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 21, 2017 20:49:02 GMT
If this is true, isn't it similar to the sub who ate a pie during that cup tie? He did it for a bet though. There's no evidence or even a suggestion that what was done today was for a bet. That is a very good point and I don't wish to imply this was done for a bet. However the pie incident was allegedly premeditated and the op suggests so was this. |
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on May 21, 2017 20:50:34 GMT
They formed a guard of honour as well when he left the pitch it's ok in a testimonial but a league fixture it makes it like a circus Typical Chelsea....all a bit cringeworthy!!! I'm sure that any John Terry love in could have been kept until "AFTER" the match, not fuckin DURING it!!! |
|
