[muffins]

Disappointed to hear Pinnacle operating dubiously regarding the A-League soccer Brisbane v Wellington match.

Match was called off in 73rd minute due to waterlogged pitch, with result awarded (as per A-league rules).

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-2...ogged-/6339272

Pinnacle voided all wagers on the match. Their own rules are very clear:

If, in a game scheduled for two halves of 45 minutes each, a referee ends the game with an official result with what appears to be a time different than 2 halves of 45 minutes each, wagers will have action.

They even give a specific example to assist:

9 May 2010: Fortuna Dusseldorf vs Hansa Rostock:
The match was suspended and resumed shortly afterwards twice for crowd disturbances. The referee decided not to add extra time for the 2nd suspension and ended the match with an official result after only 87 minutes were played. In this case all wagers had action since the match was not abandoned. The referee ended the match with an official result.

Clearly settled match in contradiction to their rules, refusing to address mistake. Deserving of a downgrade as a clear case of dishonourable action.

[Lookingtostart]

This doesn't sound good, hope that the new owners don't make pinnacle dodgy now!

[Hareeba!]

Ok here is the full set of rules. The OP has chosen only those parts which appear to support his argument but in reality not.

1. Wagers will be decided on games with two halves scheduled for 45 minutes each and any time the referee adds to compensate for injuries and other stoppages. It does not include periods of extra time nor penalty shootouts. Occasionally, tournaments, friendlies, or other matches may have time frames different than two 45 minute halves. If Pinnacle does not announce this special playing time before the start of the game all bets will be considered void and stakes returned. If, in a game scheduled for two halves of 45 minutes each, a referee ends the game with an official result with what appears to be a time different than 2 halves of 45 minutes each, wagers will have action. If a referee declares a game abandoned for any reason, wagers will be void and stakes returned.
   
   For example:
   9 May 2010: Fortuna Dusseldorf vs Hansa Rostock:
   The match was suspended and resumed shortly afterwards twice for crowd disturbances. The referee decided not to add extra time for the 2nd suspension and ended the match with an official result after only 87 minutes were played. In this case all wagers had action since the match was not abandoned. The referee ended the match with an official result.
   
   
   17 October 2010: FC Ashdod vs Hapoel Beer Sheva:
   The match was abandoned by the referee during injury time in the 93rd minute because of crowd disturbances. At a later date, Hapoel Beer Sheve was awarded a technical win by the governing Football Association. In this case, all wagers were voided since the match was abandoned. It was irrelevant that 90 minutes were completed or that match was in injury time since the referee abandoned the match. In addition, for grading purposes, awarded technical results are not taken into consideration.
   
   26 June 2011: River Plate vs Belgrano:
   The match was ended by the referee with an official result (1:1) in the 90th minute without adding injury time because of crowd disturbances. In this case, all wagers had action because the match was not abandoned. The referee ended the match with an official result."
   
   The match was abandoned.
   End of discussion.

[shaunovery]

It should be settled as a void bet

Games that don't go 90 mins and then have the game abandoned will be voided at nearly all books

[shaunovery]

Attachment 80225heres bet365 rules which is the same as nearly all uk books

[Optional]

Nice edit Muffins.

[tomallen123]

Read from that article
"Referee Alan Milliner was forced to officially abandon the game in the 73rd minute"

[dealer wins]

Standard void bet.

[muffins]

The match was not abandoned. It was called full time at the 73rd minute, with official result standing. Wellington were awarded the points for the win.

Certainly most books void all bets on matches that don't go the full 90mins, which I agree is the best policy.

Pinnacle however have a very specific clause which states that if the referee ends the game with an official result with what appears to be a time different than 2 halves of 45 minutes each, wagers will have action.

In this match, the referee ended the game with an official result in a time different to 2 halves of 45 minutes, wagers have action.

If any game that goes less than 90mins is void, what does this clause refer to?

This match is directly comparable to the specific Dusseldorf v Rostock example.

Repeat after me, referee ended match with official result. Match was not abandoned. Wagers have action.

Very clear cut to me and exactly the sort of scenario that clause is meant to cover.

[muffins]

Ok here is the full set of rules. The OP has chosen only those parts which appear to support his argument but in reality not.

1. 
   The match was abandoned.
   End of discussion.

100% agree if the match was officially abandoned. It was not, result official, result stood.

[muffins]

Nice edit Muffins.

Was trying to focus on the specific clause of relevance, not dump the whole soccer rules. The rest all refers to matches which are officially abandoned, this was not.

[muffins]

heres bet365 rules which is the same as nearly all uk books

Yes almost all books will void in this situation, but not all. A-League in particular will have specific rules at some books at it declares games official after 45mins.

Not arguing that voiding is inherently wrong, don't have an issue whichever way books wish to treat it, but treat it the way your rules say they will which in this case seems clear to me that if official result declared, regardless of less than 90mins, then bet stands.

[Hareeba!]

You could keep hounding Pinnacle about it and in the end they will likely agree to pay but on condition that your account will be permanently closed.

[cashin81]

OP is right.
ABD games are when they replay the rest of the match, or the match starts from 0-0. So you have to wait for a result.
In this case, there is no waiting - the result has been determined.

[Optional]

Was trying to focus on the specific clause of relevance, not dump the whole soccer rules. The rest all refers to matches which are officially abandoned, this was not.

Keep saying it wasn't abandoned all you like. But the FA, the newspaper you quoted, Pinnacle and dare I say everyone else who reads this apart from Cashin81 does not agree with you.


If a referee declares a game abandoned for any reason, wagers will be void and stakes returned.

and

for grading purposes, awarded technical results are not taken into consideration.

These two lines which you removed from your cut n paste rules post are quite clearly the relevant ones here.

OP is right.
ABD games are when they replay the rest of the match, or the match starts from 0-0. So you have to wait for a result.
In this case, there is no waiting - the result has been determined.

I do not think the dictionary would agree with you that abandon means "when they replay a match". I think you are thinking of 'postponed'.

From the news report the OP posted, the match was officially abandoned. And the FA declared a winner, by a technical decision, because the match had passed half time.

[muffins]

Keep saying it wasn't abandoned all you like. But the FA, the newspaper you quoted, Pinnacle and dare I say everyone else who reads this apart from Cashin81 does not agree with you.


If a referee declares a game abandoned for any reason, wagers will be void and stakes returned.

and

for grading purposes, awarded technical results are not taken into consideration.

These two lines which you removed from your cut n paste rules post are quite clearly the relevant ones here.




I do not think the dictionary would agree with you that abandon means "when they replay a match". I think you are thinking of 'postponed'.

From the news report the OP posted, the match was officially abandoned. And the FA declared a winner, by a technical decision, because the match had passed half time.

You are incorrect, the FFA did not award a technical decision. A technical decision involves a hearing and involve an award of points for breach of rules, crowd behavior or such. This match result was official from the moment the referee blew the whistle.

If you feel this shouldve been voided, then they shouldve voided the German match in their example. Their rules clearly contemplate that a match which goes less than 90min will be settled as long as result is official.

It is irrelevant the word used by one newspaper article on the match, the official league is always the source for result and this was a match result.

[Optional]

Honestly Muffins, you are now grasping at straws. But I'll have one last go to explain this for you...

A technical ruling does not need a hearing or any time after the whistle is blown to be a technical decision. In Australia the rules say if the match is abandoned after half time the match result will be posted as the score at that time. This is known as a technical result. (whether you agree or like that or not. It's not a debatable point. Its a clear fact)

But lets just say you are correct and it is not a technical result. In order for this type of result to have happened the match HAS TO BE abandoned to start with.

So if it was abandoned what do you think the correct grading should be?

[muffins]

If the match is abandoned then bets void. Abandoned means no result.

If the match is whistled full time prior to 90mins, with a match result awarded at the time by the official, bets stand. That's not an abandoned match, its a completed match.

I ask you, if any match which doesn't go 90mins is abandoned, as you seem to be asserting, what purpose does the specific clause referencing matches less than 90mins serve? Was the German example they give abandoned? It went 87 mins, yet was not deemed abandoned or void. So clearly matches which go less than 90 aren't automatically abandoned.

[Optional]

If the match is abandoned then bets void. Abandoned means no result.

If the match is whistled full time prior to 90mins, with a match result awarded at the time by the official, bets stand. That's not an abandoned match, its a completed match.

I ask you, if any match which doesn't go 90mins is abandoned, as you seem to be asserting, what purpose does the specific clause referencing matches less than 90mins serve? Was the German example they give abandoned? It went 87 mins, yet was not deemed abandoned or void. So clearly matches which go less than 90 aren't automatically abandoned.

You are trying to define new things to suit your argument as you go. Abandoned does not mean No Result. It just means the match is stopped and not to be restarted or replayed. And specifically to A-League football, an abandonment in the second half does allow a result to still be declared, technically. This is different to Europe and is not only perplexing you but annoying some Australian fans too.

The rule about matches that go for less than 2 x 45 min halves is there for situations like that German result. The match was suspended and resumed a short time later but the referee did not add extra time to account for the suspension period. The game ended in a normal result, not a technical result or an abandonment, but less than 45 mins was played in the second half.

That rule about the 45mins is not relevant to this situation because this match did not end in normal play like the German one. It was stopped at 73 mins. The remaining 17 mins scheduled play could either be postponed or abandoned. There isnt another option I can see.

[daringly]

That rule about the 45mins is not relevant to this situation because this match did not end in normal play like the German one. It was stopped at 73 mins. The remaining 17 mins scheduled play could either be postponed or abandoned. There isnt another option I can see.

Several years ago, I handled a similar complaint for SBR when I posted as Justin7. As in this match, the referee signaled the end of the match before 45 minutes in the second half (I don't remember how early, but I think it was about 8 minutes early, for 37 minutes played in h2). No AET was used either. He blew the end much earlier due to violent crowd conditions.

In that case, Pinnacle graded the wager with action (the player wanted it voided, since the wager lost). I argued that the wager should have been voided, but Pinnacle refused to do so. In a situation very similar to this match, the wager was honored.

It might be worth looking deeper into this dispute, and how this issue has been handled in the past. I don't have access to my old emails on this dispute, and I handled 1000's of complaints, so it is hard to recall every detail, but this dispute with Pinnacle stood out because I thought the wrong result was reached.

[dirtdog52658]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/...-1227273807199

Referee Alan Milliner made the decision to end the game in the 73rd minute – just as Brisbane were about to take a free-kick on the edge of Wellington’s penalty area - due to puddles having formed all over the pitch because of torrential rain that hit Brisbane over the weekend.
Under A-League regulations, the scoreline at the time of the final whistle stood because the game had the entered its second half.
Had the match been called off before half-time, the game would have been replayed.

Think player has a point based on pinnacles rules. Game ended with an official result and the two examples they give of games ending early with official results are quite similar to this one.

[cashin81]

The team got the points, they won. Officially.
But the book says, nah nobody won here, it was abd - no result? bets void...

[HeeeHAWWWW]

From a British football point of view, "awarded technical result" would normally refer to results decided afterwards by a football association committee. For example, a 0-3 result given when a player is subsequently found to be ineligible (cup-tied etc). However, here the result was automatically decided as the referee ended the game.

At the same time, a 73 minute match looks like an abandonment regardless of who formally wins.


Tough one - I think you could make a case both ways. Prolly worth pinny clarifying their rules for exactly this scenario.

[shaunovery]

Think there should be a global rule.all matches should go 90 mins for action

[Optional]

@Heehaaaaw If there was a hearing afterward, sure it would be a technical result too. But that does not mean this is also not a technical result. Do you see this as an on field or off field result? I think the answer to that will guide you to the same decision as Pinny has made. The European coach of Brisbane did not expect or understand it either, but I think it's pretty clearly still an abandonment and still not an on field result.

Several years ago, I handled a similar complaint for SBR when I posted as Justin7. As in this match, the referee signaled the end of the match before 45 minutes in the second half (I don't remember how early, but I think it was about 8 minutes early, for 37 minutes played in h2). No AET was used either. He blew the end much earlier due to violent crowd conditions.

In that case, Pinnacle graded the wager with action (the player wanted it voided, since the wager lost). I argued that the wager should have been voided, but Pinnacle refused to do so. In a situation very similar to this match, the wager was honored.

It might be worth looking deeper into this dispute, and how this issue has been handled in the past. I don't have access to my old emails on this dispute, and I handled 1000's of complaints, so it is hard to recall every detail, but this dispute with Pinnacle stood out because I thought the wrong result was reached.

It sounds like you think both this and the previous case should be a void?

Is there really any way this can be seen as anything but an abandoned game? (whatever happened in your case)

Here is an article from the A-League website;

"According to rule 22.22 in the A-League regulations, if a match is abandoned before the end of the first half, it must be replayed, but if it is called off during the second half, the result at the time becomes the final result.

The rule has been in place throughout the 10 years of the A-League’s existence, but Dutchman Thijssen found it perplexing when he discovered his team would not have the chance to finish the game at a later date.

“Of course I’m disappointed because this is a crazy end,” he said.

“If you always worked in Europe and you see this you think, ‘what is happening here?’"

Read more at http://www.a-league.com.au/article/t...QfOJaitc70T.99


The A-League describe it as abandoned. I asked the question above what else it can be called apart from Abandoned or Postponed. I just don't see the argument.

And I think Muffins even showed that he knew he had no argument by deleting the line about matches abandoned 'for any reason' from the Pinny rules he posted originally.



Anyway, Muffins is welcome to submit a complaint if he likes still. I won't handle it.

[cashin81]

@Heehaaaaw If there was a hearing afterward, sure it would be a technical result too. But that does not mean this is also not a technical result. Do you see this as an on field or off field result? I think the answer to that will guide you to the same decision as Pinny has made. The European coach of Brisbane did not expect or understand it either, but I think it's pretty clearly still an abandonment and still not an on field result.



It sounds like you think both this and the previous case should be a void?

Is there really any way this can be seen as anything but an abandoned game? (whatever happened in your case)

Here is an article from the A-League website;

"According to rule 22.22 in the A-League regulations, if a match is abandoned before the end of the first half, it must be replayed, but if it is called off during the second half, the result at the time becomes the final result.

The rule has been in place throughout the 10 years of the A-League’s existence, but Dutchman Thijssen found it perplexing when he discovered his team would not have the chance to finish the game at a later date.

“Of course I’m disappointed because this is a crazy end,” he said.

“If you always worked in Europe and you see this you think, ‘what is happening here?’"

Read more at http://www.a-league.com.au/article/t...QfOJaitc70T.99


The A-League describe it as abandoned. I asked the question above what else it can be called apart from Abandoned or Postponed. I just don't see the argument.

And I think Muffins even showed that he knew he had no argument by deleting the line about matches abandoned 'for any reason' from the Pinny rules he posted originally.



Anyway, Muffins is welcome to submit a complaint if he likes still. I won't handle it.

He may be wrong, but everyone on this thread can see he has at the very least an argument - but you.
Flashscore always states abd/postponed games, in this game it says "finished" - because the team got the points.
Nothing to do with what europe does, if AUS league is different, then bets should follow suit.
http://www.flashscore.com/match/rRbtNZAa/#match-summary

[Optional]

He may be wrong, but everyone on this thread can see he has at the very least an argument - but you.
Flashscore always states abd/postponed games, in this game it says "finished" - because the team got the points.
Nothing to do with what europe does, if AUS league is different, then bets should follow suit.
http://www.flashscore.com/match/rRbtNZAa/#match-summary

Sure, he has an argument and has made it.

I guess I feel less inclined to humor him after the way he removed the relevant lines from Pinny's rules and then posted his edited version in a thread titled Pinny ignore their own soccer rules.

[Stockdale]

OP is right regardless of whether they edited out parts of the rules that werent apart of it

17 October 2010: FC Ashdod vs Hapoel Beer Sheva:
The match was abandoned by the referee during injury time in the 93rd minute because of crowd disturbances. At a later date, Hapoel Beer Sheve was awarded a technical win by the governing Football Association. In this case, all wagers were voided since the match was abandoned. It was irrelevant that 90 minutes were completed or that match was in injury time since the referee abandoned the match. In addition, for grading purposes, awarded technical results are not taken into consideration.

26 June 2011: River Plate vs Belgrano:
The match was ended by the referee with an official result (1:1) in the 90th minute without adding injury time because of crowd disturbances. In this case, all wagers had action because the match was not abandoned. The referee ended the match with an official result."

This match is quite clearly the same as the second scenario here. The match was ended due to the weather and pitch conditions and an official result was given as soon as the referee blew his whistle. There was no technical win given after the fact by a governing body as the first example entails

Quite clearly based on their own rules Pinny should have settled this bet rather than voiding it

[dirtdog52658]

OP is right regardless of whether they edited out parts of the rules that werent apart of it

17 October 2010: FC Ashdod vs Hapoel Beer Sheva:
The match was abandoned by the referee during injury time in the 93rd minute because of crowd disturbances. At a later date, Hapoel Beer Sheve was awarded a technical win by the governing Football Association. In this case, all wagers were voided since the match was abandoned. It was irrelevant that 90 minutes were completed or that match was in injury time since the referee abandoned the match. In addition, for grading purposes, awarded technical results are not taken into consideration.

26 June 2011: River Plate vs Belgrano:
The match was ended by the referee with an official result (1:1) in the 90th minute without adding injury time because of crowd disturbances. In this case, all wagers had action because the match was not abandoned. The referee ended the match with an official result."

This match is quite clearly the same as the second scenario here. The match was ended due to the weather and pitch conditions and an official result was given as soon as the referee blew his whistle. There was no technical win given after the fact by a governing body as the first example entails

Quite clearly based on their own rules Pinny should have settled this bet rather than voiding it

I agree 100%, this was not some decision made by a governing body, this was a written rule that everyone in the league or outside the league had access to read and know before the match started. Even though one coach claims to not know anything about thats his own fault for not knowing the rules of the league. Their rules clearly state that if a game is called for whatever reason in the 2nd half the result is official.

[shaunovery]

So in essence this is not a betting rule its a rule where's the game is being played

[muffins]

Sure, he has an argument and has made it.

I guess I feel less inclined to humor him after the way he removed the relevant lines from Pinny's rules and then posted his edited version in a thread titled Pinny ignore their own soccer rules.

That was to focus on the rules that were relevant to the issue, its obvious I feel that they are pretty clear on the fact that matches with an official result, even of less than 90mins stand, I highlighted the rule and the example which both make that very clear.

I left out all the extraneous stuff as I didn't see how anyone can consider a match with an official result at the time of the match as an abandonment. Obviously I misjudged, a few seem to. Majority of the posters in this thread now support that this match was official, and should be settled.

As you can see, I also edited out parts of the rules/examples which supported my case as per Stockdale's info.

The rules are at best very ambiguous/misleading and on balance favour the position that this match should've been settled.

Appropriate action for a sportsbook in cases where their rules have this degree of doubt and dispute is to amend their rules to remove the ambiguity and to pay the affected customers in their favour. The latter is not going to happen, but they clearly need to do the former.

I leave it to forumites to judge how Pinny have handled this and stand by the title that they ignored their rules.

[Hareeba!]

That was to focus on the rules that were relevant to the issue, its obvious I feel that they are pretty clear on the fact that matches with an official result, even of less than 90mins stand, I highlighted the rule and the example which both make that very clear.

I left out all the extraneous stuff as I didn't see how anyone can consider a match with an official result at the time of the match as an abandonment. Obviously I misjudged, a few seem to. Majority of the posters in this thread now support that this match was official, and should be settled.

As you can see, I also edited out parts of the rules/examples which supported my case as per Stockdale's info.

The rules are at best very ambiguous/misleading and on balance favour the position that this match should've been settled.

Appropriate action for a sportsbook in cases where their rules have this degree of doubt and dispute is to amend their rules to remove the ambiguity and to pay the affected customers in their favour. The latter is not going to happen, but they clearly need to do the former.

I leave it to forumites to judge how Pinny have handled this and stand by the title that they ignored their rules.

Feeling as strongly as you do about it you should proceed to submit a formal complaint via SBR.
Pinnacle's response should make an interesting read and hopefully clarify the issue for the future.

[wrongturn]

Pinnacle should clarify how they determine an abnormal ending match is abandoned or called at ending, because by reading the examples in their rules, I still have no idea how they grade such matches consistently. Normally they should use the league's official sources, not just a random news article.

[dirtdog52658]

Pinnacle should clarify how they determine an abnormal ending match is abandoned or called at ending, because by reading the examples in their rules, I still have no idea how they grade such matches consistently. Normally they should use the league's official sources, not just a random news article.

Yup I wish they would chime in. We all know they are reading this.

[handicapping11]

i dont mean to argue in any way but thats not true from my experience at least when a game is suspended it gets settled at the score at the time of suspension