Wayne Shaw

NRC · Post by **NRC** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:38 pm

Hero

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 8:56 am

Looks like he is going to be investigated over betting activity after Sun Bet had him at 8/1 to eat a pie live on TV.

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:00 am

Quite clever by The Sun, great advertisement for a fraction of what it would of cost to reach so many people in so many different ways.

Why is he going to be investigated, as he actually done anything wrong?

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:22 am

MACCA wrote:Quite clever by The Sun, great advertisement for a fraction of what it would of cost to reach so many people in so many different ways.

Why is he going to be investigated, as he actually done anything wrong?

I've only gone off newspaper articles and social media conversations (I understand these outlets usually create fake stories and should be taken with a pinch of salt)

But he did say in an interview that he was aware of the odd's and although he didn't put a bet on himself he did it to earn friends and fans a few bob. I am not sure that is within the rules

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:28 am

MarkGreen wrote:But he did say in an interview that he was aware of the odd's and although he didn't put a bet on himself he did it to earn friends and fans a few bob. I am not sure that is within the rules

Not sure where that stands to be honest, I mean who is investigating it, the sun?

Sun - We put odds out on you eating a pie to make a few quid, and have a bit of a laugh.
Shaw - Yes I know, I didn't put a bet on myself, but thought eating the pie would help create the bit of a laugh you intended.

They created the market, they wanted and were willing to take bets, they lost out. ( They didn't )

NRC · Post by **NRC** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:29 am

Wasn't aware of this betting angle - stupid from the agency as Shaw has full control over whether he does or not, there's no chance aspect at all.

Instead I was innocently watching the game, marveling at a substitute eating a pie. I never thought the day would be eclipsed, when standing on the bee hole, I watched with glee a tweedledee trainer run on the pitch to a chorus (and I think it was the first rendition ever) from the Longside of "who ate all the pies?"

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:37 am

MACCA wrote:Not sure where that stands to be honest, I mean who is investigating it, the sun?

Many outlets reporting its against FA rules so i'd imagine it would be them who look into it

Just one of the sources I read:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 90781.html

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:40 am

HHmm.

Interested to see how this pans out.

What was the flavour of the pie in question?
Pivotal piece of information if you ask me!

NRC · Post by **NRC** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:43 am

Potato pie Macca......

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:44 am

MACCA wrote:HHmm.

Interested to see how this pans out.

What was the flavour of the pie in question?
Pivotal piece of information if you ask me!

Funny you should ask

independent.co.uk wrote:Shaw revealed that he took the pie in the club's kitchen at half-time and confirmed that its contents were meat and potato.

IndigoLake · Post by **IndigoLake** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:49 am

I like pies. There was a good pie thread not long ago.

1fatclaret · Post by **1fatclaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:47 am

Why is this anything to do with FIFA? It's not a football related bet, had no bearing on the game either. If someone puts odds on him eating something on tv, then I'm assuming there would be odds on him not doing it too. Would he then be investigated if he told his mates he wouldn't be eating a pie?

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:12 am

NRC wrote:Potato pie Macca......

The man should be held in high regard as an hero, not scrutinised by all and sundry.

#freeshaw
#fatlivesmatter

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:53 am

Sun Bet is the club sponsor and what they loat on bets will be nothing compared to what they've gained in publicity and would have had to pay for that adertising.

It also doesnt affect the result one iota so dont know why FA would get involved.

Sutton-Claret · Post by **Sutton-Claret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 12:24 pm

BREAKING NEWS - GOING TO BE INVESTIGATED

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39037401" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HendricksHair · Post by **HendricksHair** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 12:51 pm

He's been in trouble before think he head butted an opposition fan during his warm up a few years back

1HappyClaret · Post by **1HappyClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:03 pm

Quite simply it is fraud. It is like having insider information. Jail term is the punishment. Shaw would have been able to see a TV monitor so he new when the camera was on him.

Nothing to do with FIFA but is breaking British law and that is why it is being investigated.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:19 pm

Sunbet paid out a five figure sum to one punter?

I seriously doubt that at 8/1.

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:28 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Sunbet paid out a five figure sum to one punter?

I seriously doubt that at 8/1.

Sounds like lazy journalism, their tweet suggests to me that they paid out 5 figures in total

Edit: The more I read that the more it does suggest one punter

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:29 pm

£102.35 (5 figure sum)

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:53 pm

Apparently, it was a pasty. (ITN)

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:56 pm

ElectroClaret wrote:Apparently, it was a pasty. (ITN)

& his personal twitter, wonder if Sun Bets will be asking for their money back

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:51 pm

Sutton have asked him to resign from the club

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:54 pm

And he's agreed.

He'll be on I'm a celebrity next series.

Walton · Post by **Walton** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:55 pm

And he's resigned.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:07 pm

Well that was a stupid ending to an otherwise dignified and historic cup tie.

Feel a bit sorry for the chap, innocently caught up in the media excitement and ends up losing his job. A job to which it sounds like did more for the club out of passion than he got back in wages.

MarkGreen · Post by **MarkGreen** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:11 pm

ElectroClaret wrote:And he's agreed.

He'll be on I'm a celebrity next series.

Sun Bets actually have odds on that

20/1

https://www.sunbets.co.uk/sports/bettin ... 20Specials

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:17 pm

So it have been ok If he'd eaten a pie without under his own volition without knowing about the bet on offer?

Probably would have denied all knowledge if he'd know how it would end.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:27 pm

(nicked from twitter)

Surely it would be better to ban him for 3.142 games?

Sausage · Post by **Sausage** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:41 pm

If anyone on here knows about employment law, can they please have a stab at explaining the difference between being sacked and being 'asked to resign'?

kentonclaret · Post by **kentonclaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:51 pm

What are the odds on him being appointed Blackburn manager and scoffing a chicken balti pie at half time

IndigoLake · Post by **IndigoLake** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:56 pm

Ridiculous he's lost his job over this. Storm in a teacup.

kentonclaret · Post by **kentonclaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:04 pm

Talk of him getting his job back is just "pie in the sky" according to the Sutton Chief Executive.

Terry Cochrane · Post by **Terry Cochrane** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:34 pm

Loved this story about a bookie being fleeced in Australia over a daft bet

http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/04/bookies-p ... s-5984328/

Terry Cochrane · Post by **Terry Cochrane** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:41 pm

ElectroClaret wrote:And he's agreed.

He'll be on I'm a celebrity next series.

More appropriate for Great British Bake Off next series on Channel 4.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:42 pm

Sausage wrote:If anyone on here knows about employment law, can they please have a stab at explaining the difference between being sacked and being 'asked to resign'?

I'm not a lawyer - and probably only know what a lot of us know.

Boss: "We think you'd done something wrong. We could conduct disciplinary proceedings and, if we find against you, we will fire you... But, if you choose to resign, then we won't say any more about it."

Employee: "OK. I resign."

Some might say this is leaving by "mutual agreement." Personally, I don't know enough about employment law to know if the two are the same or there are some fine legal distinctions.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 6:16 pm

Stop when the fun stops.

djt2006 · Post by **djt2006** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 6:55 pm

Sad end ... football needs more characters.
Love his nickname too ... the roly poly goalie

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:54 pm

If the FA are concerned about the integrity of the game, they ought to say that pie-eating contests are not subject to FA approval and therefore won't be covered by the ethics committee. Any bookmaker taking bets on whether the keeper eats a pie is clearly doing it for the publicity - how on earth can the FA or Sutton United be taking it seriously?

How does it affect other players? If Andre Gray finds out that several of his pals have bet on him to score a goal, will he be breaking the rules if he does score? (For that matter - perhaps Gray's pals did have a bet on him scoring against Lincoln, which is why he made sure not to!

)

But that Sutton goalie - what if he discovered that some of his mates had bet on him eating the pie, and some had bet on him not eating it. What does he do then? Eat half and then throw up?

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:03 pm

I'm amazed that guy was actually involved in the playing side really.

Garnerssoap · Post by **Garnerssoap** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:18 pm

1HappyClaret wrote:Quite simply it is fraud. It is like having insider information. Jail term is the punishment. Shaw would have been able to see a TV monitor so he new when the camera was on him.

Nothing to do with FIFA but is breaking British law and that is why it is being investigated.

Good one lol

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:30 pm

1HappyClaret wrote:Quite simply it is fraud. It is like having insider information. Jail term is the punishment. Shaw would have been able to see a TV monitor so he new when the camera was on him.

Nothing to do with FIFA but is breaking British law and that is why it is being investigated.

No fraud involved, happyclaret. I may choose to have a bet on you not eating between now and Christmas, but if I tell you about the bet, it doesn't mean you will be committing a criminal offence by eating. If a bookmaker chooses to place bets on whether a private citizen will do something legal, and that private citizen then does that legal thing, there's nothing the bookie can do except learn not to place stupid bets. It would be illegal (or perhaps a civil, rather than criminal offence) if the bookie and the goalkeeper colluded.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:41 pm

dsr wrote:It would be illegal (or perhaps a civil, rather than criminal offence) if the bookie and the goalkeeper colluded.

I think there's an issue that he knew the bet was available and went on record saying he knew people who had placed a bet therefore involving a 3rd party, similar to insider trading where you yourself don't have to have a stake in a trade just tell someone else info or affect the market deliberately.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:49 pm

FA Rules

5 (a) A Participant shall not, directly or indirectly, seek to influence for an improper
purpose the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of, or occurrence in, a
football match or competition.

So whatever the bet was to do (eg: eat a pie) because he was a player in the team and on the bench it falls under 'any other aspect of, or occurrence in, a football match or competition.' So doesn't have to be directly related to the play of the game.

(2) (a) A Participant shall not bet, either directly or indirectly, or instruct, permit,
cause or enable any person to bet on –
(i) the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of, or
occurrence in, a football match or competition:
(A) in which the Participant is participating, or has
participated in that season; or
(B) in which the Participant has any influence, either direct
or indirect

Given his statements made opening of an investigation (not concluded) might be to see if any of the above occurred eg: instructed another person to place a bet on something he has direct influence over.

Darnhill Claret · Post by **Darnhill Claret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:52 pm

I benefited from a similar bet. Bellamy celebrating a goal by doing an imaginary golf swing.

The sun laid bets that someone would not do something. All it turns into is 'daring' the guy in question to do something.
Offering odds is then daring punters to bet on the outcome.

The roly poly goalie waited until his team had used their three subs so he was never going to participate in the game.

Sense of humour bypass I think.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:53 pm

CombatClaret wrote:I think there's an issue that he knew the bet was available and went on record saying he knew people who had placed a bet therefore involving a 3rd party, similar to insider trading where you yourself don't have to have a stake in a trade just tell someone else info or affect the market deliberately.

It doesn't matter about the bet or that Shaw knew people stood to win money on him. The bookmaker cannot stop Shaw from eating a pie if he wants to, no matter what he is foolish enough to bet. You could open a book on whether or not I go to work tomorrow, but you can't make me a criminal for doing it.

The FA is a different matter. If the FA feels it is a matter for "the integrity of the game" that betting on pie-eating is an integral part of the sport and should be regulated, that's their concern. Personally, I don't see it.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:08 pm

dsr I misunderstood where you were coming from. I agree there is no criminality in this and no laws besides the FA's own have been broken. It's not fraud unless collusion can be proven between him and the betting company.

1HappyClaret · Post by **1HappyClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:11 pm

If his friends have backed him then yes it is fraud and laws have been broken.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:36 pm

1HappyClaret wrote:If his friends have backed him then yes it is fraud and laws have been broken.

Placing a bet on someone you know's actions is not inherently illegal, if it can proved they had prior knowledge that he planned to eat the pie in question there could be a potential issue.

Commy · Post by **Commy** » Wed Feb 22, 2017 5:04 am

He's been offered a job. He might put a bit more weight on though.

https://tinyurl.com/hrtcdyk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;