SA Footy

I realise Sportsbet are a sponsor of this site.. but this is f****d

I placed a bet yesterday on Lachie Neale to have under 21.5 possesions thinking that he is every chance to be the sub, they have then sent me email this afternoon:


Dear Sir/ Madam
Thank you for your email.
Just a quick courtesy email to inform you about your recent Total Disposals bet for the AFL Grand Final this weekend. The player must be in the starting 21 or your bet will subsequently be void and your funds will be refunded. If you would like to void your bet before the start of the match you are welcome to do so.
If you require further assistance with the above, please do not hesitate to contact our Customer Service Team. We are here to help via Live Chat, Email, or Phone.

Kind regards,
Ben
Sportsbet Customer Service Team

think this is average

Seems pretty standard. They arent gonna let you bet on someone having under 21 possessions when they're only likely to play just over a quarter at most.

What if bet on him over 21.5 and he gets subbed out... Refund the bet then?

No..

lol! do you think the corporates are stupid? lol

Nope, don't think they're stupid... Think they are xxxxs

You said it yourself, you only placed the bet cause you thought he might be the sub. They thought of that too so put in the condition about being in the starting 21. Basically you're angry cause they thought of it first.

Try finding value rather than loopholes.

You'd be lucky to get on in time anyway - their useless f#cking app keeps freezing.

Spargo wrote:You'd be lucky to get on in time anyway - their useless f#cking app keeps freezing.

Their App is by far the worst. I mainly punt using apps and I don't punt with them for that reason

My 2 bobs worth.

I have made errors in processing bets with Corporate Bookies
I rang up to cancel the bet
The reply MOST times with MOST Bookies is :
"We cannot cancel an Internet bet."


With Corporate Bookies, on several occasions, they put up the wrong odds
An example for discussion purposes:
A :$1.20
B: $4-50
Every other bookie has side B at $1-20
Punters take $4-50 for the team that should have been $1-20
Corporate Bookies then contact the punters by phone or email saying they have voided the bets

So the question is :
Why should a corporate bookie be allowed to void bets placed on the internet but the punters cant ?

On face value:
Swervins bet was interesting
It was placed on a Thursday
He punted with a fair degree of nouse thinking than Neale may be the sub
I confidently assume he placed the bet b4 the teams and subs were announced
Had Neale consequently been named in the starting 21 , Swervin's advantage was negated and the bet stands
But , I assume, when Neale was announced as the NAMED sub, Sportsbet contacted Swervin about voiding the bet

Swervin was given a choice by Sportsbet
* The bet will be void if Neale is not in the starting 21.*
* If you like to void your bet b4 the start of the match you are welcome to do so.*

Bad ultimatum for Swervin , he is more or less snookered
Great each way bet for the Sportsbet

I think the bet should stand irrespective of whether Neale ended up sub or not
No one knows for sure who the sub will be on a Friday irrespective if named or not

CLAUSE
The only way Sportsbet should be be allowed to Void the bet is if they had a CLAUSE
That CLAUSE should have been clearly set to say NO BET applies if one of the players is a SUB

Trader wrote:You said it yourself, you only placed the bet cause you thought he might be the sub. They thought of that too so put in the condition about being in the starting 21. Basically you're angry cause they thought of it first.

Try finding value rather than loopholes.

When I placed the bet there was NOTHING stating that the player had to be in the starting 21. It was only when I got an email through saying "they forgot to put this clause there".....

To be honest, I wouldnt have minded if he was in the starting 21... I couldnt see him getting 22possies + anyway

They are the worst bookie I've ever dealt with

No CLAUSE no case surely ?
Swervins bet should stand no matter where Neale ended up playing

Is there a Gambling ombudsman??

If not should there be?

Don't get me started on Sportsbet! See worst gambling sites thread!

Pity they sponsor this site or I'd tell you what I really think

They also void the bet if you bet the over, so its not like they have it one way.

I bet with almost every bookmaker and Sportsbet are no better or worse than all of them, Sportsbet do have the best promotions around though and why it is worth having an account with them. e.g. lose a tennis bet in 5 sets and you get a refund, run 2nd in a certain horse race and you get refunded etc

Swervyn wrote:

Trader wrote:You said it yourself, you only placed the bet cause you thought he might be the sub. They thought of that too so put in the condition about being in the starting 21. Basically you're angry cause they thought of it first.

Try finding value rather than loopholes.

When I placed the bet there was NOTHING stating that the player had to be in the starting 21. It was only when I got an email through saying "they forgot to put this clause there".....

To be honest, I wouldnt have minded if he was in the starting 21... I couldnt see him getting 22possies + anyway

Most bookies do have that in their T&Cs, but if they didn't, then I have no issues with your complaint!

Whinge on good sir!

Problem with corporates is the amount of sports and other items they are offering for us to bet on has incresaed tenfold in recent years,and they are constantly making mistakes,just dont understand why if there is a mistake and no clauses in that bet they should have to take the bet up to a certain amount,if the punter makes a mistake generally the bet will still stand.