SA Footy

who was the punter that had a very heated arguement with dammarell last night ??

mal & i among others were amazed, mal being a shy man he is went up & asked what happened to the punter, so i wont spoil mals story & will wait for him to say what he was told


cue mal

I know both men and would prefer not to adjudicate on this matter.
Im worried more about WW3 and that Uncle Sam may need me.

mal wrote:I know both men and would prefer not to adjudicate on this matter.
Im worried more about WW3 and that Uncle Sam may need me.

SOFT, I'LL SAY IT THEN, THE PUNTER ASKED FOR $1.50 ABOUT 'WELL THATS LIFE' (APPROPIATELY NAMED ) WHEN IT WAS $1.40 THEY ARGUED THEN PD TOLD HIS STAFF TO MAKE IT $1.30 & AS THE ARGUEMENT CONTINUED FOR A LITTLE WHILE, THEN THE PUNTER STORMED OFF SWEARING & CARRYING ON

INCIDENTLY IT WENT BACK TO $1.40 & ALSO IT PAID $1.50 ON THE TOTE

YOU ARE SOFT MAL THE CRYPTIC CLUE WAS GOOD THOUGH (SAM) AS TO WHO THE PUNTER WAS

WELL THATS LIFE $1-40 ON THE BOARD

PUNTER : "can i have $x at $1-50
BOOKIE : " no...."

WELL THATS LIFE SHORTENS FROM $1-40 TO $1-30 ON THE BOARD

PUNTER : "give me $x at the $1-40 then."
BOOKIE: " no its $1-30 now."
PUNTER : " (*^%$((*^%#^&^*()()&*&^^%$$##(*!&((^$%#]"

This was the story as told by the PUNTER
I dont have the BOOKIE version of events, thats why I prefer not to comment as much.
The incident was unsavoury and was viewed by many others, a regrettable incident.

sounds like scoob when he backed Umaqueat from $51 to $12..... that weak bookie shit himself~!

well DUMBERELL sure knows how to give the best customer service!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

well mal i think the bookie should have given him the 1.40 as he didn't lay it during 'the discussion' but as for 1.50 the bookie has every right to say no or as they always say'odds on the board, board odds' but what do you think mal ?

ps do not sit on the fence (no wonder they call you splinters)