British Forum BETTING thread

is it just me or does it sound daft everytime a white commentator calls south africa bafana bafana
my wife just went who is this bafana guy he is everywhere!

 

:deal

Wish I found those balls in time

 

It was the sort of bet you put a few quid on and wish you'd put a month's wage on

To be fair, there was no way of knowing with them.... if they'd lost to France and he had a shocker in a 0-0 vs the Saffies they'd have been wide open against the Mexicans and you might have lost.

£30 is an alright bet, if you lose you just stay in one night..... if you win it's a free few pints :yep

 

true @ beeston

I rememeber wanting to put about 2000 on darren bent over 10.5 goals at 11/10 on. I settled on putting down 100 because you never know with injuries etc

 

If anybody took this and trebled their money, Rhys is probably worth an EW for the US Open.

100/1.

I've gone 25EW.

 

Bet of the century here... fill your boots:

New Zealand (minus 18) at 1.90 (10/11) to beat Wales on Saturday

Wales ravaged by injuries are lightweight, inexperienced and in poor form.

New Zealand just smashed a decent Ireland team. I'm on this big.

 

New Zealand just smashed a 14 man Irish team (13 at one point).

What is the bet -10 or -18?

 

Forget that, NZ destroyed them when the game was a game and we just seem to be getting worse.

 

They didn't. Did you watch the game?

It was 10-0 and Ireland were camped on thier line when Heaslip got sent off.

The try New Zealand had scored came from a break away, again when Ireland were attacking.

You say forget the fact that they were down to 14 (and 13) men but the average score change when a team is down for 14 for 10 minutes is -7.

So look at an hour and you'd 42 points down without taking into consideration the extra fatigue.

Losing a man in rugby is ****ing huge.

Anyway, back to the question, is it -10 or -18?

 

Losing a man is not actually that huge if you're playing against NZ. NZ never commit ANY men to a breakdown that they cannot win so they will always have more defenders than the opponent has attackers. This is simple basic rugby that we in the NH do not understand. We pile 3, 4, 5 bodies into a ruck that's not even being contested. We always will be outnumbered.

NZ do not scrummage. So losing a backrow forward is irrelevent in the set pieces. Back rowers are always the most expendable which is why a they are always replaced if there is a sending off or a front rower is sin binned.

Besides, we'll have players sin binned on Saturday because the pressure will be too much.

If you're playing against a strong, bruising team who are very physical then yes, I reckon the strain of a sending off will take its toll. But against NZ, who will basically try and scythe you apart, it doesn't mean very much.

We're going to get ****ing smashed on Saturday.

 

-10 or -18?

 

-18

It will sail past that.

 

Nope.

I've been waiting for the book to open.

Up to 15 was NZ.
15 to 20 was my no bet zone.
20+ was Wales.

New Zealand have it all to do and will come 3rd in the Tri-Nations :deal

 

Salam to win Prizefighter is 9/4 - with Quigley dropping out, he will soon be made the favourite. Mendy at 14/1 is worth a punt as well.

 

21 with Hills.