AFL Round 7

[One Fell Swoop]

Not sure if its luck.

Smart money was on the unders. My thinking was:

Carltons last 3 – 87, 85, 79
Saints last 3 – 71, 89, 84

No it wasn't, forget those meaningless stats and look at the way the game was played.

Despite that extremely slow start to the 1st quarter, the scoring picked up on several occasions and looked on track to cover the over. An extra 2 goals early and the over was probably home.

The umpires happy to let seemingly anything go and not pay free kicks didn't help and created too much congestion, along with the many extremely fundamental skill errors - played another role in the total staying under.

Kicking from set shots was extremely poor, and I can recall at least two balls hitting the post.

A couple of these factors being different and the total would have gone over.

 

[Nothing]

Which suggests the line was about right and should have been a no play.

 

[Lakey91]

First of all, how are those stats meaningless? It shows the scoring propensities and gives an insight into the two sides recent games?

Carlton have now scored around 80 for the past 4 weeks, and Ill be looking at them again in round 9 – both in the game margins, the game totals, and in the sportingbet MyMatch Markets.


You said it yourself, there was some periods of low scoring, and there were some bursts. Thats footy.


I don’t think you can blame the umpires specifically. Forget about punting, I think we all know that the umpires like to let things go a bit and take the whistle out when the game is close. They want to let the players play. And you certainly cant blame them for congestion! What are they meant to do? Just award a free kick to keep things open/flowing???


There might have been a contentious decision or two that cost a goal, but who says that there wasn’t also a contentious decision in the carlton backline, that should have gone carltons way, and then the saints kicked a goal? If they had of paid that free kick, the unders would have been home even further!


I would understand the annoyance if it had have been 5 points or 2 points difference between unders and over’s. For me, it was 14.5, so I think its pushing it a bit.

 

[twarby]

how can you say smart money was on the unders than post a stat like that.

 

[TurboBreuster]

3U BRIS 1Q -11.5 @1.92 (Sportsbet)
1.5U WBD 1-39 @2.35 (Centrebet)
1U GEEL -46.5 @2.05 (Pinnacle)
1.2U FREO -5.5 @1.92 (Centrebet)
3.5U BRIS/BRIS 1H/2H DBL @ 1.9 (B365)
4U: BRIS -9.5 2Q @1.85 (B365)
0.4U BRIS/BRIS 1H/2H DBL @3.5
1.5U ESS 1-39 @2.3 (Sportsbet)
1.7U MEL ML @1.885 (Pinnacle)
2.4U blues -16.5 @1.92
0.5U blues 40+ @3.8

Round 7 -12U's
Total +3.15U's

A terrible round losing almost 11U's on the Brisbane game. It's hard to know what I was thinking but I am going to try and lmit myself to a max of 3U's on a result.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

h8ers keep h8ing

id give you his phone number, but then id have to kill you...

he's the best book in india, only deals with legit punters who make mad bank

A bookmaker who only deals with punters who "make mad bank"? Sounds like a sure way to be out of business within a week...

 

[Borgsta]

A bookmaker who only deals with punters who "make mad bank"? Sounds like a sure way to be out of business within a week...

like most weeks with soho the bookmaker won.

 

[KardiniaPark]

A bookmaker who only deals with punters who "make mad bank"? Sounds like a sure way to be out of business within a week...

He meant mad wank

 

[Lakey91]

how can you say smart money was on the unders than post a stat like that.

I dont understand? What do you mean?