Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:58 am  

Norman you aren't familiar with the Shaun Leaf case are you? Rob W's punishment is lenient in comparison and therefore it's fair to assume the scale of his betting was recreational as stated when he was first punished.

The extra three month's isn't really here nor there, most of it will be off season anyway. It's probably to make an example of him for not coming clean about all of his betting at the time of the first hearing.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:00 am  

halifaxjohn wrote:

Think about it Worzel, who ever advised him to appeal hadn't been told by Rob the full facts.

Presumably, Rob knew them though.

I don't understand all these betting suspensions. Have these players no mates who can put bets on for them ?

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:47 am  

griff1998 wrote:

Presumably, Rob knew them though.

I don't understand all these betting suspensions. Have these players no mates who can put bets on for them ?

But thought the panel did not, and no griff the players have no mates, a bit like Seagull supporters.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:31 pm  

For me there's a huge difference between betting on games in your competition, and betting on your team to lose in games you're playing in. His ban should have been increased dramatically, 3 months is poor.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:30 pm  

FoxyDread wrote:

Norman you aren't familiar with the Shaun Leaf case are you? Rob W's punishment is lenient in comparison and therefore it's fair to assume the scale of his betting was recreational as stated when he was first punished.

The extra three month's isn't really here nor there, most of it will be off season anyway. It's probably to make an example of him for not coming clean about all of his betting at the time of the first hearing.

I am now. Gleeson and Long got 3 & 4 months for betting on Sint Ellins but massive fines but that was 10 years ago.

Difficult to see a way back to Fax now for Rob though.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:52 pm  

http://www.halifaxrlfc.co.uk/article/39859/halifaxs-official-statement-on-rob Pretty clear to see where its heading. The board really need to speak to the RFL in regards the evidence because if true then they are pretty much backed in to a corner.

http://www.halifaxrlfc.co.uk/article/39859/halifaxs-official-statement-on-rob Pretty clear to see where its heading. The board really need to speak to the RFL in regards the evidence because if true then they are pretty much backed in to a corner.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:50 pm  

I don't think I can bring myself to cheer for a player that has bet money on our team to lose (or not win by more than X number of points) whilst playing in those matches. Was he really that bad at catching a ball !!!

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:50 pm  

NORTON FAX wrote:

I don't think I can bring myself to cheer for a player that has bet money on our team to lose (or not win by more than X number of points) whilst playing in those matches. Was he really that bad at catching a ball !!!

Yes he was, if the Board keep him then Rob will get the same favourable support from me as he did in the past.
If they don't then I will still give him a clap, after all I am not a Seagull supporter!
God luck Rob.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:06 pm  

Cheat get over it, and get rid of him

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:09 pm  

Add corrupt