[bigboydan]

SBR Bill Dozer reports: Globet(SBR rating C-) ignores its listed rule (9.2) stating that soccer matches suspended before the 90th minute will be "deemed void", graded as no action. The sportsbook has graded a player’s wager on a soccer match suspended in the 76th minute a loss, stating that the Argentinean Federation considers the match official. Players should be able to have confidence that the sportsbook’s printed rules will stand.

[pags11]

typical scam BS...keep us updated as to when this guy's account gets credited...I'm sure had his team won, they would have quickly graded it no action...

[nikosgr]

S(h)ame old Globet.

[Clip Joint]

WTF??? Who cares what somebody else's rules are. There rules plainly state that bet should be voided. Why have rules?

[natrass]

. There rules plainly state that bet should be voided. Why have rules?

That is correct.

[bigboydan]

05.13.2006 (11:39 AM CST)

SBR Bill Dozer reports: Globet (SBR rating D+) choosing to confirm or cancel wagers on morning games that have already begun or concluded. The sportsbook requires that all wagers be manually confirmed by its staff before becoming official. Players who have wagered on morning events during the previous evening found that wagers may be validated only after the result is known. This process is responsible for a steady flow of negative feedback from Globet clients. Globet advises players who feel this process is unfair not to wager after business hours when wagering is out of the office. Globet has been downgraded from C- to D+ due to variety of wagering complaints.

[ourbet]

Great...then that's what I'll do in future; "NOT WAGER"!

Appreciate the advice btw!

[natrass]

Globet are not very good in my opinion.

[new2betting]

It pays to do some research. Almost opened an account here

Glad to have used the forum search engine.

How are these guys right now. Still dodgy?

[bigloser]

This would win at IBAS though if rules are so clear

[wack]

This would win at IBAS though if rules are so clear

It was actually me that got stiffed here, way back when. As I recall they had said to Bill that their decision was final and they wouldn't abide by IBAS ruling if that was otherwise. IBAS is the most toothless operation in existence, of 10 cases I have ever taken to them (all genuine, all I felt I had a 50% chance of winning but should have won 100% of them as they were all breaches of rules/terms and conditions explicitly stated on site, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered) - I won one case. And this was more goodwill than IBAS actually MAKING a ruling - they had a word and the bookie gave the money back as a goodwill gesture (and that one of the 10 was the smallest amount involved, how strange...)

IBAS are funded by bookmakers to give an appearance of fair play that doesn't exist. The only person IBAS don't care if they upset is betfair, again due to the bookmaker's funding IMO.

[wack]

This would win at IBAS though if rules are so clear

Oh, and that account was $5k in the red as I recall, and i never played there again. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot...

[new2betting]

Oh, and that account was $5k in the red as I recall, and i never played there again. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot...

Thanks for the heads-up. Wondering if they are Ok right now. Seems nobody uses them from here.

[bigloser]

[QUOTE=wack;228825]. IBAS is the most toothless operation in existence,.[/QUOTE

The reason IBAS rules so often in the Books favour is that most people dont understand its purpose when they submit a complaint. IBAS is there to ensure a books rules have been followed. As most Books rules are heavily weighted in their favour they win most disputes. IBAS would not judge the merits of a rule just whether it has been followed.
The case above should be a win