[gb007]

Having backed Jack to score @ any time with Skybet they are refusing to accept Lester as the goalscorer qouting Talbot as the scorer which is verified by the press association.
Any ideas how the official goalscorer can be registered as Jack and therefore claim my winnings

[Beelzebub]

gb007, on Aug 30 2009, 10:20 PM, said:

Having backed Jack to score @ any time with Skybet they are refusing to accept Lester as the goalscorer qouting Talbot as the scorer which is verified by the press association.
Any ideas how the official goalscorer can be registered as Jack and therefore claim my winnings

sue them (failing that refer them to their own programmes which clearly state the goal as Lester's)

This post has been edited by Beelzebub: 30 August 2009 - 09:21 PM

[philtooleycfss]

The Club has contacted the Press Association to tell them to amend their records. This is a copy of the e mail sent:

PRESS RELEASE 29 August 2009
Chesterfield

CONFIRMATION OF CHESTERFIELD GOALSCORER

To note that the confirmed goalscorer of Chesterfield's goal today against Morecambe was Jack Lester.

Please amend if you were notified that the scorer was Drew Talbot.

Goalscorer - Jack Lester.

Cheers

Geoff Mitchell
Press Officer
Chesterfield FC

Show them this and ask them to contact the club if they still refuse to pay up

Phil

[Wooden Spoon]

Mark Jones, on Aug 30 2009, 10:53 PM, said:

I wonder what happens to all those who backed Drew Talbot to score and have already collected the winnings. :-)

they have a free beer

[gb007]

philtooleycfss, on Aug 30 2009, 10:51 PM, said:

The Club has contacted the Press Association to tell them to amend their records. This is a copy of the e mail sent:

PRESS RELEASE 29 August 2009
Chesterfield

CONFIRMATION OF CHESTERFIELD GOALSCORER

To note that the confirmed goalscorer of Chesterfield's goal today against Morecambe was Jack Lester.

Please amend if you were notified that the scorer was Drew Talbot.

Goalscorer - Jack Lester.

Cheers

Geoff Mitchell
Press Officer
Chesterfield FC

Show them this and ask them to contact the club if they still refuse to pay up

Phil

Thanks for the info Phil I have now fowarded this onto Skybet hopefully they will now pay up-I will let you know accordingly

[DIFH]

gb007, on Aug 30 2009, 10:20 PM, said:

Having backed Jack to score @ any time with Skybet they are refusing to accept Lester as the goalscorer qouting Talbot as the scorer which is verified by the press association.
Any ideas how the official goalscorer can be registered as Jack and therefore claim my winnings

Are we talking thousands here?

[lindave]

It was deffo.Jack's goal even though he didn't know much about it.

[gb007]

Dave In Footie Heaven, on Aug 31 2009, 02:06 PM, said:

Are we talking thousands here?

a couiple of hundred and despite the info provided by Phil they are still refusing to pay up-now refered to the betting arbitration service

[DIFH]

gb007, on Aug 31 2009, 04:09 PM, said:

a couiple of hundred and despite the info provided by Phil they are still refusing to pay up-now refered to the betting arbitration service

IN THAT CASE MATE, GOOD LUCK. kEEP COOL AND DON'T LET THEM GRIND YOU DOWN.

[birdholmer]

it,s usually only given to the player who deflects the ball into the net ,if it was not on target from the original shot/header

as drew ,s original shot was on target,thats the goalscorer.
the result will be determined by press assoc report,thats the small print in bookies rules.

best of luck

[Stallion Blue]

funnily enough i had the same problem last year, got f**k all

they said they were happy with the outcome and that the press association had recorded the goal not lesters originally.

they didn't care if it was amended..

bet on kev davies instead lol.

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

Stallion Blue, on Aug 31 2009, 05:39 PM, said:

funnily enough i had the same problem last year, got f**k all

they said they were happy with the outcome and that the press association had recorded the goal not lesters originally.

they didn't care if it was amended..
bet on kev davies instead lol.

If it's changed they have to care if you take it to arbitration

[boot]

birdholmer, on Aug 31 2009, 04:29 PM, said:

it,s usually only given to the player who deflects the ball into the net ,if it was not on target from the original shot/header

as drew ,s original shot was on target,thats the goalscorer.
the result will be determined by press assoc report,thats the small print in bookies rules.

best of luck

So a player takes a free kick which is lofted into the area on a direct line to goal (as happens time and time again) the defenders and forwards rise as one to head and an attacking player gets the slightest of touches and the ball proceeds into the net - the goal is always given to the player making the last touch irrespective of whether the original ball was on target or not. There is absolutely no way of knowing if the ball would have found the net or not without the last intervention - it might have been blocked, saved, gone wide, hit the woodwork or whatever.

[birdholmer]

boot, on Sep 1 2009, 12:09 AM, said:

So a player takes a free kick which is lofted into the area on a direct line to goal (as happens time and time again) the defenders and forwards rise as one to head and an attacking player gets the slightest of touches and the ball proceeds into the net - the goal is always given to the player making the last touch irrespective of whether the original ball was on target or not. There is absolutely no way of knowing if the ball would have found the net or not without the last intervention - it might have been blocked, saved, gone wide, hit the woodwork or whatever.

is that a deflection,no
jack knew absolutely zero. , about saturdays goal

[Beelzebub]

birdholmer, on Sep 1 2009, 12:32 AM, said:

is that a deflection,no
jack knew absolutely zero. , about saturdays goal

I disagree. Jack, as the instinctive goalscorer we know he is, knows full well that if he changes the course of a long distance shot the chances of it being saved or blocked are vastly diminished. Accordingly he deliberately changed it's direction (only by about 90 degrees though!).

The real issue here is the continued incompetence of the PA reporters and the way the press take what they say as gospel - even though it is obviously wrong. Very lazy reporting. Jack's goal is bad enough but the crowd they reported for Rotherham's first home game was so wrong it was laughable - only 7,000 out - an error of more than 200%, yet, because it was reported by PA the figure is still being given in the national press and used when working out average attendances etc. Rotherham must be the only club with an average attendance figure higher than their biggest crowd!

Incidentally, how on earth did the PA guy get it wrong? It was perfectly clear that it was Jack's goal, and as Phil says elsewhere all the reporters (bar one) realised this from their vantage point in the press box. The only other person to get it wrong was the stadium announcer who has a poor view from his box and was probably doing a crossword at the time.

[rs1978]

It was clearly Jack's goal and - from behind the goal - his intervention looked deliberate. Were it not for his touch, I'm not convinced that Drew's shot was goal bound as the part of the goal it was heading for was quite congested

[philmoore6]

Beelzebub, on Sep 1 2009, 08:17 AM, said:

I disagree. Jack, as the instinctive goalscorer we know he is, knows full well that if he changes the course of a long distance shot the chances of it being saved or blocked are vastly diminished. Accordingly he deliberately changed it's direction (only by about 90 degrees though!).The real issue here is the continued incompetence of the PA reporters and the way the press take what they say as gospel - even though it is obviously wrong. Very lazy reporting. Jack's goal is bad enough but the crowd they reported for Rotherham's first home game was so wrong it was laughable - only 7,000 out - an error of more than 200%, yet, because it was reported by PA the figure is still being given in the national press and used when working out average attendances etc. Rotherham must be the only club with an average attendance figure higher than their biggest crowd!

Incidentally, how on earth did the PA guy get it wrong? It was perfectly clear that it was Jack's goal, and as Phil says elsewhere all the reporters (bar one) realised this from their vantage point in the press box. The only other person to get it wrong was the stadium announcer who has a poor view from his box and was probably doing a crossword at the time.

while i have to agree that the goal is lesters

i cannot see how you can say i quote "deliberately changing its direction"

its clear for all to see that he had no knowledge of where the ball was, certainly wasnt able to deflect the ball intentionally!

for all lester knew about it it could have gone up and over the bar.

[philtooleycfss]

Received the following e mail from PA this morning:

Hi Phil,


Thank you for your enquiry.


This has been passed to our football desk; who have updated the scorer information.


Regards,


Lucy Beldon-Morrison

Marketing Executive

PRESS
ASSOCIATION

Sport

www.pressassociation.com/sport