An Infallible Stat? When Opta Gets it Wrong, Players are Left With Nothing
In stat-based betting, it’s not what really happened on the pitch that matters, but what gets recorded in the data provider’s database. The problem is that this data can be incorrect (because they depend on human interpretation), and the system offers no effective way to challenge it. Players are left without tools, while the responsibility is blurred between data providers and bookmakers.
Incorrect Data
Most bookmakers clearly state in their terms and conditions that statistical bets, such as shots on target, assists, tackles, are settled based on data from a specific provider. Most often, it’s the biggest provider of such data – Opta. At first glance, it seems logical: a trusted provider ensures consistency and automation.
The problem is that when the data is wrong, nothing can be done. The player technically has a channel to challenge the mistake, but in most situations they don’t receive any response. The bookmaker’s most common reply is: “The bet was settled in accordance with official data.” And that’s the end of it, even if the player has undeniable video evidence.
This approach shifts the risk of error entirely onto the customer. A player may be 100 percent sure that the bet is correct, but it’s not them who decides whether there was a shot on target – it’s the data operator, who works in real time and makes the decision. If they don’t record a shot, assist or interception, even if the player has evidence, the system will settle the bet against them.
Opta publishes definitions of what constitutes, for example, a tackle or an interception, but these are often dry, theoretical rules. In reality, everything depends on the subjective judgment of the statistician.
Market Examples
We’re not talking about isolated incidents, but high-profile situations from major tournaments and leagues. The most famous is the unrecorded shot on target by Lionel Messi during the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The Argentine takes a free kick, the goalkeeper saves it, the ball is headed towards the goal. Everything is captured in the replays. However, Opta doesn’t register the shot, and over bets on shots on target lose. Only after a few days, following intense pressure on social media, the data is corrected.
A similar situation occurred with Kevin De Bruyne in a recent Manchester City vs Bournemouth match in the Premier League. The player takes a free kick, the goalkeeper parries it – a typical definition of a shot on target. Still, Opta doesn’t register it in the system. Bettors are left with nothing. Bookmakers reply that everything is in line with official data, and complaints are rejected.
Even more surprising was the situation in the Chelsea vs Nottingham Forest match. Chris Wood takes a shot on target, which is initially included in the system. A few minutes later, the stat disappears from the live data. Bets are settled as if the shot never happened. Bettors show evidence – to no effect.
— Thomas watson (@Tombighead89) May 25, 2025
These situations happen often. On X, special accounts are created to share such examples. Reddit also has many threads. We must remember that these issues don’t only concern the world’s top leagues, but also smaller ones covered by providers. In addition, other sports face the same problems with interpreting plays.
Frequent Changes to Decisions
Another common thing is situations where events are incorrectly added at first. Bets are settled as wins, players receive payouts, and after 10–15 minutes, the stats are corrected, and funds are withdrawn from players’ accounts. This practice creates confusion and undermines trust in the entire bet settlement process.
Instead of acting impulsively and updating stats too quickly, a better solution would be a more precise approach. A calm, reliable analysis, even if it takes longer, is much better and more transparent. “Backdated” changes not only cause chaos, but also directly affect bet outcomes. Customers have the right to expect that if a bet has been settled as won, it will not be reversed due to a provider error. Of course, such mistakes can happen, but their frequency is too high.
Rules Block Everything
From the bookmaker’s perspective, the terms and conditions provide complete protection. When the clause says, “data from the official provider is final,” the operator can reject any complaint without analysis. Even if a player shows proof that the data was later changed or the situation was wrongly assessed, it doesn’t matter. What counts is what was in the database at the time the bet was settled.
This is a convenient but one-sided model. It absolves the operator of responsibility and places the entire burden on the player, who has neither influence nor tools to verify the data. As a result, stat-based betting feels like a shot in the dark. Because even if everything on the pitch checks out, the outcome may depend on one person’s decision behind a screen.
Some companies have tried to introduce clauses allowing complaints based on video evidence in cases of “gross errors.” But these are rare exceptions and are usually not supported by any real system. A player might come across an employee willing to help, but might just as well be told nothing can be done. There are no standardized procedures or mechanisms.
Importantly, it is the bookmakers – not Opta – who suffer reputational damage in these cases. Players place their bets with the bookmaker, not with the data provider, and that’s where complaints go. When a stat is incorrect, it’s the bookmaker who faces the backlash in social media, even if they did everything by the rules.
Stat-Based Betting is a Huge Market. Time to Bring Order
Stat-based betting is currently one of the fastest-growing segments of operator offerings. Players increasingly choose bets on shots on target, assists, interceptions, passes, fouls, rebounds – instead of betting on match results. These markets offer more excitement, faster settlements, more options. But that’s precisely why they also require more transparency and reliability.
What’s more, the current reality discourages many players from placing stat-based bets in the first place. Even if they make the right pick, there’s a constant fear that the bet will be settled incorrectly. This creates a subconscious barrier: it’s hard to enjoy a win when you know that even a clear shot on target, like those from Messi or De Bruyne, might not be recorded. Bookmakers should start demanding a higher level of professionalism from Opta. In fact, operators may need to consider creating a dedicated unit to review disputed stat events. As Player Bets continue to grow in popularity, the number of such controversies will only increase.
If this data isn’t verifiable, if there’s no control over its quality, if the player has no way to appeal a mistaken decision – then we are dealing with a systemic problem. Especially as it concerns real money, often large amounts.
The betting industry can no longer treat stats as a “black box” to which no one has access. There needs to be a discussion about independent control mechanisms and the possibility of reporting clear mistakes.
Until something changes, players will keep losing not because their pick was wrong – but because the stat system failed them. And that, in the long run, helps no one. Not players, not operators, not the industry as a whole.