l Am Confused

[nut]

I'm confused too... and I haven't been reading through the other threads so if my questions have already been answered than I apologise.

So why a suspended sentence????? is the 6 weeks suspended on any suspension like striking??? or just if he is caught gambling again?? and if he is caught gambling on and AFL game again then he should be De-registered so having a suspended sentence is worthless.

The point that the bet was minimal should have no bearing.... infact he potentially could have won over $1000.... Maxwells "family" and friends could have won over $10,000...

I think Nick should have been suspended as well. Just like Trengrove was suspended because of the "result" of his action and not for his "actions".

 

[BF Tiger]

I'd like to know how they arrived at 14 weeks, with six of those suspended? It seems very convenient that Shaw is back for the finals.

 

[Hornberger]

The point that the bet was minimal should have no bearing.... infact he potentially could have won over $1000.... Maxwells "family" and friends could have won over $10,000...

An entire $1000 for person who earns $8000+ per week? How exactly is 85 x 101 > 10000?

 

[JuddyBuddy]

Drugs corrupt an individual. Gambling corrupts an entire code.

This about sums it up. Using non performance enhancing drugs is a personal issue that compromises a players health. Much like depression. If someone is thinking about getting on the gear after a match their mind might be elsewhere, but they're not deliberately trying to alter the course of a match for financial profit. Apples and oranges.

It doesn't bring in to question an entire team's motives. For all we know, there are more Collingwood players involved. They are playing that well atm it wouldn't be hard to rig first goal kicker markets every second week against weaker sides.

 

[nut]

An entire $1000 for person who earns $8000+ per week? How exactly is 85 x 101 > 10000?

close enough to over $10k...lol

anyhow I dont see how it's any different to Insider trading... as much as we all hate bookies they were using information that bookies didn't have. A form of corruption that has seen people go to jail..... How many people did Maxwells family members tell???? and their friends tell???.... I tipping that $95 dollars woth of bets didn't bring the odd from 101/1 to 25/1.....

 

[goose]

Let me start by saying that l am a Collingwood supporter and l agree with the punishment.

l think Collingwood should suspend him for the rest of the season.

But how can a player been suspended for 8 games for an activity that is legal (gambling) with a first offense, while another player can be given three chances before he is suspended for an activity that is illegal (drugs)??????

That does not make sense.

Put simply, there are more factors to consider than the legality of the incident.

For example, I could cheat on my girlfriend. What's wrong with that. I mean, c'mon it's not illegal, right? What about if I walk from one side of a deserted traffic intersection to the other, even though the light was red? God no, that's illegal! Right??

You're logic of considering just the legal nature of a particular incident doesn't hold up in the real world.

 

[FIGJAM]

Nah. That's a match-fix. What Shaw was engaging in was a spot-fix.

Pakistan no ball spot-fix a better comparison.

He was gambling on a heightened probability of something he had no control over. Doubt the goal hungry Shaw would have deliberately missed a ping at goal, or smothered a teammate Riewoldt style.

There's nothing you can really spot fix in AFL for legal gambling, other than throwing the whole damn game. So not a good comparison.

I'd like to know how they arrived at 14 weeks, with six of those suspended? It seems very convenient that Shaw is back for the finals.

They pulled it out of their arse. It's far too much. Goodwin had half of his AFL gambling fine suspended, so it's not without precedent.

But it is a unique case, as evidenced by an absence of similar situations. Whilst the penalty is too much for the crime, it will sure as hell make players think twice about gambling anywhere near AFL.

Interestingly, you will get more weeks for a $10 bet on your own team to win a game, than you would king hitting Judd off the ball to unfairly influence the result in your favour. When put like that, you can see that this penalty is unjust, but is more about the symbology than anything else.

 

[JuddyBuddy]

Interestingly, you will get more weeks for a $10 bet on your own team to win a game, than you would king hitting Judd off the ball to unfairly influence the result in your favour. When put like that, you can see that this penalty is unjust, but is more about the symbology than anything else.

How much money would one stand to directly profit from king hitting Judd? $0.

It may have only been a $10 bet on this occasion, but who knows how deep it really goes. They AFL had to make an example of Shaw as a warning to anyone else contemplating the same thing. There is probably other players who have done similar things or worse, but he was the one who got pinged first and as such he's paid the price.

 

[nut]

He was gambling on a heightened probability of something he had no control over. Doubt the goal hungry Shaw would have deliberately missed a ping at goal, or smothered a teammate Riewoldt style.

There's nothing you can really spot fix in AFL for legal gambling, other than throwing the whole damn game. So not a good comparison.


They pulled it out of their arse. It's far too much. Goodwin had half of his AFL gambling fine suspended, so it's not without precedent.

But it is a unique case, as evidenced by an absence of similar situations. Whilst the penalty is too much for the crime, it will sure as hell make players think twice about gambling anywhere near AFL.

Interestingly, you will get more weeks for a $10 bet on your own team to win a game, than you would king hitting Judd off the ball to unfairly influence the result in your favour. When put like that, you can see that this penalty is unjust, but is more about the symbology than anything else.

The penalty in other sports is Jail..... this has nothing to do with onfield penalties... The AFL earn Millions from Gambling... and such the integrity of the AFL and betting is at stake. Be it $10... or a Million the flow on effect could have been alot worse.
You have to ask how many other times Shaw has le his mates put bets on for him.... remember he got caught this time.... he didn't come forward himself when he realised what he ahd done.... in fact he has had 8 weeks to come forward..

 

[Badesumofu]

He was gambling on a heightened probability of something he had no control over. Doubt the goal hungry Shaw would have deliberately missed a ping at goal, or smothered a teammate Riewoldt style.

What rubbish. Either you're not very bright or your love of your club has blinded you to the reality of this situation. When Shaw placed the bet, he ought to have been aware that he could very likely be in a position to affect the outcome of the wager. This much is clear.

It seems most likely to me that Shaw is simply a moron, and there wasn't much of anything going on in his head at any stage of this. Basically the guy is a trained monkey. If he played for Hawthorn I would want the club to show him the door ASAP.

I suspect the suspended 6 matches is because the AFL also thinks he's probably just a dead-shit who did something stupid that happened to be corrupt.

Also, the comparison that's being made to non-performance enhancing drugs is just stupid. Consider someone working in a casino who smokes some drugs and it affects their performance at work. That employee could also get mates to come and place wagers that she knew she'd be in a position to affect - that would constitute being a corrupt employee. That's two very different things - one will get you the sack on the spot, the other might get you a written warning if you're unlucky.

 

[JuddyBuddy]

You have to ask how many other times Shaw has le his mates put bets on for him.... remember he got caught this time.... he didn't come forward himself when he realised what he ahd done.... in fact he has had 8 weeks to come forward..

Probably drove under the influence several times before getting caught too. The guy is extremely stupid. Has more money then most of us would ever need and puts it all on the line along with his respect for a few more (dirty) dollars.

 

[FIGJAM]

How much money would one stand to directly profit from king hitting Judd? $0.

In a Prelim of Granny? Potentially $25 to $50K depending on how the pot is split.

When I first heard the news before I knew it was related to us, I thought if it's Goodwin style, then a big fine, if it's on his own team, then it's probably a few weeks.

Barring Charles, Cous (who's suspension was more a "get yourself right and come back next year" suspension), this is the biggest suspension we've seen. It's bad, but there's been worse shit happen in football in my lifetime!

 

[nut]

So is the 6 weeks suspended if he gets caught again??? or if he gets done for anything else?? because surely if he gets caught again then he would be de-registered.... So I ask whats the point of the suspended sentence.... It;s like telling someone on death row if they get caught again the will do 6 years in jail after they are dead.

 

[goldcoastfc]

But how can a player been suspended for 8 games for an activity that is legal (gambling) with a first offense, while another player can be given three chances before he is suspended for an activity that is illegal (drugs)??????

That does not make sense.

Too simplistic.

If you are found with drugs in your system, that is not illegal. If you are found with drugs in your system on game day, or with performance enhancing drugs at any time, that is cheating and is punished with a 2 year suspension from the game.

Gambling is not illegal. But gambling on inside knowledge starts heading towards match fixing and then the real trouble starts. That is illegal and can result in jail time.

 

[JuddyBuddy]

In a Prelim of Granny? Potentially $25 to $50K depending on how the pot is split.

Nah, don't really buy it. Indirectly, if everything falls in to place following this supposed king hit you could profit from it. But doing something like that risks firing the opposition up and putting your bet in jeopardy anyway.

It's a lot different to betting on someone scoring a goal. Imagine if the first goal in this game had come from a handball over the top from Shaw to Maxwell. That's the position he was putting himself in.

The AFL should just scrap the goal related bets. Obviously the easiest to manipulate.

 

[MF]

A player using illicit substances is harming himself.

A player using insider info to bet on football is harming the game & every other team and player in the league.

Pretty simple to understand.

 

[eaglespremiers]

One is about rehabilitation. The other is about punishment.

 

[jeemak]

Let me start by saying that l am a Collingwood supporter and l agree with the punishment.

l think Collingwood should suspend him for the rest of the season.

But how can a player been suspended for 8 games for an activity that is legal (gambling) with a first offense, while another player can be given three chances before he is suspended for an activity that is illegal (drugs)??????

That does not make sense.

God almighty.

Betting on AFL games is not ok or legal for AFL players. They sign a contract that forbids them from doing it. That contract is bound by contractual law. You break the contract, youi're a chance of being punished as per the terms of that contract. It's pretty simple.

The illicit drug policy is a completely different ball game. There are many reasons why footballers take drugs, the current policy reflects those reasons.

There's also the revenue issue for the AFL. A lack of integrity in AFL betting hurts the AFL more than dirty laundry aired from a player here and there being outed as an illicit drug taker.


Hence the punishments are structured differently.

 

[Maggie5]

Because drug usage undermines the integrity of the player and possibly the club. Players betting on the game they play severally questions the integrity of the entire competition and sport.

Dud comparison

So you are saying that players on performance enhancing drugs cannot influence a result thereby influencing the integrity of the game?
Dud comment

 

[sgbn77]

So you are saying that players on performance enhancing drugs cannot influence a result thereby influencing the integrity of the game?
Dud comment

NON performance enhancing drugs. NON.

Coke, weed, ecstacy, etc.

Getting caught with performance enhancing drugs in you system is a whole different punishment, i'm led to believe.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Let me start by saying that l am a Collingwood supporter and l agree with the punishment.

l think Collingwood should suspend him for the rest of the season.

But how can a player been suspended for 8 games for an activity that is legal (gambling) with a first offense, while another player can be given three chances before he is suspended for an activity that is illegal (drugs)??????

That does not make sense.

Insider trading is illegal.

 

[Tatts22]

So you are saying that players on performance enhancing drugs cannot influence a result thereby influencing the integrity of the game?
Dud comment

PED taking is a 2yr ban on first offence. The 3 strike policy is on 'illicit' drug taking - which are not deemed to be performance enhancing.