Cricket players part of possible betting scam - could this happen in the NHL?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Nothing is guaranteed, of course, but a referee can severely slant the odds in one team's favour.

The Tim Donaghy scandal in the NBA has some interesting commentary. Among them, the argument that a crooked ref could influence the outcome of a game 75% of the time: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/s...xplainsNBAbets

Research into Donaghy's actions showed that at one point in 2007, there were ten consecutive games where large amounts of money were bet on a game he officiated. The big money won all ten games.

But these cricket fixes ARE guaranteed not just severely slanted. That's the main difference. Bettors aren't going to pay BIG money for even 90%. Must be 100%. In basketball I believe the refs kept calling free throws to push the total over (since the clock is stopped). And if players missed the free throws, they would just call more!

But in hockey.. could a ref call PP after PP after PP and hope there's a goal? Is 5-on-3 for 5 minutes a 100% guaranteed goal? There are no 'free throws' in hockey so I don't know...

[Mightyfire89]

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss...1.7_343&fsc=10

I highly recommend the above book to any and all sports fans. It's an excellent read on corruption in soccer. I suspect stuff like this is a lot more common than most of us as sports fans (want to) believe.

[Sluggo]

Maybe the players got bored and thought the game needed more drama.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

That goal was IN.

Not to mention the uncalled St. Louis trip at the Flames's blue line that led to the OT winner...

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

But these cricket fixes ARE guaranteed not just severely slanted. That's the main difference. Bettors aren't going to pay BIG money for even 90%. Must be 100%.

Tell that to this guy's zombie:



The people looking to profit from these schemes will do so if they end up well ahead in the long run, and most would accept the odd loss so long as the overall trend leads to big wins.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by JayP

How much do cricket players make in comparison?

Mahendra Singh Dhoni made $10m year plus $8m in endorsements. That would put him on top of NHL player salaries this season.

edit: found article on it, http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/cri...t-players.html

With its deep-pocketed owners and global appeal, the Indian Premier League (IPL) has shaken up professional cricket, luring top players from five continents with paychecks as big as $111,000 per three-hour match.

Take Mahendra Singh Dhoni, who plays for the Chennai Super Kings and tops our list as cricket's first $10 million-a-year man (that's $5,426 for each run scored). His $8 million in endorsements, from the likes of Reebok, General Electric ( GE - news - people ) and Pepsi ( PEP - news - people ), is 45% higher than any other player. Among all Indian athletes and entertainers, Dhoni's 17 corporate sponsors is second to only Bollywood star and co-owner of the Knight Riders, Shah Rukh Khan.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Tell that to this guy's zombie:



The people looking to profit from these schemes will do so if they end up well ahead in the long run, and most would accept the odd loss so long as the overall trend leads to big wins.

That was 1917! I think we're more capable of catching cheats these days!

The Dhoni comparision above is interesting although keep in mind Pakistani players were kicked out of the IPL after the Mumbai attacks.

Also it seems to me to be a greed factor. A player could make $10 million bucks but if they feel that it's too easy and nobody will notice than they'll do it, even for an amount as small as $1000.

A soccer player told a story on radio once that while he was a captain of a League One team back in the early 90s, he said.... "During the coin toss the other captain said, just let us kickoff, nobody can see the coin toss anyways, and we'll kick it out of bounds right away and you can have it back. I didn't think much of it at the time but later on discovered they had bet on 'which sideline the ball would go out first after kickoff and which team would do it'. That was $2000 made in about 5 seconds!"

[valo403]

Girly's right in that hockey is much less suceptible simply because of the sheer number of variables involved. Sure you could rig a hockey game, but why bother? There are countless sports out there with far less moving parts to get in the way. Crooked bettors don't need 100% guarantees to go ahead with a scheme, but they'll take a sport in which the certainty of the desired outcome is 99.9% over one where buying off one guy gets you maybe a 75% chance of success. I suppose there are prop bets on hockey that could work, an over/under on penalties and a payoff to a ref or player for instance, but that would send up tons of red flags as there simply isn't enough regular action on things like that to avoid suspicion.

[afc wimbledon]

I think you are all missing the point if you are thinking players get involved to make money, they get involved by betting, which leaves them vunerable to blackmail, either due to betting on their own sport or if they are addicted to gambling due to the debts they can rack up in a hurry regardless of what they earn, this is also what brings them to the attention of those that have most to gain if a player is fixed, bookies.

Sometimes it would be due to family back in the old country (assuming its Russia) who are the preasure point. The criminals like the players to take money as it cements the deal for them, at that point the player is part of the conspiricy and wholly owned, but it pretty well always starts as blackmail.

[RougeUnderoos]

There was a related story on Deadspin today.

http://deadspin.com/5623997/john-sal...or-inside-info

GAMBLOR probably isn't always buying a phantom punch but his odds go up if he knows something the other gamblers don't know.

[Da_Chief]

Cricket's Pay Gap

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cri...#ixzz0y9rsu0BV

IN A DIFFERENT LEAGUE: THE CENTRAL CONTRACTS
Australia: £400,000
England: £400,000
South Africa: £105,000
India: £82,500
West Indies: £77,250
Sri Lanka: £77,250
Pakistan: £22,500
Bangladesh: £12,000
Figures per player, per year

This is being used as one excuse. I don't buy it though, £22,500 * 130 (£ to Rupees xchange rate) = 2,925,000 Rupees which for a Pakistani is a good amount for the year. They're living in Pakistan not in Europe where the 22K is not close to enough. To add to it, the sponsorship deals also get them money, dunno how much but for central contracted players, it won't be pennies.

Now the bigger issue is the following story by a former Pakistani Coach, Geoff Lawson.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/...830-147f7.html

This selector said: ''We must pick [the player who had earlier approached me], I have been told that if he is not in the team tomorrow, my daughter will be kidnapped and I will not see her again.''

This is a dirty business, where people can be in danger. The young Pakistani bowler Aamer, comes from a small town and a family that worked hard to make ends meet, he is one the main suspects right now. I don't want to assume that he was pressured into this but the following quote by Shane Watson (Australian player) says a lot.

I probably feel for him more than anyone because he's only a young, naive and innocent young guy......but it's unfortunate that someone of his skill has got tied up with something that is damaging to cricket and to the individuals. I found him to be a brilliant competitor on the field.

As for as sports in North America, I don't doubt there is something always going on. Not obvious but in my opinion its all over the world in almost every sport. In baseball, the pitcher can throw a game. Basketball, the perennial All-Stars in the regular reason, choke in the playoffs. Goalies who go ice cold in playoffs for hockey. Not suggesting all of them are fixed but in some cases it might be true.

[Da_Chief]

Just one more thing, something not adding up at least for Aamer's story. This is when he takes a wicket (gets an opposition player out)



This is him the next day, after the scandal broke through(match ended, he was named Pakistan's player of the series, got a £4000 check for his efforts). You can see the remorse on his face, whether he did or not remains to be answered and all the other answers.

[yads]

There just is not enough action on hockey games to justify this. Heck you could significantly move a line with a $5K bet on even the biggest online sports books. The weird prop bets if they even existed wouldn't even get that kind of action. Apples and Oranges, soccer, football, and I presume cricket are in a different class of betting action.