An interesting viewpoint on a volatile topic. Any thoughts?
I not read article yet - will later gotta leave for work soon. However my personal take is No, No, No, I think players or anyone involved in fixing should be banned from spots for life and charged as a criminal!
Its such a shame, players in so many sports now are turning to methods beyond the boundaries of the sport to improve their chances. It does nothing for each sport affected and in my eyes its cold hard cheating…
To me it’s greed not for the sport they have been lucky to be gifted in but for money, much like drugs money can push people to make rash and maybe more so irrational decisions. Who would throw a promising career for some hard easy cash ? Amir from Pakistan cricket was such a sad story
Personally I’d have an instant ban for life if they are found guilty -as part of sport is to achieve excellence and how competition can bring more out of us
1 Like
Interesting to see the vehemence in peoples reaction to the article. I firmly believe any player caught betting/wagering on the sport they play should be banned. I don’t know how many of you follow Major League Baseball, but they have a very famous case. Pete Rose is arguably one of the best players to ever play the game. He however has been banned for life because he was caught betting on games when his playing career was finished and he became a manager.
Recognizing that you all know something about football, you will all remember Art Schlicter, the Ohio State Qb who got himself into trouble gambling.
espn.go.com/.../ex-ohio-state-buckeyes-indianapolis-colts-qb-art-schlicht…
Interesting to note however, that players who are caught gambling in US professional leagues are treated with harsher penalties than those who get caught doing drugs. Go figure!!
Interesting Drew, the below is written with respect to you… Just my 2 pence fella.
I easily recall the Rich Eisen show discussing Rose for days. I recall saying to Anders how I nearly turned away from the show full time because of it. My understanding is that Rose (an all time great in the game of baseball) did cross the line, often and obviously in terms of gambling while as a player and a coach and yet there is zero proof that he ever gambled on himself or his team, in fact he states himself that he did not. On that basis I could not understand the people who felt that due to this personal problem he was not fit for the HOF. To me Rose had a gambling problem, this is generally a one person problem that may effect those close to him but does not offer anybody else any serious damage or threat. If you like it could be compared to self harming in many ways. At the end of the day its all about self distruction and not the destruction of other people. One of the Chris’s on the Eisen show even seriously suggested that Rose should sit in the HOF but only to be taken down in the worlds eye every single second of his past life by having something like “addicted gambler” posted on his plaque below his face. A shocking suggestion if you ask me. While I may be ignorant to some of the concepts around baseball and its gambling rules I could not get away from the fact that Rose had a self harming problem and unlike many other stars of various sports he was not acting to deliberately harm or otherwise seriously threaten the well-being of others. As far as I know he was also never known to cheat to gain an advantage on or off the field either. Based on the little I know I would stand tall next to those who called in to Eisen’s show (I recall their passion) who stated that Rose should be in the Baseball HOF due to what he did on the field and that the HOF is illegitimate without him.
1 Like
Rose is an interesting case. Your point about not wagering on himself or his team is understood, but in my opinion, he falls foul of the moral ground by betting on his sport. To stay with baseball, you only have to look back at the Chicago Black Sox scandal.
The 8 players involved were actually acquitted of any wrong doing, but were banned for life anyway. Lots of speculation there as evidence went missing before the trial, turning up years later. Again though, they crossed that moral barrier.
For those of us that have any moral fiber and operate with integrity, sports wagering by athletes will always be a prickly pear.
I appreciate your points Drew, all very fair and its not ideal for me to form a judgement from so far away with little knowledge of the sport history and its reasoning for current rules. I stand by what I said but I also enjoy different points of view, its what forums are for 
Rgds
Roger Goodell released a very kind & appraising statement today in regards to Manning’s retirement. I could not help but wonder would Goodell do the same for Brady when his time comes. I suspect not, or if he does I suspect that statement would be dulled down somewhat. That led me to ponder whether Brady will get in the HOF after last off season, probably will but is it that right? I mean Brady and Rose are both guilty to the same level, both are guilty of bringing the integrity of their beloved game into question and yet this has not yet been proven to be true in either case. So If Rose cant make it why should Brady, after all there is zero proof that Rose gambled on his own teams outcome and yet its clear as day to the entire world that Brady took real proof, squashed it and then made up some tall story.
Its a funny old game 
Brady will skate by with undeserved glory when he finishes his career. Just as the Patriots have a very strong following up and down the east coast of America in spite of the repeated wrong doings of the franchise. I am still aghast that Brady had his suspension overturned, but that just shows how spineless the league administration is.
It is not unlike the way the NBA treated Kobe Bryant when he was charged with rape several years ago. It was apparent someone got bought off and with the NBA not being tarnished, the administration adopted a no harm no foul attitude.
What is good for the league is not necessarily what is morally correct. After all, it is designed as a money making business and suspending stars is not good for business.
1 Like
It cant be easy for the NFL at time but I agree on all counts Drew.
Interesting chat in Fridays Eisen show, Bryce Harper suggests that baseball (which has an average fan age of 54 approx) is “tired” because the rules disallow players to display personality. Instantly I thought of Rose… again.
The problem with personality is that it usually comes with character flaws, those who have limited personality tend to offer less character imperfections but also come across more boring, more robotic… The opposite of interesting. So naturally if you punish players in the game for character imperfections your going to result in a less interesting list of players down the line.
Make a statement, put Rose in & welcome the notion of entertainment and skill first, punishment 2nd.
Agree a lot of sport is about individual characters - if the laws are too strict it does limit that - what happens now is those who were going to test the boundaries are going to do so anyway and usually for the wrong stuff like drugs Etc I hate that celebrating a TD or a sack can be construed as a penalty
2 Likes
Absolutely, as long as its not obviously enticing the opposition or the opposing fan base it should be absolutely fine to celebrate a TD or for that matter taking your top off after a goal!
1 Like
Well said!
Yep I to think penalising celebrating a score in what ever sport or even giving it back to fans if they been calling you out all game is fine and should be allowed… really grates me when soccer players get a card for taking off there shirt or NFL players get a flag for celebrating a TD or great play/sack! For me it adds to the spice and entertainment and after all that’s what sport is - entertainment - is it not?
Oh and back to the original point - I have to say I didn’t watch the game as I was at work but listened on the radio and have serious miss giving’s as to how that World Cup T20 game between hosts India and minnows Bangladesh ended. Also hurt as I had money on the Deshi’s to chase down 146 and needing 2 runs from 4 balls should be 99% in favour of the batting team but to lose 3 wickets and score 1 run to lose the match by 1 run stinks of fish to me!!! 
That’s it …right there Noel…it casts a seed of doubt in anything extraordinary in the game and for those who have cashed in the rest of us true fans have suffered
1 Like