Rumour Four men charged over alleged Brownlow Medal betting scandal

[Greater Gattsby]

Don’t know what’s worse, an umpire leaking the votes on players at long odds or some of the calculations going on in this thread

 

[McKuursma]

Yep - it's amazing how the AFL, and sports/politicians in general. bend over backwards to protect the profits of their morally bankrupt sponsors, but try to cover up systematic doping programs like they did with Essendon.

It is never about integrity, it's always about money and power.

Agree broadly, and I'm certainly not an Essendon sympathiser by any means, but the 'Doping Saga' had a political backdrop that played out behind the scenes which required someone to hold the bag. Tracking the timeline against Peter Dutton as Shadow Minister for Health, the Australian Crime Commission released a report on Organised Crime and Drugs in Sport in 2013. It discussed use of banned peptides/hormones through the AFL and NRL, supplied by organised crime networks.

In 2014, E34 were shown show cause notices relating to a 2012 supplement program administered by the club. The players largely bore the responsibility (Cronulla included but a very different experience..... ). Stephen Dank was banned by both sports but never criminally convicted. No one else higher up the apparent chain of supply was caught or charged either.

So, what was the basis or motivation for the initial report? Was it a shot across the bow to ward off shit local influences (Dank), or were there legitimate organised crime concerns at the time that were never addressed and instead borne by players? Layer in league reputational risk, on top of sport's wider role in Australia as a 'bread and circus' influence on population, then supported by PR-driven politics, and I think it's a straightforward sum.

For the record I agree with the doping standard being the athlete being responsible for what enters his/her body with regard to performance. My point - AFL players being guilty and being thrown under the bus aren't exclusive.

 

[shaqsuns]

This might just be my anti gambling ethics speaking here, but in my opinion the umpire in question hasnt really done anything wrong.

Its not his fault the AFL got into bed with gambling organisations who will do anything in their power to make sure you lose, including but not limited to:

• shuting down your account if you win to much
• limit bets where the gambling company will lose
• giving tips to colleagues

To me they are a legal, yet morally corrupt version of the Mafia.
Pell Is no more corrupt than the betting company's who lure their victims in with free bets and flashing lights into a system where you cant beat the dealer.

 

[Taylor]

This might just be my anti gambling ethics speaking here, but in my opinion the umpire in question hasnt really done anything wrong.

Its not his fault the AFL got into bed with gambling organisations who will do anything in their power to make sure you lose, including but not limited to:

• shuting down your account if you win to much
• limit bets where the gambling company will lose
• giving tips to colleagues

To me they are a legal, yet morally corrupt version of the Mafia.
Pell Is no more corrupt than the betting company's who lure their victims in with free bets and flashing lights into a system where you cant beat the dealer.

I'd be far more inclined to support this moral superiority justification of dubious deeds against the less moral if there wasn't a significant person gain won by those doing it.

Two wrongs is just more wrongs.

Now if they sent a better company broke, or took a Whitlams approach and blew up the pokies, only to give the money away - more Fight Club than Oceans 11 - that's a different story.