Doggies in betting scandal over Ballarat game v Demons

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,817]

How stupid are these Bulldogs players?

Betting on Melbourne to win a game.

[Whispering_Jack 30,028]

How stupid are these Bulldogs players?

Betting on Melbourne to win a game.

They weren't very smart to be betting in the first place because they've been found out and they and the club should be heavily penalised notwithstanding that they made an early disclosure.

The bet on Melbourne given that they had inside knowledge of the team make up was a pretty educated bet in the circumstances.

[ManDee 7,134]

Good luck proving that, they almost came back from 45 points down,

They made another bet at half time that the Doggies would lose by let than 10 points.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Err we were accused of tanking in a game where we were ahead at the final siren....

Just saying...

Perhaps we were trying to tank the game against the Bulldogs too?!

Just that no one gave that instruction to Watts - he was meant to kick his last set shot out of bounds on the full, just like half the team did in the last quarter against Freo a couple of weeks ago.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

I'm touching wood as I type this, but in a selfish way I'm stoked that it's not us.

There has been crap flying everywhere this off season and we have stayed away from it for a change which is excellent.

[thevil1 421]

I'm touching wood as I type this

Please keep that to yourself in future, I really don't wanna know what posters are 'up' to while they're on here thanks.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

Yeah, throw the book at them! What idiots they are. Any player stupid enough to bet on AFL matches should be kicked out of the competition!

Um.... errr..... Maybe not all of them....

http://www.foxsports.com.au/breaking-news/goodwin-handed-heaviest-fine/story-e6frf33c-1111113080954

Edited March 19, 2015 by Moonshadow

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,388]

Would make sense if you had the inside info. We were paying close to 2-3 bucks before the teams came out then the odds quickly swapped sides.

With which betting agency? Sportsbet had us at $1.48 - doggies $2.08

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,752]

The part of the The Australian article that I find ludicrous is that it states that the players self reported. You'd only self report if you were already under investigation and know you are about to be caught. There should be no lesser penalty for self reporting.

I'm not as cynical as you. I can see circumstances where the players may have self-reported. What about if they had just attended one of the AFL's integrity sessions about betting? Or (more likely) they mentioned it to other players or officials at the kennel where they were then reminded of the error of their ways and that they should self-report before being caught?

And having come from a law enforcement background I also disagree with you that there should be lesser penalties for self reporting. The more self reporting there is, the more resources become available for the law enforcement agency to investigate those who really need to be investigated. And if you want self-reporting, you need to provide an incentive to do so. Lesser penalties is a good start.

[daisycutter 29,613]

I'm not as cynical as you. I can see circumstances where the players may have self-reported. What about if they had just attended one of the AFL's integrity sessions about betting? Or (more likely) they mentioned it to other players or officials at the kennel where they were then reminded of the error of their ways and that they should self-report before being caught?

And having come from a law enforcement background I also disagree with you that there should be lesser penalties for self reporting. The more self reporting there is, the more resources become available for the law enforcement agency to investigate those who really need to be investigated. And if you want self-reporting, you need to provide an incentive to do so. Lesser penalties is a good start.

plus it saves you a working over with the phone book

[Tony Tea 2,809]

I find it almost impossible to believe an AFL listed player, on the tail end of several high profile gambling breaches, would bet on his own team to lose.

[DubDee 25,847]

When I said put $100 on the dogs I meant the greyhounds!!

I should be a lawyer

[ManDee 7,134]

When I said put $100 on the dogs I meant the greyhounds!!

I should be a lawyer

Not bad but he had his money on the Dees.

That will be the end of using live bait at the Whitten oval.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,752]

plus it saves you a working over with the phone book

And good phone books are so hard to find these days.

It's pretty hard to threaten a crim with your contacts in a smartphone.

[mo64 5,874]

I'm not as cynical as you. I can see circumstances where the players may have self-reported. What about if they had just attended one of the AFL's integrity sessions about betting? Or (more likely) they mentioned it to other players or officials at the kennel where they were then reminded of the error of their ways and that they should self-report before being caught?

And having come from a law enforcement background I also disagree with you that there should be lesser penalties for self reporting. The more self reporting there is, the more resources become available for the law enforcement agency to investigate those who really need to be investigated. And if you want self-reporting, you need to provide an incentive to do so. Lesser penalties is a good start.

Give me a spell!!! After what happened to Heath Shaw, are you trying to say that an AFL player would be ignorant of the legalities of betting on an AFL game?

The bet type and amount that Barrett stated on the Footy Show would not have drawn any suspicions, if there is an investigation into a betting plunge on the match. The player in question would know that given his old man's background into betting. His motives for self reporting are questionable,and I'm sure that there is more to play out.

Betting on your team to lose is reprehensible, regardless of the amount or the nature of the game involved, and a life time ban is warranted. The fact that he self reported should not change his penalty one iota.

[Biffen 12,943]

Wonder how much the English got on Bangladesh?

[mo64 5,874]

I work in a TAB and have to relate this story. Many years ago, an AFL fullback placed a bet on Matthew Lloyd to be the highest goal kicker for the round. As you can imagine, my first reaction was to check to see if his team were playing the Bombers. They weren't....

[DubDee 25,847]

cool story

[Little Goffy 14,522]

Perhaps we were trying to tank the game against the Bulldogs too?!

Just that no one gave that instruction to Watts - he was meant to kick his last set shot out of bounds on the full, just like half the team did in the last quarter against Freo a couple of weeks ago.

Ha ha, you reckon Watts was having a Jordan McMahon moment?

More pertinently, clearly we could never have actually lost. Our best on the day included Lumumba and Garlett, both originally from clubs which definitely, definitely, never, ever, whatsoever, not even conceivably, couldn't have possibly, wouldn't even know how to, not in a thousand years... tanked.

Oooh, I'm having fun times bringing up the bitter cud for another chew!

[hardtack 10,537]

Now Collingwood's Jack Crisp has been named as being investigated for the same offence. Coincidentally, the Pies play the Doggies tonight.