Jump to content

Featured Replies

Just now, P-man said:

Betting advertising is certainly overdone, but let’s not use that to shield Stephenson from what was an act of unbelievable stupidity.

it's not the advertising... it's the AFL taking the money

It's a bigger issue than pokies if you take a step back...

It is mainstreaming a minority activity... think on it.

 

Seriously how dumb do you have to be. I mean you get talks on this stuff after you are drafted. 

It's a shame he didn't own up the week before he played us. We would have been 4 goals better off. 

Anyway the pies will make finals and they get a fresh Stephenson to come in. 

17 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

it's not the advertising... it's the AFL taking the money

It's a bigger issue than pokies if you take a step back...

It is mainstreaming a minority activity... think on it.

Doesn’t really change my point.

 
7 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

More info:  AFL Statement

Quite a rap sheet:

The multi-bets included legs on:

  • Collingwood to win,
  • Collingwood winning margin,
  • Stephenson to kick a goal,
  • Stephenson to kick three or more goals,
  • Collingwood teammates to kick a goal,
  • Collingwood teammates to kick two or more goals, and
  • Collingwood teammates to have in excess of a number of disposals.

For the grand total of $36 across 3 games!

Unbelievable that he bet on himself!!  That alone warrants the book thrown at him.  Those bets are very open to match-fixing.  Yet the  22 week ban was reduced to 10.   Eddie has been busy to get Stephenson back for finals as @ArtificialWisdompredicted. 

Also gets a $20,000 fine.  Along with losing match payments $36 will cost him $100,000+.

Very silly lad.

Ok, so lets get this clear to avoid confusion. It was 3 multi bets and the outlay was $36 across those 3 bets. Multi bets multiply the odds of each leg of the bet, by the sum invested. So if you have 6 legs for instance, including bets on individual players, for the sum of lets say $12.00....then the return could easily be in the $1000s!

How can the filth organise this slap in the wrist. It’s a total breach and It should have warranted a 12- month ban.  Not 10 weeks and he’s back for the finals.  Ridiculous AFL AGAIN !!!


41 minutes ago, P-man said:

Betting advertising is certainly overdone, but let’s not use that to shield Stephenson from what was an act of unbelievable stupidity.

I don't believe (m)any are using this to shield Stephenson from his stupidity, but nor should we shield Gil (and all his colleagues at AFL HQ) from hypocrisy for their dependence on gaming and gambling revenue.  

Frankly, when these sportsbet, betfast, multi,  etc  or whatever brand ads come on I often change the channel (or radio  station) and sometimes forget to turn it back.  It is a real turnoff.

There must be figures somewhere showing the percentage of AFL revenue that comes from the gaming / gambling / betting industry.

 

 

2 minutes ago, monoccular said:

I don't believe (m)any are using this to shield Stephenson from his stupidity, but nor should we shield Gil (and all his colleagues at AFL HQ) from hypocrisy for their dependence on gaming and gambling revenue.  

Frankly, when these sportsbet, betfast, multi,  etc  or whatever brand ads come on I often change the channel (or radio  station) and sometimes forget to turn it back.  It is a real turnoff.

There must be figures somewhere showing the percentage of AFL revenue that comes from the gaming / gambling / betting industry.

 

 

Fair, but I’ve seen more than a few on social media overlooking and yes even excusing Stephenson. So just putting it out there that one doesn’t cancel out the other.

 

Another thing, if hes placing multi bets like these, hes been doing sports betting for a fair amount of time. Its not the only 3 bets this guy has ever had.

18 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Does anyone think he actually self reported? 

One bet could be a brain fade.  Multiple bets on 3 games over a 6 week period?  Self-reporting is probably window dressing to 'justify' the discount from 22 weeks to 10.

According to this article it was Jeremy Howe that advised Stephenson to seek help after he made a flippant remark in the change rooms.

How dumb do you have to be? Commenting as a joke about a teammate costing you a multi, wow, to a club leader after a win. He deserved a 36 week suspension , here’s your ‘bonus bet’ kid.

It was in the rooms at the MCG after the Magpies had just beaten St Kilda by 41 points in round nine – a game in which Stephenson kicked three goals – that the 20-year-old made a passing comment to Howe that one of their teammates had cost him a multi.

Stephenson was remarking on the fact one of their teammates hadn’t delivered the number of disposals that he had earlier bet on.

https://apple.news/A9I1gA3IZRJazQM7FxHQtow

Fine leadership shown by Howe if accurate.


17 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

spot betting .. for instance that the next ball is a wide and you as the player determine the result is so so different but I will leave others to judge.

This is the AFL playing tough on one hand while supping at the ever growing sports betting trough

His bets included spots, though.

He bet on himself to kick 3+ goals.

That required him to influence the outcome of the match to engineer 3 goals for himself, even if that was a bad outcome for the team.

We've seen the footage showing him go for a 65m torp with 2 minutes left. Collingwood at that time were 40+ points up, but imagine if the Saints had been leading when he took that mark. Imagine if he'd gone for the low-percentage barrel with the game on the line, just because he wanted to get his own personal goal-count up to 3.

There's a fair debate to be had around the AFL's taking of gambling money with one hand and doling out harsh punishments for gambling with the other, but that doesn't make what Stephenson did OK. It was not, and his penalty is probably too lenient given he is back for finals.

AFL knew about this prior to QB and yet allowed him to play and he starred, receiving coaches' votes and likely Brownlow votes. That stinks.

Self declared?!!!!

slip of the tongue

Howe took it to Walsh and then Stephenson self declared

22 matches (1 year) absolute should have been the penalty without any deference 

27 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Self declared?!!!!

slip of the tongue

Howe took it to Walsh and then Stephenson self declared

22 matches (1 year) absolute should have been the penalty without any deference 

Yep, that's the bit I don't get 'norm'...

He didn't come forward at all, a slip of the tongue gave him no choice in the end.

Credit to Howe though...it seems.

Meanwhile the AFL turns a blind eye to PED use ... but the public doesn't care about PED use anymore (except when the Olympics or Cycling comes around)  No votes to buy there.

I'm not excusing Stephenson either ... more so highlighting the inconsistencies with regards to the integrity in the sport. 

A 10 week suspension for transgressing the rules with regards to gambling on the sport vs 1 urine test per year per player for PED use.  Out of whack in my book.


So 12 matches suspended for rest of career? If he gets done 1 week next year for a high bump does that mean he serves the 12 as well?

1 minute ago, Moonshadow said:

So 12 matches suspended for rest of career? If he gets done 1 week next year for a high bump does that mean he serves the 12 as well?

c'mon moonie, it means whatever the afl (and eddie) want it to mean at any particular time

22 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Does anyone think he actually self reported? 

One bet could be a brain fade.  Multiple bets on 3 games over a 6 week period?  Self-reporting is probably window dressing to 'justify' the discount from 22 weeks to 10.

A former player from the red and blue dobbed him in.

4 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

His bets included spots, though.

He bet on himself to kick 3+ goals.

That required him to influence the outcome of the match to engineer 3 goals for himself, even if that was a bad outcome for the team.

We've seen the footage showing him go for a 65m torp with 2 minutes left. Collingwood at that time were 40+ points up, but imagine if the Saints had been leading when he took that mark. Imagine if he'd gone for the low-percentage barrel with the game on the line, just because he wanted to get his own personal goal-count up to 3.

There's a fair debate to be had around the AFL's taking of gambling money with one hand and doling out harsh punishments for gambling with the other, but that doesn't make what Stephenson did OK. It was not, and his penalty is probably too lenient given he is back for finals.

Well imagine also (for example)  if Collingwood made the 8 by 1/2 a % point causing Melbourne to miss the 8 (after we win the next 12 games straight).........Hypothetical yes, but its still influencing an outcome.

$36 on 3 bets. It's all so innocent and harmless. That's probably what Hansie Cronje thought at first.

Meanwhile there are rumours of bikie gangs showing up to clubs' training because some players owe them money ...

(dream sequence begins)

It's the year 2021. Stephenson, having never self reported,  is now an habitual gambler and bets large amounts. And finds himself in money trouble.

He's put a bet on at good odds, that he will not score any goals in the next match againt the Suns.

Deep in the 4th, no goals. It's all looking good. Then at the 30 minute mark, with Collingwood down by 3 points, he marks 30 out directly in front.

Does he kick the goal?


Or ... what if his bet was for to Collingwood to lose? Not too far a leap, if he's accustomed to laying bets, and the Pies were underdogs for that match. Does he kick the goal?


"Fixing" a match in advance would be hard in the AFL, but affecting the outcome of a match is not too much of a stretch.


1 hour ago, Win4theAges said:

A former player from the red and blue dobbed him in.

Jeremy Howe did the right thing, but I wonder how he feels about that? Imagine being the person who, by not turning a blind eye, might subsequently be accused of derailing Collingwood's premiership chances. I stress that Howe's action was the correct one to take and showed real leadership, but it imposes a heavy burden on him for the rest of the year. Stephenson hasn't just been a fool and hurt Collingwood; he's also hurt Jeremy Howe. 

6 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

His bets included spots, though.

He bet on himself to kick 3+ goals.

That required him to influence the outcome of the match to engineer 3 goals for himself, even if that was a bad outcome for the team.

We've seen the footage showing him go for a 65m torp with 2 minutes left. Collingwood at that time were 40+ points up, but imagine if the Saints had been leading when he took that mark. Imagine if he'd gone for the low-percentage barrel with the game on the line, just because he wanted to get his own personal goal-count up to 3.

There's a fair debate to be had around the AFL's taking of gambling money with one hand and doling out harsh punishments for gambling with the other, but that doesn't make what Stephenson did OK. It was not, and his penalty is probably too lenient given he is back for finals.

Still nailed it... 

2 hours ago, Wadda We Sing said:

Well imagine also (for example)  if Collingwood made the 8 by 1/2 a % point causing Melbourne to miss the 8 (after we win the next 12 games straight).........Hypothetical yes, but its still influencing an outcome.

At the end of the day he kicked a goal which would be the same result regardless of any bets. Guarantee there would be Demon players betting on games too.

 

Making that remark to Howe in the change rooms (if that was indeed what happened) about one of his team mates costing him a multi, shows how Stephenson's betting wasn't just a bit of mucking around with his mates on the couch when he was bored and his mates were betting on their phones. His betting had ingrained itself into the way he looked at playing football. Instead of being a part of a TEAM with the objective of being as good as he could be to work within that team, the ultimate goal being part of a premiership team, the gambling made him selfish.

And another thing. I suspect Eddie has done a mountain of spin doctoring to convince everyone Stephenson's bets were only minor aberrations. We only heard recently how gambling is a problem for many AFL players. Yet Eddie reckons his player was a "clean skin" (his words) who picked up a multi for 30 bucks, self reported, and then got "clobbered". Now he says the decision to "clobber" Stephenson will in future drive players "underground" to bet with unregulated bookmakers and in turn this will lead to a gateway to organized crime!!

Cor blimey Eddie. You are lucky your player will get to play in finals. Take it and be quiet.

On 6/19/2019 at 8:11 PM, Diamond_Jim said:

it's not the advertising... it's the AFL taking the money

It's a bigger issue than pokies if you take a step back...

It is mainstreaming a minority activity... think on it.

How do you quantify its quantum

in relation to pokies. Interested to know


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Haha
      • Love
    • 528 replies