By Steve Kaless
December 10th 2009 @ 2:50am
Related coverage
Gambling on matches a risky bet for the NRL
As 2009 draws to a close, so will end one of the most controversy laden years for NRL off the field. Barely a week seemed to go by without another player being splashed all over the papers for “all the wrong reasons.”
The NRL has steeled itself to get tough on players and clubs in 2010 and has even hired a private investigator to assess all matters of mis-behaviour.
But while most people will see this as reviewing “alcohol related incidents” at various nightspots, one wonders how much attention is being given the threat of match-fixing and point shaving in rugby league.
There was a brief storm when the Roosters capitulated against the Cowboys this year and a number of bookies cited suspicious betting patterns. In truth, that wasn’t the only game of the season involving the Roosters which had the same odd patterns.
Their penultimate game against the Storm, where a minus 18 start quickly blew out to a minus 26, rose a few eyebrows, while their round three match against the Tigers also gave off some odd impressions.
This is, of course, only relevant if you look at that sort of thing, and the NRL most certainly should.
This is not because any match-fixing has been proven or even alleged, but because the greater the presence of gambling has in a sport, the more its officials must work to maintain the sport’s integrity.
It’s also naïve.
If match-fixing can hit the world’s biggest sports, why not rugby league?
Gambling on rugby league is Australia is growing at an incredible rate. TAB Sportsbet saw a 17 percent growth in their rugby league market last year, which built on a 14 percent growth the year before, to see the code account for 20 percent of their total sales.
The first State of Origin match this year held a record $5 million dollars for the TAB while the NRL Grand Final has become the premier event for the TAB, with this year’s sales holding $9.5 million.
Remember, these figures are for TAB Sportsbet alone and don’t take into account the other Australian bookmakers and the plethora that are available online to the savvy (or desperate) punter.
It is estimated that the yearly nationwide pool in rugby league betting is around $300 million dollars per year.
Much of the growth comes down to the fact that the demographics that enjoys rugby league also enjoys a punt. And the two’s relationship are getting stronger and stronger.
Mobile betting vans out the front of matches and Footy TAB machines in pubs always have men queuing prior to matches in order to have their flutter.
In August 2008, the government lifted the advertising restrictions on bookmakers to allow them to advertise nationally, and as such, there was the surge in advertising by bookies of rugby league clubs and during rugby league matches this season.
The NRL supported the idea as previously, while they created this enormous betting market, they were unable to earn any income from the millions punted.
But now the genie is out of the bottle, does the NRL have the resources to maintain its rage?
The key to any monitoring is to watch the betting patterns, and when a game stands out, it should warrant further investigation. Even the fact that greater scrutiny will be placed on matches should act as a strong deterrent.
The biggest problem with any gambling issues is finding the smoking gun.
Anyone actually involved in a rort is rarely going to be stupid enough to put a bet on themselves. And how can you prove that if a friend or even relative did have a wager, it wasn’t just based on a hunch.
If anything, the Roosters Vs Cowboys match provided good evidence of that. Plenty of pro-punters were certain of a fix, but the club and NRL said no, and most of public just saw the bookies as whingers for putting the hapless Roosters up as favourites.
Should the problem rear its head again in 2010, it may not be so easy to explain away.
Get Australia's best NRL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(35)
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 7:35am | Report comment
Agree with most of what you have said Steve, but we need betting, most other sports bet on their matches. I was thinking, maybe we could kick teams out of the comp if they are found out, now that will send the best message. You only have to look at Europeon football scandal recently to see it was the players making money off the deals as well. So clubs should cop the full force of any indiscretions. Also drugs, these are other problems, that Olmypic runner who was found out, must of been some money made their as well. So rugby league is no different to other sports around the world.
And to survive, we need betting, can we afford to be the only code not betting.? You might have to give up your day job otherwise, rugby league would not last long without income. Cheers.
Ian Whitchurch said | December 10th 2009 @ 9:14am | Report comment
Oikee,
What cut does rugby league get out of Tabcorp etc’s wagers ?
That isnt snark, its an honest question.
Steve Kaless said | December 10th 2009 @ 10:32am | Report comment
Ian,
That is a good question, my understanding is they income they derive is from sponsorship, not from actual beting but I may check on that.
Oikee,
I’m not for one minute suggesting banning gambling, if anything hat would make any potential problem worse, I’m simply arguing for viligance in the monitoring and a realistic view of potential problems.
Cheers
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 11:18am | Report comment
Yes, and i agreed with your post Steve, 1st thing i said, and i also mentioned what happened this year in Europe, with gambling syndicates. Players were involved, goes right back to the early Yankies games, remember,. I think even Babe Ruth was involved in throwing games. ?
Cheers.
Anyhow, yes i agree, and the solution, ban the team from playing, now if that does not send a message, along with criminal justice, I dont know what will. But to be realistic, greed is bigger than god.
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 10:40am | Report comment
Ian, they have their own betting companies in which the NRL gets a percentage of the Profits, i was just reading about it not long ago. If you can recall earlier this year , there was a big write-up about the NRL and Sportsbet it might have been, but i know there is profitering made out of it, remember the Broncos it might have been, wanted to align themselves with that betting agency, but the NRL stopped it from happening, because they had another agency involved with the game. Awile ago, but i could look it up and give you some sites to read. ? I will have alook now, if you post back, i know your interested. cheers.
Ian Whitchurch said | December 10th 2009 @ 11:28am | Report comment
Oikee,
Yeah, I’d like to see something more solid
Russell Bussian said | December 10th 2009 @ 11:46am | Report comment
My understanding is that the NRL receives lump sum sponsorships from betting companies rather than profit sharing. I wasn’t aware of then receiving say 1% of net profit. The sponsorship might work out around that but at least it doesn’t give the NRL a financial incentive to increase betting turnover.
Those other Roosters game Steve mentioned as possible suspicious games could be right. That game in Melbourne was played on a wet night and I found it odd that all the big punters were looking to back the Storm giving a big start in the rain. That is the opposite of what they would usually do.
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Yes, sorry, i was wrong, it was sponsership deals, and the peice i was reading must have been for a sponsership deal with a different agency, sorry, my mistake.
But to add to your question, with the game being so close now,” last can beat 1st “, how would you find out if there was a scam being played out, i could put 100 thousand on the sharks to beat Parramatta, next year. What would that mean, they beat them this year. I recall the game, the shark crowd went ballistic, cheers.
Cotton McKnight said | December 10th 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
oikee, you said we need betting. Could you explain what you mean by this? I’ll be up front, I don’t like gambling much, I’ve seen too many people, personally, that have had real problems with it, doing real damage. But I can also see the fun in putting on a bet. I am not trying to ban it. But I am concerned that as A sponsor to NRL and channel nine, the promotion of it make me a bit uncomfortable. Peter Sterling and Rabs telling us the ongoing odds, but making sure we bet responsibly.
Mick from Giralang said | December 10th 2009 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Spot on Cotton. I find the personal endorsement of betting during the match commentary sickening. Sterling of all people would know the misery that current and ex footballers, not to mention ordinary punters, have suffered through addiction to gambling.
Steve, I agree with the thrust of your article but I think the Roosters accusations have been overblown. Glenn Munsie from Sportsbet is on the record as saying they had no problems with the match against the Cowboys. An NRL investigation also found nothing wrong. Much of the SMH article which laid the original accusations against the Roosters has subsequently been debunked.
None of that of course means the game can afford to be complacent about the impact of betting. There have been well publicised betting scandals involving the AFL and soccer in recent years and rugby league is not immune from the same sort of risks.
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
And Mick, one thing mate, i am not having a go at you, but i was one of those gamblers, and nearly lost my house and marriage over it at the time. It does not effect me these adds , or probably many of the millions of gamblers out there. I was one, i do know.
I learnt my lesson, and now own my own home, paid for, so its up to the individual, same applies to drugs mate. You stick that needle in your arm, hey, you took that choice, nobody forced you. So dont let guilt of humanity run you into the ground, as long as you are a good person, be happy. Cheers mate.
Mick from Giralang said | December 10th 2009 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Agree with you Oikee, I have a mate whose life was shattered by gambling addiction unfortunately he has yet to turn things around like you have. I am not suggesting rugby league should end its association with gambling completely after all it’s a legal activity and gamblign and sport have gone together since day one. It just annoys the hell out of me that they’re using the commentary team to push the envelope during games.
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
Yes, i watch alot of rugby league on Fox, so Sterlo dont really bother me, what bothers me is getting a fix of anything rugby league in the off season.
Anyhow, this might cheer us up, love this video. Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_slM5Hmsp6g
The Answer said | December 10th 2009 @ 10:58pm | Report comment
Sterlo still appears on Fox as they take the Nine feed on those games.
The problem with Sterlo and Rabs punting tips (apart from the fact they come from dreadful punters) seem to be more down to the Channel Nine production decisions rather than betting per se.
Steve Kaless said | December 10th 2009 @ 9:22pm | Report comment
Cotton, I agree I found the advertising of the running odds during the game quite off. Interestingly, according to Sportsbet those ‘ads’ from Rabs and Sterlo don’t actually increase the bet in play market much at all, but just the brand awareness, so surely there must be a strong arument on the ‘why bother’ front.
Sadly like cotton jerseys the days of watching a match without being bombarded by odds are probably behind us.
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
OK, we dont need betting, but people do bet on games. So putting some money back into your code from these proceeds seems ok in this world we live. As for Gambling, i am with you, i dont even bet on the Melbourne cup. We all have choice, you just sometimes have to learn the hard way, if you get what i mean. ? Yes, i gave up gambling about 15 years ago.
Bet responsibly, true, but does not work for some people. I also learnt the hard way. Part of lifes lessons. I for one know the evils of gambling, so i am on your side, but still does not stop the government from reaping profits from betting.
oikee said | December 10th 2009 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Well quite frankly i dont know why you guys are carrying on about betting, mate, what are we doing here , ? trying to save the world from gambling, the government indorses gambling, The USA allows for Poppy growing in Afganistan, the Chinese government allows for a 100 ton quota of ivory into china, we all beleived bush about weapons of mass destruction, and we let our kids go to schoolies week. ???
Gambling is one of lifes painful reminders of why we are human. Along with every other evil. Lets not turn this into a save the world , when we can’t even endorse a engine emmisions program which is compulsary in England, and europe, now who’s talking about saving the last 1500 tigers in the wild, ???? You want to save them, put them in a zoo. Even then, we will read a report how the guards smuggled them out for a nice price tag. Remember 1 thing, we all have lust and greed before us, its up to the individual to say no. Your the one with duty of care, to yourself and others, but your not responsible for there doings.
Hope that answered your question fully Cotton, i really did not have time before, was off to the bank to cancel a evil, my credit card.
Tifosi said | December 10th 2009 @ 4:57pm | Report comment
Leave the betting.
But no betting ads, no commentators telling me odds either. You think seeing rabbits and sterlo talking odds are bad, hearing Richie Benaud say it at the cricket must be the worst thing i have seen on tv.
In conclusion betting yes, advertising the betting during games. NO.
Justin said | December 10th 2009 @ 9:16pm | Report comment
Spot on, those that want a bet (me!) should be entitled too but I dont need it rammed down my throat every 30 secs
AndyRoo said | December 14th 2009 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
Yeh I think this should be a case for self regulation. The betting agencies should pick up on this mood and keep it more low key, if they go over the top their will be a ground swell against them and they will cop legislation like tobacco. Just because they are currently allowed to do something desn’t mean they should.
The HAL does a bit at half time where the normal commentators give you the half time price, I think thats as far as it should go, no need to talk about it when the game is on.
Justin said | December 14th 2009 @ 4:54pm | Report comment
Watching the NZ v Pak cricket Test and I would love to bet that some of the comms have had a bet on the match! Refer to prices every 30mins or so and you can tell who has backed what outcome just by listening to their passion for the way the game is developing at different times. Quite funny really.
Barking Glider said | December 10th 2009 @ 6:24pm | Report comment
This is sensible matter to raise, but in regard to all major sports in Australia. Why just a story on the NRL? What about the AFL? The AFL basically told the Victorian betting watchdog to get stuffed when they were out under scrutiny about match fixing in AFL (I’m not calling it tanking).
Steve Kaless said | December 10th 2009 @ 11:02pm | Report comment
There was no editorial decision for the issue to only focus on NRL Barking, it is simply my beat and the issue interested me, the other columnists like myself have complete freedom to choose their own articles.
Steve Kaless said | December 10th 2009 @ 11:25pm | Report comment
An interesting post script from the UK’s Guardian.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/dec/10/corruption-sport-government-review-rick-parry
MyGeneration said | December 11th 2009 @ 9:35pm | Report comment
One thing to note here is that this sort of review is possible because betting is open and (somewhat) transparent. If you drive betting underground there will be rumours, but no realistic chance of investigation. Just because betting isn’t visible doesn’t mean there isn’t any betting. The current visibility of betting, plus scandals in a number of sports, is distasteful to many, but the alternative is really for sporting bodies to stick their heads in the sand, because betting will go on regardless. If Rabs and Sterlo are alerting us to betting moves (I know it’s advertising), we can make our own minds up about what is going on out on the field. Transparency is crucial to integrity.
Mushi said | December 14th 2009 @ 4:00pm | Report comment
Agree if you want US college style point shaving in the NRL then force betting underground
Col the Bear said | December 11th 2009 @ 8:23pm | Report comment
Hey Steve where can I put some loose cash on the CCBears getting up into the NRL by 2013..now that one I will back…
Scott Woodward said | December 12th 2009 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Steve excellent post but the ARL, NRL and who ever we end up with next year just don’t want to know about the subject of maintaining integrity in relation to betting.
It is in the “too hard basket” for them and they happily hand ball it onto the police, who in turn do nothing. The Racing world have their own dedicated stewards, but the footy world don’t think it is necessary because they partly have their head in the sand, and consider the money involved may only be small bickies.
The NRL and AFL have both formed joint ventured with betting agencies which signal that they accept an income stream from betting, but they have no idea where it originates from and if it was “hot” money. They don’t care, as long as it keeps coming.
The Roosters V Cowboys game should have been a shot across the bow but nothing has happened officially, and will not.
I originally included the Roosters in my staking plan as part of my preview on RacenetTV and my MillionDollarRatings, but had no hesitation to then take them out after observing “unusual” betting movements. I did this mid week and warned my members to “stay out” and displayed a warning ticker on my blog.
A red flag was waiving with any thinking person that knows anything about wagering, and after watching the game at the SFS, what happened in the second half would have made great copy for Paul Newman and Robert Redford in “The Sting”.
Steve Kaless quoted: “It is estimated that the yearly nationwide pool in rugby league betting is around $300 million dollars per year.”
I know of a couple of guys that would cover that figure on their own. Rugby League is big business, who when the smoke is cleared, will rely on the punting dollar to survive.
Barking Glider said | December 12th 2009 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
Rubbish. The Victorian gambling commission investigated the Roosters match and found that the NRL’s investigation into it was sufficient and proved there was nothing untoward.
“The VCGR said the NRL had fully and properly investigated the matter and recognised the importance of protecting the sport’s integrity.” http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1134817/NRL-match-fixing-claims-quashed
There were many NRL matches over recent seasons where there has been a run of points one way to one team. It’s called possession flow. Have a look at the Kangaroos vs England 4N final for an example.
The NRL and AFL haven’t formed joint ventures with betting agencies. They have sponsorship.
Scott Woodward said | December 12th 2009 @ 6:38pm | Report comment
Barking Glider so you are one of those guys who believe everything they read? What about weather reports? The VCGR investigated the NRL who would be the first to admit that they do not understand the subject, so they made a call to the clubs who naturally said they know nothing.
Can you imagine the NRL, the Roosters and the Cowboys investigating a sting, pllllllllease!
I am not sure who the VCGR spoke to but they never spoke to any punter or bookie that I know of. The difficulty is that there is a huge “illegal” market that these guys would have no contact with.
When it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, in general BG more often than not, it turns out to be Daffy.
Barking Glider said | December 12th 2009 @ 8:56pm | Report comment
So you demand that the NRL and AFL introduce a steward, which would do what the VCGR did, but you claim the VCGR are hopeless as well. How about you become the NRL and AFL steward seeing as you know all.
ScottWoodward.me said | December 13th 2009 @ 11:38am | Report comment
You really must stop quoting me incorrectly. I am happy to debate the issue, especially as it is such an important one.
1. I haven’t demanded anything.
2. I never claimed the VCGR are “hopeless”
I certainly do not claim to “know all” but I do believe I can smell a rat. Our major sporting bodies need someone with an appropriate background who can not only know where to investigate possible crimes, but importantly have the “nose” to stop them before they have started.
When hundreds of millions are invested on anything, it will attract undesirable activities, and at the moment there is NO dedicated watch dog.
For the record BG are you of the opinion that everything is above board and squeaky clean?
Barking Glider said | December 13th 2009 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
For the record BG are you of the opinion that everything is above board and squeaky clean?
Of course I am of that opinion. There’s no evidence of anything else going on.
Scott Woodward said | December 13th 2009 @ 5:09pm | Report comment
BG what is your definition of evidence?
Does an alarming change in prices early in the week?
What about when a big chunk of the money was at the margin suggesting an easy win?
Every major bookie I know rang an alarm bell.
Punters I spoke to were conscious of the unusual circumstances.
BG you are correct that there is no evidence to convict, but there is enough circumstantial evidence to take action, and in some cases that has happened unofficially.
The USA had no evidence to invade Iraq and grab Pres Hussein, but I am glad they did.
Mushi said | December 14th 2009 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
What the hell does the Iraq war have to do with it? So you’re happy to have any investigation conducted like the Iraq war – authorities can act knowing no evidence exists and use it as pretext to achieve some other result?