Sports betting is out of control and in danger of controlling sport. The activity is now so embedded in the perma-culture that its runners threaten to strangle the virtues which drew us to sport in the first place – the thrill and spectacle of the contest and the ability of its stars.
There was a time when sports betting was confined largely to various forms of racing, where to be honest, without the gambling element, the activity itself would attract less viewers than Dance Your Ass Off repeats.
In Australia, legal betting on sport wasn’t reintroduced until the late 1970s, after 80 years on the outskirts of the law. Even then, it was a gradual process with modest returns.
We cannot watch a game now without the latest odds being intermittently flashed on the scoreboard or our TV screens. That your team has already blown out to $12 before your second coldie or the other mob is paying $1.01 effectively does what commentators, for obvious reasons, avoid doing – kill the suspense and sense of unpredictability.
Nor should a culture of betting on sport be ingrained in our youth.
Yet these are petty gripes in the grander scheme of the punt’s nefarious underbelly of worldwide corruption, money laundering and gambling addiction.
The vastness and depth of betting pools has soared in recent years, with opportunities for organised rackets exacerbated by the plethora of meaningless games and unwieldy leagues with overlong seasons, and tournaments fulfilling only to sponsors and television networks.
Temptation is just a few keystrokes away with everything from Major League Baseball to the Czech Women’s Soccer League forming part of an estimated US$24b pa online industry.
With internet and digital television technologies set to merge enabling betting via our TV remote controls, more accelerant will be poured on the wildfire.
What is becoming apparent is that despite the scandals which nearly brought cricket to its knees at the turn of the Millennium, governing bodies are embracing the punt like never before.
European and Asian soccer leagues are now in dire straits.
The NRL and AFL’s multi-million dollar relationships with TAB Sportsbet and Betfair present an interesting test of where their priorities lie.
Bookmakers are angry the NRL can profit from the deals but withhold information to punters. The hue and cry when footballers withdraw from a game has teams and their coaches beholden to the demands of punters and bookies, rather than fans and the well-being of players.
Punters may soon test clubs in court for providing false information.
Maintaining the integrity of the NRL has already come at a financial cost. The Canterbury Bulldogs’ salary cap rorting debacle of 2004, which saw their points stripped just before the finals, resulted in an out of court settlement with aggrieved gamblers.
In 2006, five punters sued the AFL following ‘sirengate’, whereby the AFL prematurely declared a draw before overturning the result in Fremantle’s favour.
The AFL has come under scrutiny due to the implications on the betting industry of its tank-friendly draft system.
AFL legend Leigh Matthews is on record as saying official involvement with gambling is “unhealthy, unsavoury and unfortunate”.
Well known sports betting manager Gerard Daffy believes that most rules will need to be rewritten, with the consumer rights of punters in mind.
Pandering to the needs of the agencies and their clients particularly riles Matthews, though the AFL claims it’s now in a better position to preserve the sanctity of the competition, together with its ‘Integrity Services Manager’.
No sport is immune, no scenario too ludicrous. Betting syndicates have even directly influenced outcomes, as per the Malaysian group who cut the floodlights at a couple EPL games in 1997.
Common denominators in most sport scandals have been drugs and betting. Administrators and governments expend billions in attempts to eliminate the former, but the latter enjoys the green light.
The AFL and NRL are alert to the threat but more alarmed at the prospect of missing a slice of the action.
IOC President Jacques Rogge has suggested there needs to be a WADA-like surveillance organisation established. But monitoring, let alone doing anything about the 15,000 online websites, of which 13,000 are illegal, is surely impossible.
Players are being approached and threatened, referees and matches bought.
With big-time outlays of over $100,000, how long before athletes tragically bear the brunt of the criminal element?
The problem is bigger than sports authorities alone can handle. A united and concerted global effort is required. Fast.
ScottWoodward.me
Roar Guru
The Roars Steve Kaless did an excellent article on Dec 10 (Gambling on matches a risky bet for the NRL) This was my response: 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.
Redb
Roar Guru
I share similar concerns. Betting agencies seem to want all the inside information to only go their way. If a punter(s) they beleive gets wind of team changes and makes a sizeable bet (like in the Hawks v Saints game in Tassie this year) they pull the betting market for that game. They then voice their public concern to the AFL about its team change rules, amongst others. It's bad enough that the game 's bounce of the ball after a goal is dictated by TV commercial breaks, what happens if various rule changes are required to satisfy betting agencies? The level of sponsorship dollars is massive and getting bigger, as a significant stakeholder they will have a say. The AFL seems to be courting them on one had with not only sponsorship but also the prospect of live games carrying betting lines/quotes in real time. Unfortuantely in the end, commercial imperiatives usually win out. Redb
Kurt
Guest
Good article Jeff. I too am very concerned at the penetration of the gambling ethos into sports culture. Whilst it's important we not be naive about these things - after all if people genuinely want to gamble on sports matches they will find a way - it's also important that we not go out of our way to encourage it either, which is unfortunately the direction we seem to be heading. Of course it could be argued that it's a little harsh to single out sporting bodies when our state governments are even more addicted to the revenue generated by gambling. As a small part of the solution I'd like to see punters presented with the realities of gambling economics each time there is an ad for gambling (including the odds updates) - something along the lines of: "So far on this match 5000 people have gambled $250,000. We expect 3000 of those punters to lose money overall, of which 500 will lose more than they can afford and 100 now won't be able to buy their kids new shoes for the upcoming school year". Or perhaps something a little briefer, along the lines of: "The mathematical laws of the universe dictate that the longer you gamble, the more certain you are to lose".