- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Yesterday the AFL suspended Heath Shaw for “14 matches” – six of them are suspended – for betting on Collingwood teammate Nick Maxwell to kick the first goal in the club’s Round 9 game against Adelaide. The bet was placed after Shaw learned that Maxwell would start the game up forward instead of his usual role in defence.
Shaw contributed half of the $20 bet, which was placed when odds were at $101, meaning a return of $2020 was possible.
In further twists, it was also revealed by the AFL that the same inside information was passed on by Shaw to two other people and by Maxwell to family members, which led to bets totalling $110.
Maxwell, for the record, was unaware of the bets and his only crime was not informing his family that the information was not to be used for betting purposes.
In previous seasons, the league have given slaps on the wrists of players who’ve bet on AFL matches not involving their own team.
Now, though, we have a case of a player betting on an AFL match not just involving his own team, but a match he himself played in.
This is really messy territory. The integrity of the game comes into question when a matter such as this arises. There should be no question a heavy-handed penalty is what’s required for people who do what Shaw did.
When headlines yesterday screamed Shaw was rubbed out for 14 weeks, it seemed like a justified reaction.
However, when the fine print was read and the true penalty turned out to be eight weeks – conveniently ending after the final round of the season, just in time for finals – it was hard not to be utterly perplexed.
If the AFL were dealing with a player from a less powerful club who in all likeliness wouldn’t be contesting finals, would the penalty have been the same?
You’d have to think the opportunity to send a strong message to the competition as a whole would be too tempting to pass up.
The AFL have cited Shaw’s honesty, his contrition, the small size of the bets in question and the fact there was no attempt to influence the outcome of the contest as factors in determining the penalty they handed down.
But is honesty enough to allow Shaw to spend six less weeks on the sidelines? He was caught on camera at the TAB – what alternative did he have other than to be honest!
Is contrition enough to allow Shaw to play finals this year? Probably every single player in the AFL would be remorseful if the league caught them making such a horrible error of judgement.
Is the small size of the bets enough to allow a less powerful message to be sent to the rest of the competition? It’s not like we’re talking about loose change – the bets linked to Shaw could’ve netted a return of over $4500, the total possible return when you include the bets made by Maxwell’s family is $13,130.
The fact the bets weren’t on the outcome of the actual game is something that should come under consideration, that point can’t be argued.
But it doesn’t justify wiping six games off the penalty at all – if a player was caught betting on and trying to influence the outcome of a game, you’d like to think 14 games wouldn’t be the AFL’s starting point when handing down a penalty.
How many years he’d be kicked out of the game would be the starting point.
Shaw should’ve been forced to sit out the full 14 weeks. Even if it meant a popular and powerful club would be missing one of its key stars in September.