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.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
It's not the money involved, it's the fact that he broke an essential rule. He has been in football long enough to know that under no circumstances, are players to bet or to give out information. Additionally, corruption often comes in drips, instead of floods. You question it because it's a $10 bet; what if it was &100, or &1000, or &10,000? The reality, anyway, is that he knew the rules, and he can not use ignorance as an excuse.
Droppa
Guest
Yeah mate crucify the guy over a $10 bet Another self rightous journalist talking about ethics... Spare me.,
Aware
Guest
Who do you mean? I'm not promoting betting on football outcomes. I never bet or gamble. By the way, we're talking about "spot fixing", which is a criminal offence.
Richard
Roar Guru
Well I suspect, without knowing anything of course, that players having 5 bucks here and there on a game is not as rare as we think. So lets get off our high horse shall we? AFL. CFC. St.Kilda etc. etc.. You guys are promoting betting on football outcomes. Shame on you!. It is your fault! Shame on you!
Aware
Guest
Just my suspicious mind. I've lived in Melbourne most of my life and seen how corrupt things can be- would probably make a Gold-Coaster blush. Maybe not money laundering in this case, but we don't know how deep the illegal betting goes or who really profits from it. I can't believe it's a one-off.
Qlder
Guest
'money laundering'? You are kidding - half a $20 bet that stood to win Shaw $1k and you think that's AFL money laundering? Spare me. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Completely agree! Great post. :D
Titus
Guest
It was widely reported in the media, presumably this is how you know about. And they were fined by the FFA. The difference is that none of the Victory players placed bets on games that they were involved in. And all of the bets were on teams not involving the Victory, except for one bet by Grant Brebner on a Victory match in which he wasn't part of the squad.
Uncle Bob
Guest
Wasn't a number of Melbourne Victory player's involved in something very similar and the whole episode was swept under the carpet by the FFA and the media?
Karmikel Funk
Roar Rookie
No dude, the AFL coming down on its players like, enforcing the rules that it made man. Like betting on a game you are playing in.
Aware
Guest
HS? Oh yeh, I know who you mean. How dumb of me.
woodsman
Guest
indeed. Better this way for all concerned (possibly including HS)
woodsman
Guest
In the critical period Maxwell was ignored on at least one occasion when he was arguably in a better position than team-mates. Footage shows no obvious sign of a deliberate attempt to manipulate results- however, this was a v.suspicious game- Pies played around in the first half before blowing Adelaide off the park in the second- having been at the game at the time I remarked 'someone is making money off this' on several occasions dumbfounded by what I was seeing. Only cover I could think of at the time was that Malthouse had mentioned in the weeks earlier that the 'Pies would be 'experimenting' with their positions with 'games in hand'.
woodsman
Guest
Completely agree with you here Michael- hopefully this will be a landmark ruling that AFL penalties will also apply to Q/NE/S/T/V/WAFL and so on
woodsman
Guest
Yet his actions during the game in question where Maxwell was ignored for a better option in the critical period clearly demonstrate he was NOT attempting to rig the game.
Aware
Guest
I can't help thinking that Shaw has taken the "fall" for something much, much larger than we are being shown.
Swampy
Guest
Tooks, well said. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
Not a bad way of thinking, Tooks.
Uncle Bob
Guest
This is what he has been caught for. What hasn't he been sprung for.
Tooks
Guest
I think the taint of match fixing, or even altering the course of play to allow exotic bets to pay off is worth a massive over-reaction from game officals - rather than an under-reaction. Sports historians still talk of lost generations of fans as a result of the White Sox throwing their World Series. God help us if even a $10 bet puts us one baby step closer to a calamity like that. Was the penalty too light? Heath laid a share of a $20 bet possibly using insider knowledge about the game tactics his team was about to employ. This is a very slippery slope. He should cop the 8 weeks and count himself lucky. But the AFL should stipulate that the penalty set is not a precedent. It should only be a starting point. Persionally, I reckon they should threaten to double the penalty for each successive infringement regardless of the sums involved or the complicity to potential corruption until it stops happening altogether. Just my 2 cents.