- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The football codes of Australia have been backed into an unwinnable and untenable position. The rise of spot betting or so called “exotic bets” over the past few years mean that conversation that was once just dinner time chitchat has now become highly sensitive information – and it shouldn’t be.
Heath Shaw was suspended on Friday for placing a bet on an AFL match. No problems with that – it was an idiotic thing for him to do, and his punishment should serve as a warning to all players and club officials.
If you are a player or an administrator at an AFL club, you must not bet on the sport. Simple.
On the same day that Shaw was punished by the AFL for his foolishness, his captain was also fined for mentioning to family members ahead of the Magpies round nine match against Adelaide that he would be starting in the forward line.
Maxwell did not mention this with the intention of securing a financial gain, it was simply part of a more general discussion he had about his football with a family member.
The simple fact is that Maxwell’s disclosure to his family would not have been an issue ten years ago. The sports gambling industry has cornered the AFL insidiously over the past decade or so with the introduction of exotic bets. The landscape has changed, and it is sports gambling which has changed the goalposts, not the players or the AFL.
The information which landed Maxwell in hot water never used to be considered sensitive information. It has only become so with the addition of exotic bets as another means of gambling on sport.
As I have written previously on The Roar, gambling has sport by the balls. The rise of spot betting now means players can face censure for answering what are completely reasonable questions from family and friends.
The simple enquiry of “How’s work going?” must now be met with an evasive or unenlightening response, to prevent players running the risk of putting themselves in an awkward position should any disclosure be considered sensitive information.
Let’s be clear here – football players kick and throw around an inflatable ball. They don’t hold the nuclear codes or work for ASIO.
Mandating that players are not to discuss what are otherwise rudimentary details of their work with family members is a joke, and a burden the players should rally against.
As if media conferences weren’t dull enough already with players delivering stock-standard responses, the dinner table conversation at the Maxwell household could soon become just as bland.
Maxwell gamely appeared on Channel Seven’s AFL Game Day program on Sunday. During his time on the show, Maxwell mentioned that players are allowed to discuss so-called sensitive information with family members, so long as they add on the rider that “this information must not be used for betting purposes.”
Should Maxwell have divulged the same information to his family, but insisted afterwards that he had told them not to use this information for gambling purposes, and his family had gone against his advice and gambled anyway, would the AFL still seek to penalise him or his family who placed the bets?
Will AFL players now feel compelled to place a voice recorder next to the salt and pepper shaker on the dinner table next time they discuss details of an upcoming match with family members, just to cover their backsides?
Furthermore, are players allowed to freely discuss sensitive information with family members so long as they mention that the information must not be used for betting purposes?
Will the caveat “You cannot use this information for betting purposes” be the new “allegedly” – tacked on the end of all statements to cover oneself from possible tribunal or judicial action?
How far will this go?
Suppose a fringe player who normally plays in the backline is told by his coach that he will spend more time in the midfield for the remainder of the season.
Should the player refrain from telling his family and friends, just in case a family member places a bet that he will be the leading possession winner in an upcoming match? In this instance, would the player mentioning that his role in the team is changing be considered sensitive information?
The infiltration of exotic bets into the gambling landscape now affects what players can discuss with their friends and family, and the line is still not clear what constitutes sensitive information, and what is not.
How long before the next case?
Follow Michael on Twitter @michaelfilosi
Who’s in your ultimate team? Pick the best team and compete with other fans for daily prizes on Draftstars. For the best odds on the game try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Think. Is this a bet you really want to place? Set a deposit limit.