With recent media reports detailing allegations of match fixing, rugby league has been quick to point the finger of blame at the usual suspects. But perhaps the real culprit is a little closer to home.
Could the NRL’s role in the rise and rapid spread of online betting be the underlying issue?
Match fixing. It’s such an ugly term. It conjures up images of a shifty looking character from the sub-continent offering Mark Waugh a sack full of rupees to influence the outcome of a match.
Such unscrupulous behaviour would seem tailor-made for rugby league, but despite a few brushes with this issue in the past, it’s one of the few black eyes the game has successfully dodged. But all that could be about to change.
In June of this year, it was reported that the NSW Crime Squad was investigating two suspicious games from the 2015 season, both involving the Manly Sea Eagles. The first was a Round 16 clash against South Sydney which the Sea Eagles lost 20-8, and the second was a Round 24 defeat at the hands of the Parramatta Eels (20-16).
And just the other day, Channel Seven reported that a further game was under scrutiny, again involving Manly and Parramatta.
These reports were deeply troubling and moving. In fact, I heard the stories moved Channel Seven reporter Josh Massoud into a bigger house. The idea that matching fixing had infiltrated rugby league throws the very integrity of the game into question. And a sport without integrity is, well, cycling.
The rugby league community reacted to these vicious allegations with the usual degree of mock shock and well-staged outrage. High horses were mounted at such an alarming rate that you could have been forgiven for thinking the NRL were leading a division of cavalry into battle.
Todd Greenberg spoke out to defend the integrity of the game, and vowed to punish the offenders to the full extent of the law. But really, what did we expect?
Gambling is everywhere in the modern game. From television commercials, to signage at the ground, discussion of odds by those in commentary, advertisements on social media and live crosses to affiliated betting agencies during the broadcast. It’s practically inescapable.
Players can pretend that they take no notice, but in reality, it’s near on impossible to be exposed to any form of rugby league media without encountering a reference to gambling.
Picture yourself as a modern day footballer, sitting down at home to watch NRL 360. Paul Kent is prattling on about some minor issue that no one cares about, when suddenly Jamie Rogers appears on the screen.
Almost as though she is speaking directly to you, she gives you the odds of your team losing their upcoming match, an event within your control. While it’s not quite Biff Tannen walking in the front door and handing you a Grays Sports Almanac, it’s not that far off.
Most would quickly eradicate any such thoughts from their minds, if they even had them in the first place.
However, I’d be shocked if there weren’t at least a few players who might give the concept of match fixing more than a passing fancy. These guys are human beings after all. But how did we get here? How did betting and rugby league become as inseparable as Danny Weidler and Sonny Bill Williams’ agent?
Growing up as a rugby league fan in the 90s, betting on football simply wasn’t all that common. Discussion of odds was isolated to the stuttering syllables of Ken Callander, and the only exposure I had to exotic markets was through my Nana’s holiday snaps of the Grand Bazaar. While I’m sure it still took place, those looking to have a punt were forced to brave the unwashed and unemployed at the local TAB, which more closely resembled an abandoned ice den than a licensed gambling agency.
But it wasn’t just the TAB’s peculiar stench of stale nicotine and back sweat which deterred punters. It was just too much bloody effort. If the urge to have a flutter suddenly struck, you needed to come up with an excuse to placate the wife, get in the car, drive to the TAB, find a park and then subject yourself to the horrors within.
The advent of the smartphone changed this forever. With constant access to the internet and apps tailored to make the betting process as simple as possible, it has never been easier and faster to lose your money. The release and refinement of this mobile technology served as chum in the water for betting agencies, and a feeding frenzy soon developed.
It started with a couple of commercials on Channel Nine for the TAB. Annoying, but harmless. Then the commentators started discussing the odds, which was a bit strange, but we let it slide.
All of a sudden, Ray Warren and Sterlo were reading out a poorly written segue for Glenn Munsie to provide a live update of the betting markets. At this point, alarm bells are ringing. Kids are watching. It just doesn’t feel right.
And then Tom Waterhouse happened. The young colt with impeccable pedigree hit rugby league viewers like a slap in the face with an Italian leather driving glove. His smarmy appearance and shiraz-drinking persona were completely incongruous with rugby league, and fans objected to his involvement in the Channel Nine commentary panel.
Such was the public’s distaste that Waterhouse received a reprimand from the Gillard government and eventually issued a public apology, before sidling out of the live broadcast.
This experience served as a line in the sand. Betting agencies knew how far they could push before facing a public backlash, and they’ve been camped on this line ever since.
So here we are in 2016. There are a generation of young players coming through the ranks who have grown up thinking gambling is just part of the furniture when it comes to rugby league.
The NRL educates them about the perils gambling and informs them that as professional rugby league players, they are no longer permitted to place bets on the game. The players get it.
But at the same time, they are still just 18-year-old kids. Many have come from low-income households and have limited secondary education. They are living out of home for the first time in their lives, often away from their existing support structures and any form of supervision.
To top things off, they suddenly have more money than they know what to do with, and their six-figure salaries attract more clingons than the Starship Enterprise.
Are we expecting these kids to be making sound, reasoned choices when questionable situations arise? Of course not. The current environment is more conducive than ever for footballers to make poor choices. It happened in 2010 with Ryan Tandy, and again in 2014 when five players were caught placing bets on NRL games involving the club they played for. We created this problem, and now it’s time to do something about it.
So what’s the solution? Unfortunately, there will be no quick fix. Rooting out the slimy characters that coordinate this illegal activity is harder than deciphering the legitimacy of a Thai massage parlour.
Police investigations move at glacial pace, so findings and subsequent sanctions are not expected anytime soon.
One thing the NRL can do right now is to officially divorce itself from betting agencies. Remove all gambling advertising and sponsorship from the television broadcast. Those wanting to have a bet can still easily access the unlimited betting options via their phones, but the content is not forced down the throats of an impressionable generation.
We know that the NRL has a lucrative partnership with betting agencies, as reports suggest the league pockets around $30 million a year from such agreements. But with a billion dollars in the bank, surely the integrity of the game which Todd Greenberg cares so much about is worth the price.
andrew
Guest
" Yes, most of the game’s cash comes from TV deals, which relies on advertising, but only a portion of that revenue is generated by betting companies." But you have just complained about ALL of the betting advertising and how it is in the prime advertising slots?! So it clearly makes up a very sizable portion of the advertising revenue that TV networks are able to generate. But lets play your game. No gambling advertising - TV's will now take what ever ads they can get their hands on to fill the void.... Alcohol - You will be flooded with beer and Jim Beam ads - People all ready complain about that. Alcoholism kills and destroys families. BAN IT Now no betting and no drinking, who is left to fill the void... The Fast Food Giants - Feel like a Dominos Pizza? What if we fill the crust with melted cheese and bacon and give you a few chocolate brownie for desert..no need to go through detrimental impacts of excessive fast food eating. Viagra! Well that might drive sex addiction or worse, drug dependency - BAN IT Teclo's: Mobile phones - People get addicted to talking on phones or playing games, texting etc. There are endless studies confirming the dangers of excessive mobile phone use - not to mention the anti-social behaviour that is created! No advertising of RSL Clubs or Leagues Clubs (a big advertiser on regional TV) because they have poker machines. Chocolate - Sugar and Chocolate addiction can cause significant damage to organs and weight gain, not to mention lead to diabetes! - Sorry Cadbury, you are out. And before you think about advertising other products like nut bars - remember the damage that can cause. In the hands of the wrong child, it can kill! BAN IT And of course sugar drinks etc are no good as well. Coke O'Cola, your money is no good here. So now Woolworths and Coles are pretty limited to what they can advertise... If I advertised Cow Manure 15 times during a football match you would write how sick you are of the cow manure ads. Whatever ads take the place of the gambling adds will annoy you just as much because you don't like the necessary evil that is advertising - Nobody does. But without knowing you I would guess about 10% of your disapproval is your social conscience towards gambling and 90% of your annoyance is the repetition and frequency of the ads. Social conscience is just a more palatable platform. As to your final point, again, the fact that the re is no history of regular or repeated match fixing in rugby league and given the restrictions in place from the NRL on players, It absolutely would be a shock if it was the tip of the iceberg.
Tom Rock
Expert
I think you are way overstating the importance of betting agencies in rugby league. You say that if advertising and sponsorship of these companies was removed, there is no more money in the coffers for the players? That is absurd. Yes, most of the game's cash comes from TV deals, which relies on advertising, but only a portion of that revenue is generated by betting companies. Rugby League survived the demise of the Winfield Cup once it was legislated that advertising around smoking was no longer permitted. In fact, some would say we are in better financial shape than we were 20 years ago. By around a billion dollars. If a similar stance was taken at government level to ban advertising of gambling, then this would be across the board, not just aimed at rugby league. That money you mention being funneled to other sports simply would not happen. And yes, the reports of match fixing have been few and far between. I acknowledged as much. However my point is that the current environment created by the NRL is fostering this type of behaviour, so it would not be a shock if this is only the tip of the iceberg.
andrew
Guest
20 minutes on radio with no music is two segments, a traffic report and at least one block of ads.. But okay whatever you say...
andrew
Guest
Okay, so players need to be around crooked people in order to match fix. So what does that mean? Ban them from race tracks? ban them from night clubs? ban them from barber shops offering "$8 men's cuts"? Only allow players to play in the NRL once a thorough background check has been done against all family members and people the player may have met at school once? The NRL can't ban gambling on rugby league matches, it bans its players from doing it though. They could remove the sponsorship and guess what happens then? Not only no money for your players - But the coffers of the betting agencies can now be used to fund other sports, so the NRL's competition now has more money to promote their game, more money for grassroots of their game and more money to poach players at all levels from rugby league, until there are none left. Meanwhile you are back watching the NRL with a Salary Cap of $1.2m, played in front of 3,500 people and replayed on a three camera coverage on SBS at 11pm at night... Enjoy. And there is no more hyperbole in that statement than any of the above rhetoric connecting gambling and match fixing. In the last however many years, there has been the same number of reports of players doing dodgy things with dogs while drunk as players involved in match fixing. Why such an over the top reaction to potentially (potentially!) one single story?
andrew
Guest
Obviously advertising can be powerful, otherwise companies wouldn't pay large sums to do it. And I get it can bother some people, but it doesn't bother me, just like I don't notice the trainer on the field all game and I couldn't tell you what the signs say on the advertising boards around the grounds. I think connecting advertising and match/spot fixing is a stretch though. I don't see the correlation there - aside from if you want to accuse Joel of certain acts which i am willing to assume he is clear on because i can't imagine SportsBet or Fox would associate themselves with him if there was any criminal activity. And teenagers are not encouraged to bet. I haven't seen an add with a teenager betting in it.
Tom Rock
Expert
Andrew. Like you, I watch a lot of rugby league. I listen to Triple M and 2KY. I am exposed to more gambling advertising than most, and much more than I would like. Luckily for me, this super-liminal message saturation does not make me want to gamble. However not all who are exposed to this bile are so lucky. Advertising works, which is why they do it. The fact that advertising for betting agencies is so ensconced in mainstream rugby league encourages people to bet. This behaviour becomes a social norm. It reminds those who regularly gamble of the options available to them, and pushes those who may not already gamble to start. For you to say that advertising a range of exotic markets and niche betting options does not introduce the idea of match-fixing is naive. While the players themselves might not always come to this idea themselves, you can be sure there are plenty of people around the game who are more than happy to suggest the idea to them. I agree that match fixing will occur, with or without the prevalence of gambling on our screens. But the NRL would certainly be taking a giant step towards discouraging this type of behaviour by dissociating itself from these companies.
Tom Rock
Expert
Norad, I'm not sure you could find the point of this article with a compass.
concerned supporter
Guest
@Andrew, The important point that you missed is that young people, teenagers etc are exposed and even encouraged to bet. Gambling is NORMALIZED.A bad sign. With match fixing a match fixer would need to place a massive amount on one team to win so he can bribe players in the other team to lose the game. At least $200,000,seems to me too hard to manipulate or match fix.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
Becuase there was nothing suspicious in the markets about them. One line moved against the alleged fix
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
Or what he does for a living.
Norad
Guest
I'm suggesting that rugby league should be banned seeing as it alone is responsible for gambling and every other social ill it seems. As we all know that banning rugby league will stop Australians gambling.
Jacko
Guest
Thats fine Andrew and I, like you , dont bother on betting too much on the league but if it didnt have a positive affect for the betting agencies do you think they would be spending millions doing the advertising or sponsorship? Of course they wouldnt. They banned tobacco advertising because advertising and sponsorship works in getting info on their product out there and this current sponsorship gets people betting when they normally wouldnt. You and I may not have gambling problems but surely a gambling problem is more harmful than a smoking adiction as generally a smoker harms himself where a gambler harms those around him ( family etc ) more
Jacko
Guest
Smoking was around long before RL also but they banned the advertising and sponsorship from that so it certainly can be done. Just dont believe it will unfortunately.
Jacko
Guest
So if they know within minutes if their is some sort of issue why are they only now investigating matches from last year?
duecer
Guest
Don't have pokies over in WA, so there's 2 teams that don't need them to survive, but to be fair they've proved to be an easy way to fund the coffers and it's pretty hard to wean away from them.
Tom Rock
Expert
His face was pretty annoying. And let's not get started on his hair.
Tom Rock
Expert
Easier is not always better.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
The same Joel Caine that was in contact with Ryan Tandy's crew multiple times in the days leading up to and after the infamous Ryan Tandy game? The same guy that had a bet on the particular option after these calls and messages, even when his betting history showed he had never bet this option before? It's all in the evidence sumbitted to court These are the sort of people the game should be distancing themselves from. It's bad enough he can be a spokeman for a betting company and at the same time call games
Kaks
Roar Guru
Which part of it went for 2 mins? The part where Joel caine spoke about a draw paying $4? A fact that they spoke about, even mentioning the chances of it happening? And how we have had a record number of draws this season so the odds were so good? Or the part where they spoke about a 'special' market, where they grouped up a number of players and it was paying $4 for them to score first try, then they went on about how good the value of that bet was as so many players are at $7.50 to score first individually, then spoke about the amount of first tried the group of players in the 'special' market have scored? Or the part where they spoke about why they think there have been so many draws, making reference - again - to the $4 odds sportsbet were offering? I remember it all because I was so disgusted and it didnt go on for 2 mins like you believe it did.
Norad
Guest
NRL having gambling sponsorship is bad, should be banned and somehow encourages match fixing? AFL having gambling sponsorship is not ideal but really gambling is a society problem not the AFL? Got it. Banning rugby league would be easier than banning gambling, pokies, smokes, beer, fast food & etc etc