John Higgins match fixing claims

zack01

The game of snooker has survived many setbacks over the years and will I'm sure suffer many more, however it has always maintained it's popularity with television viewing figures etc.I personally think it's biggest setback was the loss of the tobacco sponsorship and it has struggled to attract long term sponsors, only last year Bet Fred was secured at the last minute to sponsor the Worlds.
The Higgins episode albeit dissapointing is now a closed matter, from what I have read on this thread there seems to big a divide on who thinks what and what should have been done. We are all fans of the game some more than the others who just jump on the bandwagon when a big story comes up and then dissappear until the next one breaks.
Some peoples idea here that the game is bent is utterly ridiculous really winds me up, snooker somehow will always be tarred with the dingy local smoke filled billiard hall where all kinds of gangsters and crooked players meet up to bet and throw frames, where pupils skipped school and gambled their pocket money!
Well all the top players started in their local snooker club and look at them now! Miss spent youth? I don't think so.
The WSA and Barry Hearn took the Higgins case very seriously to the point where an independent tribunal and QC were brought in to examine and proceed with the case. The WSA had nothing to do with the judgement, nothing was brushed under any carpet, and it didn't matter if it was John Higgins, O'Sullivan,Williams or Hendry or even a player ranked 70th in the world, they would have had the same treatment.
The case is now closed, the real culprit in the case Pat Mooney has been banned and rightly so, he knew what was going on from the previous meetings and walked his biggest asset John Higgins right into it, make no mistake the Kiev sting turned into a huge bonus for the NOTW as Higgins only went at the last minute after his shock defeat to Davis in Sheffield, their intention was to film Mooney but got a huge bonus with Higgin's appearance.
As i said the case is closed, snooker will go on and continue to enjoy it's fantastic rebirth under Barry Hearn, the quarter finals of the first ranking event of the season get under way in China tomorrow and the exciting World Open starts on Sept 18th.
No matter what John Higgins does in the future, I as a friend of his and more so a fan of snooker hope he does well and returns to his exceptional high standard of play, there will always be the people who doubt him, as a previous post said if he was to leave a match winning black hanging in the jaws of the
pocket, the doubters would return!

Chucky the tree

seadnamac wrote: »

I'm not sure which one of us is interpreting it wrong here but the actual ruling states that; Regarding Higgins;

"The Association has withdrawn Charges 1 and 2.[match fixing]

The Association has explained that this withdrawal resulted from an acceptance, following an investigation which all concerned have correctly characterised as very thorough and fair, that Mr Higgins had truthfully accounted for his words and actions at the meeting in Kiev on 30 April"

They are stating that they withdrew the charge because they found that he was telling the truth. They are not stating that they withdrew the charge because of jurisdiction issues.

Regarding Mooney they state that;

"The Association has also withdrawn Charges 1 and 2.
The Association’s explanation for these withdrawals was very different. The Association maintained that Mr Mooney had in fact intended to act fraudulently and corruptly as alleged. However, a last minute argument advanced on behalf of Mr Mooney by Mr Phillips QC, based on a proper construction of the Rules to which Charges 1 and 2 refer had persuaded the Association that it did not have sufficient prospects of proving those Charges."


They are stating that they withdrew these charges based on last minute jurisdiction issues.


A couple of points on this;


1) If they had any doubt over Higgins innocence but wanted to sweep it under the carpet then they had an obvious and easy oppurtunity here to do so. They could have just used this jurisdiction issue as a means to keep Higgins clean. Instead they chose to make a clear distiction between the rulings for the two parties, and expressively state they found Higgins to be telling the truth.


2) They state that it was a last minute issue brought up by lawyers for Mooney. It is within reason to assume that they were not aware of this issue while making their decision on the charges against Higgins.


For me, the way the statement is constructed it is blindingly clear that they have cleared Higgins of match fixing and that the technicality did not contribute to their decision.

It's certainly not clear to me. Why did they bother bringing in an supposed independent commission if they were just going to carry out their own investigation and make decisions based off that? If they planned to sweep it under the carpet they are going to do their best to make higgins come across as innocent, and by claiming they investigated and found Higgins did nothing wrong but and laying all the blame on Mooneys shoulders they've done a good job.

As Zack says, snooker has struggled getting sponsorship. Having the sports World number 1 and 3 times champion found guilty of match fixing would have been a massive blow to the sport. For me, not allowing Higgins clear his name at the hands of a fully independent panel seems a very very strange decision.

Myrddin

seadnamac wrote: »

I'm not sure which one of us is interpreting it wrong here but the actual ruling states that;

Well in fairness to yourself, my interpretation was lacking. That does make it a bit clearer for me, and it seems "They dropped the charges" isn't quite accurate, because they were only dropped after a complete investigation. Fair dues (I removed most of your quote as it's quite long)

Chucky the tree wrote: »

For me, not allowing Higgins clear his name at the hands of a fully independent panel seems a very very strange decision.

Thats one of two things left in the case I find poorly managed. For me personally, the choice between;

"John Higgins today cleared his name of all allegations in a match fixing tribunal, proving to an independant board that he had no prior knowledge of the scam"

is a far more desireable headline than,

"The WPBSA today dropped the charges of match fixing against John Higgins, & instead he faced the lesser charge with a 6 month ban"

From a PR point of view, clearing his name with all allegations standing, would have been nicer.

The second thing is, and I'm asking this out of genuine curiousiy, why is Pat Mooney in more trouble than Higgins? Is it because he set up the whole affair (I presume it is), surely it's not becasue of the video? Why can one man be made guilty if both are on tape agreeing to do it? I suppose I'd just hate to see one man being made a scapegoat, & one man a hero.

Zack & Seadamac - great posts, and I appreciate you both in that I'm not being made to feel like I'm just here to antagonise you, I assure you I'm not

philstar

Did the investigating committee not see the video:rolleyes:

To expect us to believe that he was prepared to set the whole thing up but then not go through with it is an insult to anyone's intelligence.

Why go into so much detail regarding how he could 'swallow' the bribe using his property in Spain then return to the UK and not inform anyone about the approach ?!! thats hardly the talk of a mislead man is it.

And lets not forget his previous "misdemeanour" when he tried to place a bet on himself in case he lost the World Champ final against Sean Murphy??

The whole thing is a sham that hardly sends out an appropriate message to deter further corruption.

DubGF

Another twist in relation to John returning to play...

http://snookerscene.blogspot.com/2010/09/higgins-may-be-out-until-february.html

jkell061

it is a disgrace he walks scot free (91k hardly counts)!

higgins should have been made an example of by banning him for life, or at least a few years so as he'd be finished in the sport when/if he'd return.
the only lesson learned here to any other players is to just be a bit more careful if deciding to throw frames.

plus, am i right in saying his manager got life suspension, and john only got 6 months, which he's already served?!..
i dunno if i'll have much heed in watching any of his games in the future after this, the evidence was on youtube ffs. He must be laughing his head off n not believe his luck that he's got away with this!

Myrddin

jkell061 wrote: »

it is a disgrace he walks scot free (91k hardly counts)!

higgins should have been made an example of by banning him for life, or at least a few years so as he'd be finished in the sport when/if he'd return.
the only lesson learned here to any other players is to just be a bit more careful if deciding to throw frames.

plus, am i right in saying his manager got life suspension, and john only got 6 months, which he's already served?!..
i dunno if i'll have much heed in watching any of his games in the future after this, the evidence was on youtube ffs. He must be laughing his head off n not believe his luck that he's got away with this!

Have you even considered the possibility, that he knew nothing of the arrangement prior to what we seen in the video? It would be unwise to life ban the man, solely on the basis of a tabloid sting. At least bear John's history in mind, before determining the sentence. It's possible he's guilty I guess in some manner, but it's also possible he genuinely had no idea about this, portrayed the role for his own safety, and was set up. I mean Zack knows the man, and is probably the only one here qualified to make a proper interpretation of the event.

John Higgins has been nothing short of the perfect sportsman until the video was released, weigh that up against a media tabloid, and tell me this all adds up. Also as Zack stated, whether anyone believes this or doesn't, the matter has been decided and it's up to us all now to let John move on & get back to playing the game. In a way, I'm actually looking forward to seeing him on the baize again. He's gonna play his socks off I feel, and will probably be the better for it.

blinding

It won't take Higgins long to get the fine back. Just a few frames here and there !

Its basically a slap on the wrist and don't be foolish enough to get caught on camera next time !

Myrddin

blinding wrote: »

It won't take Higgins long to get the fine back. Just a few frames here and there !

Its basically a slap on the wrist and don't be foolish enough to get caught on camera next time !

I'm gonna hope you mean that in the context of winning a few frames here & there? Kinda bad form otherwise...

blinding

EnterNow wrote: »

I'm gonna hope you mean that in the context of winning a few frames here & there? Kinda bad form otherwise...

Who in their right mind would ever have faith in any frame this dodger dealer ever plays in again.

If you saw the footage of the Notw reporter approaching Higgins at his house and explaining what the Notw had you could tell by Higgins expresssion that he was caught bang to rights !

Myrddin

blinding wrote: »

Who in their right mind would ever have faith in any frame this dodger dealer ever plays in again.

If you saw the footage of the Notw reporter approaching Higgins at his house and explaining what the Notw had you could tell by Higgins expresssion that he was caught bang to rights !

All I'm saying is that everybody on the planet is entitled to a fair hearing, no matter the accusation. The system isn't perfect, but chasing after him with burning torches isn't going to achieve anything. I did see that, albeit earlier in the year, and who's to say it wasn't complete shock that a tabloid reporter was knocking at his front door accusing him of cheating?

If you can establish a man's guilt from a surprised reaction, I'm glad your not a Judge tbh. My surprised reaction immediately makes me look guilty of someting :P

Memnoch

I enjoy watching snooker from time to time. Not my absolute favourite sport in the world, but pretty entertaining still.

But the way this Higgins issue has been dealt with is enough for me to not really bother anymore. Granted I was never a hardcore fan, but I'm sure many casual fans like myself feel the same way.

col.in.Cr

Zack01
there will always be the people who doubt him, as a previous post said if he was to leave a match winning black hanging in the jaws of the
pocket, the doubters would return!

And with good reason too,come on Zack I know hes your mate but be honest
he was caught good here,theres no getting away from that,as I said I am a fan of his,at least if he admitted it and got a proper punishment and came back from it,he would maybe get some respect back.

DubGF

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2010/09/21/revealed-why-john-higgins-was-cleared-of-match-fixing-because-the-evidence-including-a-statement-from-mazher-mahmood-told-the-full-story-210901/

Does this change any opinions?

SIX PACK

Come on guys he knew what he was doing, He didnt come down in the last shower & he was caught rapid by the usual suspects,
Who probably set him up in the 1st place NOTW.... & yea he deserved what he got, Even though im a huge admirer of his snooker game