A few more bans on the way

Will be interesting to see what matches were involved and in which tournaments. Cant really be a surprise when you consider the level of illicit gambling you hear about in the Far East that things like this will surface. Have believed for a long time that snooker is really only scratching the surface when it comes to the level of small time corruption going on.

Allen's beef was in relation to fouls on the table so not really relevant to this, I think.

elgriff wrote: »

http://www.snookerbacker.com/2017/12/29/if-it-aint-broken/

http://www.snookerbacker.com/2013/09/22/arson-about-at-thai-players-home/

Can only keep aiming to stamp it out. Good on the authorities

wow, that guy was spot on in the 1st link.

Jamie Jones suspended.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/11/jamie-jones-suspended-world-snooker-allegations-match-fixing

David John: A suspension from attending or competing in WPBSA sanctioned events for a period of 7 years. He was given credit for admitting the charges, so the period of suspension he has to serve is 5 years 7 months. This is to run from 22nd May 2018, the date of his original suspension, until 21st December 2023. He was ordered to pay £17,000 towards the WPBSA costs.

Jamie Jones: A suspension from attending or competing in WPBSA sanctioned events for a period of 16 months. He was given credit for admitting to the charge, so the period of suspension he has to serve is 12 months. This is to run from 11th October 2018, the date of his original suspension until 10th October 2019. He was ordered to pay £9,000 towards the WPBSA costs.

https://www.wpbsa.com/wpbsa-disciplinary-hearing-finding-david-john-and-jamie-jones/

waynescales1 wrote: »

A year ban for failing to report the fact that another player was approached to fix a match seems quite harsh.

Jones part does seem strange but we simply don’t know the full details. Why was he present when the approach was made? Seems odd somebody would make an approach like that with a witness present, I really can’t figure that bit out.

But the rules on reporting are crystal clear so not sure he can have too many complaints, maybe a couple of months less might have been fairest?

Can’t remember fully now but I believe the wpbsa wanted to charge jones with basically facilitating the whole thing - in that he was the intermediary between Mr X and John, but he denied it and they couldn’t prove it. They knew from phone records that Jones had been in contact with the fixer but that obviously wasn’t enough to nail him.

*on a more serious charge I mean

Well that was the case they initially laid out, but they couldn’t prove it and Jones denied it so they went with the lesser charge of failing to report.

I guess Jones version must be along the lines either he just happened to be there when John was approached or else John just told him about it later. Think they were sharing a hotel room as it happened.

Think they know who the fixer guy is but their hands are a little tied because I don’t believe there is any criminal focus to these investigations.