Post a reply

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Monique » 08 Mar 2013 Read

Sickpotter wrote:Survival of the shiftiest maybe.....

Was that really because you couldn't make ends meet or was it because you wanted partying money? ;-)

I must say when I was younger I did some dubious moves like this as well, always managed to rationalize it and decide it wasn't wrong per say, it was getting back at the big bad corporations who had plenty of cash so they weren't being hurt.

Naive, young and dumb is my read on my actions now. It's theft and what may appear harmless at the outset ceases to be so when "everyone is at it".

I don't condone cheating/match fixing but IMO WSA working on guilty til proven innocent mandate is going to be problematic. Players are being put in a position where the mere accusation is enough to suspend them and if the suspension is long enough or comes at a critical time it can be a career ender.

I say screw the bookies. Want to bet on snooker then you take the risk. Right now the sport is catering to the suspicions of the bookies. Let them investigate and come to WSA with proof before suspending a player.

Not odd betting patterns and crap like that, real proof. Odd betting patterns offer nothing but a possibility of wrong doing and are evidence of nothing concrete. Suspending players without anything concrete seems a draconian measure.

I have to wonder why people would bother placing dubious bets with legal betting offices where their actions could create these "odd betting patterns". I would've thought match fixing to be more in line with backroom betting parlors, like underground boxing. With legal betting are there no longer any real "bookies" in the UK?

IMO the whole line taken by the WSA looks to be more of appeasement for their primary sponsors, the legal betting shops.



WSA is not always taking such a hard stand. Neither Maguire or Burnett were suspended at any time. Jogia was only suspended after the disciplinary authorities had examined the evidence and decided that he had a case to answer. Lee himself was never suspended while the UK justice system was examining his case (and it was deemed serious enough for him to be bailed), he was suspended after WSA got access to the evidence AND the Malvern incident happened which might well have been the drop that caused the bucket to overflow.
Higgins of course was suspended immediately, but the evidence made public and Higgins status left WSA no choice but to act swiftly or risk to lose their main sponsoring source.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby SteveJJ » 09 Mar 2013 Read

It's interesting how these things are dealt with compared to how they were dealt with in the past under different regimes.

The Maguire-Burnett thing was probably where the line was drawn - as the police took so long to make a final decision. Since then things have been a lot more open and swiftly dealt with.

The one that looked more suspicious to me was the Ebdon-Wenbo match in N.I where loads of bets were put on the combination of Ebdon losing 5-0 and not making a 50 break - a combination which has happened very rarely in his career (at least at that stage) It was enough for the ref to report it as Ebdon not trying his best (not knowing the betting situation). I'm not one to go in for conspiracy theories but it may have helped Ebdon being on the board under Walker at the time when Walker needed all the support he could get.

I see in Snooker Scene that there was suspicious betting yet again at the one frame shoot out in the match between Delu and Mark Davis. Has anyone heard whether World Snooker are looking into that?

It's an easy tournament for this to go under the radar as you could blame the time constraints on missing simple balls.

Lets hope the Lee thing gets sorted out soon. I'm always an optimist and hope that there's no foundation in the accusations. Playing in unsanctioned events and breaking the streaming rules won't do very much to endear him to the authorities (not that this should be taken into account in the original charges)

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Simone » 09 Mar 2013 Read

I think that people should (and I believe these days they will) just trust for how they read things. At least I do. Basically intuition guides you to read things you can - and then that is just right, you get those things right.

It is up to people who uses power to decide what information is for offer and available - and what you can do or can´t do about things. But theres no problem about reading things these days I would dare to announce.

It was a very different story in the early 90´s when I was a school kid. I was a really sharp and fast learner and student (frontrunner-type), and I thought it would be great if everyone would had same factual information. So I was hoping that all the kids in my class would be that good students also. Because it creates a flair when you are with them. The same factual information, so it just makes you come up with things - flair and creativity, and in a good way. Like in the mid 1900s.

So obviously it is a very different these days with computers, fast data transfer, mobiles, power struggles that are going through and so on.. But like I wrote basically it is up to the people who uses power. Anyway, I am glad that lately Obama got one important thing sorted out.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Casey » 08 May 2013 Read

Snooker Overdrive wrote:Any news here?


Last I heard, any hearing wouldn't be until June.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby roy142857 » 19 Jun 2013 Read

Casey wrote:
Snooker Overdrive wrote:Any news here?


Last I heard, any hearing wouldn't be until June.


... and is now delayed until 9th September - reason per WPBSA "The WPBSA has met all the requirements set down by the Independent Disciplinary Hearing Board, unfortunately Mr Lee has not." They also say Lee has changed lawyers 3 times ...

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Wildey » 19 Jun 2013 Read

roy142857 wrote:
Casey wrote:
Snooker Overdrive wrote:Any news here?


Last I heard, any hearing wouldn't be until June.


... and is now delayed until 9th September - reason per WPBSA "The WPBSA has met all the requirements set down by the Independent Disciplinary Hearing Board, unfortunately Mr Lee has not." They also say Lee has changed lawyers 3 times ...

if that's true then Lee is having difficulty finding lawyers that believes him.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby fridge46 » 09 Sep 2013 Read

The case is set to start tomorrow, and is expect to last all week, although an outcome may be known by midweek.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/snooker/24000431

The article does state that Lee as had at least 3 legal teams, hence how this whole thing has dragged on...

In the end, he is representing himself. He must be the only one to believe he can win!!!

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby gallantrabbit » 11 Sep 2013 Read

Case is over. The QC will soon pass judgement. :fart: time for Mr Lee methinks, although he's probably got a good idea of his fate already.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Wildey » 11 Sep 2013 Read

gallantrabbit wrote:Case is over. The QC will soon pass judgement. :fart: time for Mr Lee methinks, although he's probably got a good idea of his fate already.

yea they will proberbly pass judgement bang in the middle of the shanghai masters yet again Tournaments overshadowed by off table shinanigans.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Ayrshirebhoy » 16 Sep 2013 Read

Sad day for snooker thou can someone answer me this.

Why did the police not find anything during their investigation but world snooker finds him guilty?

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Smart » 16 Sep 2013 Read

World number three Judd Trump, speaking before the Lee verdict was announced, said that any player found guilty of match-fixing should be banned for life.

"If anybody is found guilty, they should be chucked out of the game," he told BBC Points West. "There's no time for it in any sport. It is ruining the game.

"It's going to push away sponsors and money coming into the game. People are going to look at it differently so anybody found guilty should be punished with a lifetime ban."

______________________________________________________________________________________________

BJ <ok> :clap: <ok>

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby gallantrabbit » 16 Sep 2013 Read

It's not a sad day for snooker but a good one, or will be when the 8/10 year ban is announced. Snooker is doing what maybe other sports haven't. It's easyish to read into this case, a former big earner who had been hit hard by the game's hard times and his own lack of form. 2008/9 was before Hearny got involved and started to make being a pro snooker player viable again. Patience is a virtue...Lee had started to make money again...shame for him and his family, but the only verdict to shine a little credibility on the game.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby gallantrabbit » 16 Sep 2013 Read

Wasn't it Trump who Lee threatened to sue at the start of this after a comment on twitter? Two westcountrymen who don't get on?

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Smart » 16 Sep 2013 Read

gallantrabbit wrote:Wasn't it Trump who Lee threatened to sue at the start of this after a comment on twitter? Two westcountrymen who don't get on?


Yep, hate is often used lightly but I think Lee felt that Trump got a lot of exposure and limelight whereas he trucked along all his career with little recognition. Therein came the resentment and ill feeling.

I think the right decision has been made and without going into print why, I hope he gets a very long ban (10 years or more).

Greedy <ok>

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Roland » 16 Sep 2013 Read

I logged in and thought bloody hell the topic is 5 pages already :redneck:

No love lost between Judd and Lee and same with Mark Allen. If you remember back to when Lee beat Judd to qualify for the Crucible he had a few words to say. Then obviously Judd piped up last year when Lee appeared to be throwing the last frame against Higgins in the Premier League, and Lee got wind of it and said something on Twitter aimed at Judd. Safe to say they don't like each other, and Judd has just this minute tweeted #thegreatergood

And of course Mark Allen is another, his reasons being that he was signed up after Lee was sacked by OnQ so he knows Paul Mount very well and what he went through managing him. I'm pleased the Mounts can now stop taking abuse from Stephen Lee fans now the judgement has shown him up for what he is.

The bottom line is he's greedy and it's come back and bitten him on the bottom. He was gaining financially from the outcome of losing frames and matches.

Do the Thai players gain financially from losing with a gun to their head? Metaphorically speaking of course. I hope those who read the Lee judgement don't assume the same thing is going on with the Thai players embroiled in match fixing allegations at Doncaster last month.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Roland » 16 Sep 2013 Read

It's a different set of circumstances, it's not "double standards". There's a difference between fear and greed.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby gallantrabbit » 16 Sep 2013 Read

Not sure if Lee got greedy or desperate. Probably thought he'd earn big till he was 45, then his form went and snooker was going to the dogs. That's no way an excuse, but his case wouldn't have been helped by his circumstances around the time when all the shennanigans went on.
He might end up with a bigger ban than most cos he's a biggish name, but I can't feel sorry for him, he's more than had his chance.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Roland » 16 Sep 2013 Read

What about the Premier League match? OK it was dropped but why waste money investigating when you know you've already got your man? He was coining it in at the time.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby snooky147 » 16 Sep 2013 Read

All of you on here know how much I dislike Lee but when all of this started I was(and still am) deeply troubled at the apparently casual way that the WPBSA suspended Lee Now I see that they had the evidence to do it but they should be reminded that in future cases the evidence for suspension should be as strong. Lee's case should be a benchmark. They cannot take any player's livelihood away on anything less.
After having read the ruling twice now I see no future for Lee in the sport but this judgement gives me no pleasure. It is a stain, a stain that will take time to eradicate.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Roland » 16 Sep 2013 Read

As with cycling and the drug testing, you have to believe it's clean since they brought in the tougher stance. All the matches in question were before Hearn took over and brought in the disciplinary committee.

One match they didn't take action on was the Malta Cup group match against Swail which Lee won and which his backers gained substantially on. Of course his odds would probably have lengthened after his previous losses giving him more to gain from winning.

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby Smart » 17 Sep 2013 Read

SnookerFan wrote:I hate to agree with Judd, but I agree with Judd.

Lifetime ban.


did you mean to say Judd x 2 in that sentence. If you did - well played. If you did not - equally well played.

S/fan - best poster in all of Croyden <ok>

Re: Stephen Lee Statement

Postby GrumpyMrDavros » 17 Sep 2013 Read

Here was me feeling sorry for Lee . He gets suspended for a year just as he was finding form again , not making any money in a case that dragged on forever . Seemed a case of one rule for all time greats like Higgins and another for less well known players

But now it's a different ball game . What a lousy POS and a lifetime ban is too good for him . Glad we'll never see his slug like frame shumbling in to snooker venues and I look forward to the day in the future where the tabloids run a feature on him living on the streets begging money
Post a reply