Not so black and white - Higgins has a case

Worst case scenario as far as I can see is that he's brought the game into disrepute. Give him a 2 match ban or something to satisfy all the self-righteous moral indignation, then let him back for the UK and hopefully he will serve up some of the cracking snooker he's been producing over the last 15 years.

Hearn seems to think that they can do it. Its an awful situation, after all the world series is a promo exhibition event. Yes people bet on it, but people also bet on the Davis v Taylor rematch and it was fixed.

case_master wrote:Hearn seems to think that they can do it. Its an awful situation, after all the world series is a promo exhibition event. Yes people bet on it, but people also bet on the Davis v Taylor rematch and it was fixed.

True, but everyone knew it was fixed

I just hope he isn't turned into a sacrificial lamb to herald in a new age of cleaned up snooker, which I think is a real danger here. The WSA is going to want to be seen to be taking action, but I don't think someone should have their career destroyed over a mickey-mouse event.

Templeton Peck wrote:I just hope he isn't turned into a sacrificial lamb to herald in a new age of cleaned up snooker, which I think is a real danger here. The WSA is going to want to be seen to be taking action, but I don't think someone should have their career destroyed over a mickey-mouse event.

That is exactly my feeling, if this had been a proper event then yes throw the book at him. The world series are basically exhibition matches, the players split the prize money for God's sake.

Templeton Peck wrote:I just hope he isn't turned into a sacrificial lamb to herald in a new age of cleaned up snooker, which I think is a real danger here. The WSA is going to want to be seen to be taking action, but I don't think someone should have their career destroyed over a mickey-mouse event.

i got to say you do have a valid point and it would be ohhh so easy to send him to the lions for the sports sake.

Templeton Peck wrote:I just hope he isn't turned into a sacrificial lamb to herald in a new age of cleaned up snooker, which I think is a real danger here. The WSA is going to want to be seen to be taking action, but I don't think someone should have their career destroyed over a mickey-mouse event.

Whether it's a "mickey mouse event" or not is irrelevant. I would have no problem with Higgins "arranging" a match in an exo event to accomodate television needs or create more "suspense", for free, it's done all the time probably. But here we speak of accepting a very substantial amount of money (300000 €, how many of you earn that a year?) to fix the results in order to allow fraud on bettings. And again the fact that it wasn't any of the UK established betting companies is irrelevant. Also there is a clear intention to fraud the fisc as obviously this not so small income can't possibly be declared and the way to achieve it is discussed albeit not in details.
This is a completely different proposition and actually really questions Higgins integrity and through him, the world n°1 and 3-times World Champion, a whole game's integrity.
IF it is proven true, there is no excuse for it whatsoever.

It's both the money and the fraud on bettings that are the problem.

Mon IF he is proven guilty what do you think would be an adequate punishment for him on the WPBSA tour?

as long as the enquiery is conducted right and the desition they come up with is the right one based on evidence i have no problam with it.

what i dont want is them to turn round we cant find anything but the video was damning lets ban him otherwise a cloud will forever be over the sport.

case_master wrote:Mon IF he is proven guilty what do you think would be an adequate punishment for him on the WPBSA tour?

if he is proven guilty sorry but a life ban as far as im concerned but if there are gray areas the benefit must go to higgins and ruining his career on something someone else has done would be wrong but for sheer stupidaty he must get some punishement.

Hopefully they will prove Higgins innocence. In this case what do you think would be a suitable punishment for not informing the WSA? I think maybe make Higgins donate money to charity.

N_Castle07 wrote:Hopefully they will prove Higgins innocence. In this case what do you think would be a suitable punishment for not informing the WSA? I think maybe make Higgins donate money to charity.

no im not for cash punishements when you got the earning potential John has yes donate to charity but he must have tournament bans even a ban from the WC for the cloud it caused over the 2010 championship.

wildJONESEYE wrote:

N_Castle07 wrote:Hopefully they will prove Higgins innocence. In this case what do you think would be a suitable punishment for not informing the WSA? I think maybe make Higgins donate money to charity.

no im not for cash punishements when you got the earning potential John has yes donate to charity but he must have tournament bans even a ban from the WC for the cloud it caused over the 2010 championship.

I'm saying if it came about Higgins was innocent then what should his punishment be for not informing the WSA?

Well he's definitely brought the game into disrepute by not informing the WSA so I think it's a certainty he'll get more than a fine, but Thorburn did crack cocaine and only got a two match ban. Higgins (the other one) decked the ref and only got a five match ban. I think a 2 match ban like Thorburn's would see him punished enough, and a ban longer than what Higgins got for actual assault would be disproportionate.

N_Castle07 wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:

N_Castle07 wrote:Hopefully they will prove Higgins innocence. In this case what do you think would be a suitable punishment for not informing the WSA? I think maybe make Higgins donate money to charity.

no im not for cash punishements when you got the earning potential John has yes donate to charity but he must have tournament bans even a ban from the WC for the cloud it caused over the 2010 championship.

I'm saying if it came about Higgins was innocent then what should his punishment be for not informing the WSA?

as i say i think a ban from the 2011 WC. if he had informed the WSA the NOTW article on sunday morning would have made them look like dicks and everyone at the crucible would be snake hissing themselfes laughing instead of being down depressed and almost ruined a great championship and not giving the finalists the respect they deserved.

If he is guilty then there has to be a ban otherwise it would make a mockery of the WSA. However if he is not guilty and a punishment has to be put in place for him not informing the WSA then they should take into account his continued support to promote Snooker and his efforts in bringing snooker around Europe.

Some people have said a one year ban. However that would amount to as much as a lifetime ban, firstly he would lose his ranking – meaning when the ban was over he would have to compete in the POIS tour for a place on the main tour…with the ban included he would be out of the top 16 for 3 or 4 years at least…putting him at 38

[no im not for cash punishements when you got the earning potential John has yes donate to charity but he must have tournament bans even a ban from the WC for the cloud it caused over the 2010 championship.[/quote]

I'm saying if it came about Higgins was innocent then what should his punishment be for not informing the WSA?[/quote]

as i say i think a ban from the 2011 WC. if he had informed the WSA the NOTW article on sunday morning would have made them look like dicks and everyone at the crucible would be snake hissing themselfes laughing instead of being down depressed and almost ruined a great championship and not giving the finalists the respect they deserved.[/quote]


agreed but in his defence he didn't know it was the News of the world.

N_Castle07 wrote:[no im not for cash punishements when you got the earning potential John has yes donate to charity but he must have tournament bans even a ban from the WC for the cloud it caused over the 2010 championship.

I'm saying if it came about Higgins was innocent then what should his punishment be for not informing the WSA?

as i say i think a ban from the 2011 WC. if he had informed the WSA the NOTW article on sunday morning would have made them look like dicks and everyone at the crucible would be snake hissing themselfes laughing instead of being down depressed and almost ruined a great championship and not giving the finalists the respect they deserved.[/quote]


agreed but in his defence he didn't know it was the News of the world.[/quote][/quote]
thats the point lol

he thought he was dealing with people that would give him cash to fix matches....by not reporting the aproach he is in breach of a very important rule in sport.

case_master wrote:Mon IF he is proven guilty what do you think would be an adequate punishment for him on the WPBSA tour?

Quinten Hahn has got an 8 year ban for similar facts. Quinten was nowhere Higgins is in terms of visibility or profile. I will not go so far as to say this kind of things was expected from Qinten but you know what I mean. Higgins had an image of model professional. So this has the power to damage the trust sponsors put in the game much much more than the Quinten Hahn affair had. With Higgins status come responsibilities ... He can't get less than Hahn.
Now a 8 years ban or more means we won't see him play anymore as a pro. And I doubt he gets many exos proposals after this.
all that IF he is guilty.

He could possibly stay on the tour if he were banned for a season. Under the current system for example, it would see him drop to 20 in the rankings meaning he would have to qualify. The severity would depend on the new ranking system. A rolling ranking system over the course of two years would have pretty much the same effect, but a one-year ranking sytem would see him drop off the tour. Maybe there's a middle ground here of dropping him 16 places in the rankings and making him qualify — being made to go Prestatyn is punishment enough for anyone!

Monique wrote:

case_master wrote:Mon IF he is proven guilty what do you think would be an adequate punishment for him on the WPBSA tour?

Quinten Hahn has got an 8 year ban for similar facts. Quinten was nowhere Higgins is in terms of visibility or profile. I will not go so far as to say this kind of things was expected from Qinten but you know what I mean. Higgins had an image of model professional. So this has the power to damage the trust sponsors put in the game much much more than the Quinten Hahn affair had. With Higgins status come responsibilities ... He can't get less than Hahn.
Now a 8 years ban or more means we won't see him play anymore as a pro. And I doubt he gets many exos proposals after this.
all that IF he is guilty.

question

if higgins doesent get a similar ban should World Snooker apologise to Quinten Hann and award him a wild Card on tour ?

wildJONESEYE wrote:if higgins doesent get a similar ban should World Snooker apologise to Quinten Hann and award him a wild Card on tour ?

You are joking wild. Aren't you?

That’s it Monique its not the same as Hann. Firstly Hann agreed to throw an entire match, there is no suggestion that Higgins would have deliberately lost any match.

Also being in a ranking event, Hann losing on purpose could have had a knock on effect on the careers of other players in terms of their ranking and therefore earning potential. This was not the same in John’s case.

I am not saying IF John is found guilty that he shouldn’t be banned, however I think 8 years would be ridiculous given the circumstances.

JohnFromLondonTown wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:if higgins doesent get a similar ban should World Snooker apologise to Quinten Hann and award him a wild Card on tour ?

You are joking wild. Aren't you?

no

im only asking the question based on moniques post lol

JohnFromLondonTown wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:if higgins doesent get a similar ban should World Snooker apologise to Quinten Hann and award him a wild Card on tour ?

You are joking wild. Aren't you?

why should aussies be treated differently

GJtheaussiestud wrote:why should aussies be treated differently

Good God where's this gone now?

I'm not even going to answer the that. I'm not, I promise.

Maybe this is the end to Higgins regardless of the outcome. With or without a ban he may not want to continue to play anymore because of this NOTW rubbish. it would be a great shame for the greatest all round player to ever pick up a cue go out in this way.

Templeton Peck wrote:He could possibly stay on the tour if he were banned for a season. Under the current system for example, it would see him drop to 20 in the rankings meaning he would have to qualify. The severity would depend on the new ranking system. A rolling ranking system over the course of two years would have pretty much the same effect, but a one-year ranking sytem would see him drop off the tour. Maybe there's a middle ground here of dropping him 16 places in the rankings and making him qualify — being made to go Prestatyn is punishment enough for anyone!

Nobody will go to Prestatyn anymore, as all qualification events and the qualification school will be held in Sheffield

Templeton, our game cannot afford to jeopardize the trust of the sponsors (and remember that there are major betting companies there). People have asked for a life ban for ROS when he made his lewd comments arguing he was bringing the game in disrepute and sponsors wouldn't touch it. Now those comments (the kind you can hear in any playground nowadays BTW) never questioned the very integrity of the main actors in the game, its top players, they just showed one invidual in a bad light. What Higgins did, if he did it, actually questions that integrity big time and he should just been put somewhere in the 32-16 bracket as a punishment? Are you kidding? Don't you see the consequences this may have if WPBSA fails to show they are committed to preserve that integrity?

well asking for ronnie getting a ban for a schoolboy humour was stupid.