Yu Delu / Cao Yupeng

Ash147 wrote:Anyone who participates in match fixing should be banned for life, no exceptions. That includes Higgins and Lee.

Not sure about Higgins but these two I agree. They actually fixed multiple matches. Cao got off really lightly.

I think Dan Cat makes a good point.

There is a possibility that they were forced into it. Of course we will never know, but it is not unprecedented.

Ash147 wrote:Anyone who participates in match fixing should be banned for life, no exceptions. That includes Higgins and Lee.

Bit harsh on Higgins to be banned for something he has never been charged with.

SteveJJ wrote:

Ash147 wrote:Anyone who participates in match fixing should be banned for life, no exceptions. That includes Higgins and Lee.

Bit harsh on Higgins to be banned for something he has never been charged with.

He was perfectly happy to match fix, until he got caught.

Ash147 wrote:

SteveJJ wrote:

Ash147 wrote:Anyone who participates in match fixing should be banned for life, no exceptions. That includes Higgins and Lee.

Bit harsh on Higgins to be banned for something he has never been charged with.

He was perfectly happy to match fix, until he got caught.

Saying and doing something are two completely different things.

If you said you were going to kill someone (and didn't go through with it), should you still be charged with murder?

Higgins main fault was not reporting to World Snooker what he knew.

Regardless if he did have any intentions to do it we'll never know.

In these cases (Lee, Yupeng, Delu) they did it and therefore got a long ban.

What about David John? Presumably he had not accrued enough ranking points to stay on the main tour in any case

Holden Chinaski wrote:

SteveJJ wrote:

Ash147 wrote:

SteveJJ wrote:

Ash147 wrote:Anyone who participates in match fixing should be banned for life, no exceptions. That includes Higgins and Lee.

Bit harsh on Higgins to be banned for something he has never been charged with.

He was perfectly happy to match fix, until he got caught.

Saying and doing something are two completely different things.

If you said you were going to kill someone (and didn't go through with it), should you still be charged with murder?

No, but if some people would approach you and offered you money to kill someone for them I think it would be your duty to report these people to the police. Not telling the police about this and keeping it quiet should be punished as well..

True - but as SF has said, John was punished for this (whether too leniently is another matter). It just gets to me that frequency that people label Higgins as a match fixer when there's no evidence that he actually did it. A lot of people think that's what he was banned for and not the actual bringing the game into disrepute/failing to report an approach charges.

Higgins was idiotic in that and sullied his name but there's no evidence that he actually ever fixed a match so shouldn't be tarred with that brush. He clearly stated an intention to do so (which is diabolical) but until there's proof that he did anything more than say he would fix matches then he shouldn't be brought in to the same category as Lee, Yupeng and Yu Delu.


Will be interesting to see whether Jamie Jones' ban (if he gets one) will be similar in length to Higgins in the sense that its been made clear that Jones' hasn't fixed matches but knew what David John was up to and didn't report it.

I still think this is bucking hilarious. "How d'ya swalla free undred faasand John?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aFP1e5PtB8

So does that mean that the player ranked 65th at the end of the season misses out on a place on the tour because Cao is still on the tour?

So, how does this help those that don't c heat?!

Higgins didn't fix any matches. Is completely different. Do we have to go through this again? In multiple threads. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Badsnookerplayer wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/46411743

One thing I don't get is how do the organisers of the fixing (the players are just the pawns after all) expect to get away with it, when surely a sum of £100k+ being dropped on a qualifying match is bound to raise suspicions??

SnookerFan wrote:

Dan-cat wrote:

Badsnookerplayer wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/46411743

One thing I don't get is how do the organisers of the fixing (the players are just the pawns after all) expect to get away with it, when surely a sum of £100k+ being dropped on a qualifying match is bound to raise suspicions??

I don't think they're bright enough to figure that out.

Reading the article it seems that they have software that places smaller amounts with 30 online bookies, but apparently the bookies now have software to detect this

SnookerFan wrote:No wonder Ronnie is defending the Chinese players actions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKIrAleWhuU

And that's why he loves Higgins too. parakeet!

One of Yu’s bets was interesting. Either player to win by 4-3. Which means he backed himself to win three frames... must have been hella confident in his ability

Dan-cat wrote:One of Yu’s bets was interesting. Either player to win by 4-3. Which means he backed himself to win three frames... must have been hella confident in his ability

He must have been playing one of Ronnie's numpties.

The other Scottish guy Burnett should have been banned. No doubt he was at it. No blame on Maguire though.

gallantrabbit wrote:The other Scottish guy Burnett should have been banned. No doubt he was at it. No blame on Maguire though.

The tour needs more Scottish players. There are loads of Chinese ones. It's was a simple number decision