by Monique » 07 May 2010 Read
http://www.sportinglife.com/snooker/wor ... _Dott.htmlDOTT SEVERS MOONEY TIES AFTER MATCH-FIXING CLAIMS
By Press Association Sport staff
World Championship runner-up Graeme Dott has parted company with Pat Mooney following allegations of match-fixing against his manager.
A report in Sunday's News of the World alleged that Mooney and three-time world champion John Higgins, who Mooney also represents through his FSTC Management business, had been prepared to fix frames at high-profile tournaments, claims that both men have denied.
Mooney has since stood down from his seat on the board of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association, while Higgins has been suspended from playing pending a WPBSA investigation into the claims.
Dott, the 2006 world champion, said in a statement: "Further to the press reports last week involving Mr Pat Mooney, I have terminated my representation contract with Pat Mooney and FSTC Management with immediate effect.
"I will have no further dealings with either of these parties."
-
Monique
- Posts: 4597
- Joined: 02 February 2010
- Location: Brussels
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: Kodachrome (Paul Simon)
-
by Wildey » 07 May 2010 Read
WOW
this is big.
as a player that was represented by pat mooney he knows the man better than any of us and parting company means Dott has doubts about his own manager's innocence in this.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Bourne » 07 May 2010 Read
Or he just simply doesn't want to get involved in any of this business...
-
Bourne
- Posts: 17471
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: UK
- Snooker Idol: Judd Trump
- Highest Break: 150
by Wildey » 07 May 2010 Read
Bourne wrote:Or he just simply doesn't want to get involved in any of this business...
he is already involved the investigation wont drop him being managed by Moony just because hes left the fact hes left will mean being more involved wanting to know why he hasn't stuck by moony.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by SnookerFan » 07 May 2010 Read
It might not mean that. He might just want to 'prove' his innocence, by leaving Mooney as soon as these allegations come out. Probably didn't want to be dragged into anything he didn't have to.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 150749
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 07 May 2010 Read
SnookerFan wrote:It might not mean that. He might just want to 'prove' his innocence, by leaving Mooney as soon as these allegations come out. Probably didn't want to be dragged into anything he didn't have to.
but at the time of the said crime he was part of Mooney's stable so think of how it looks if a client walks away as soon as a story broke.... has greame herd something from the past that mooney has done and didn't believe it at that time but now he thinks buck me im out of here.
these are all questions that greame has to answer now....if he stayed put there would have been less focus on him.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Templeton Peck » 07 May 2010 Read
Graeme doesn't have to answer for anything unless an allegation is brought against him along with evidence. He's done the right thing distancing himself from the mess, and that's all there is to it.
-
Templeton Peck
- Posts: 54
- Joined: 27 April 2010
by Wildey » 07 May 2010 Read
Templeton Peck wrote:Graeme doesn't have to answer for anything unless an allegation is brought against him along with evidence. He's done the right thing distancing himself from the mess, and that's all there is to it.
distancing himself now could be seen as running away could be seen as throwing doubt on their innocence.
if the inquiry did not take an interest in why he went they wouldn't be doing their job properly.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Bourne » 07 May 2010 Read
Wild you are trying too hard ... there is nothing at all, whatsoever, to suggest Dott has anything to run away from. My reading of it is that he's just not interested in having anything to do with this partnership again: "I will have no further dealings with either of these parties." ... It's as simple as that, i'm sure he's got other avenues he wants to explore but you cannot run and hide from serious matters like this, he's merely wanting a change of scenery. Who knows, he might have been planning this long before the saga last week ?
-
Bourne
- Posts: 17471
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: UK
- Snooker Idol: Judd Trump
- Highest Break: 150
by Roland » 07 May 2010 Read
He obviously doesn't want to be tarred with the same brush and wants to do what's right for him. His career is back on track and it's totally understandable if he wants to distance himself so he can focus on what's right for him and his career.
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-
by gallantrabbit » 07 May 2010 Read
Bit strange how Mooney is guilty already and we are all guilty of desperately looking for ways to make Higgins innocent.
Dott has done the right thing and will have other offers
-
gallantrabbit
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: 08 February 2010
- Location: são paulo
- Snooker Idol: forever jimmy
- Highest Break: 134
by Wildey » 07 May 2010 Read
Sonny wrote:He obviously doesn't want to be tarred with the same brush and wants to do what's right for him. His career is back on track and it's totally understandable if he wants to distance himself so he can focus on what's right for him and his career.
to late he is and he will be even more by going im not trying hard im just saying how the inquiery will look at him going if i was him i would go nowhere and stay put.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Wildey » 07 May 2010 Read
i want to say personally i don't for one minute think John Higgins involved or Pat mooney for that matter but in this inquiry they not dealing with jo bloggs from the local cash and carry they are dealing with a former police detective that is trained to be suspicious of everything and sorry if its not to peoples liking but Greame Dott has got more involved than he would have been siting tight.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Rocket_ron » 08 May 2010 Read
wildJONESEYE wrote:i want to say personally i don't for one minute think John Higgins involved or Pat mooney for that matter but in this inquiry they not dealing with jo bloggs from the local cash and carry they are dealing with a former police detective that is trained to be suspicious of everything and sorry if its not to peoples liking
b
ut Greame Dott has got more involved than he would have been siting tight.
agree wirh wild
-
Rocket_ron
- Posts: 8307
- Joined: 27 December 2009
- Location: Chesterfield
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie Osullivan
- Highest Break: 43
-
by SnookerFan » 08 May 2010 Read
I really think we are reading far too much into this. Grame Dott loses nothing by moving on. He is removing any doubt. Okay, people are innocent until proven guilty, but as long at there is doubt, there would be doubt over Dott as well. By moving on from Mooney, he is sending a message that he wants nothing to do with match-fixing, even if it's just alleged.
It makes a stronger statement then if he'd have adopted a wait and see approach, whatever level of guilt Mooney has.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 150749
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 08 May 2010 Read
SnookerFan wrote:I really think we are reading far too much into this. Grame Dott loses nothing by moving on. He is removing any doubt. Okay, people are innocent until proven guilty, but as long at there is doubt, there would be doubt over Dott as well. By moving on from Mooney, he is sending a message that he wants nothing to do with match-fixing, even if it's just alleged.
It makes a stronger statement then if he'd have adopted a wait and see approach, whatever level of guilt Mooney has.
yes but if i was accused of something and say a friend of mine was a policeman and he said so long mate i want nothing to do with you immediately despite my innocence that throws doubt over my innocence.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by SnookerFan » 08 May 2010 Read
wildJONESEYE wrote:SnookerFan wrote:I really think we are reading far too much into this. Grame Dott loses nothing by moving on. He is removing any doubt. Okay, people are innocent until proven guilty, but as long at there is doubt, there would be doubt over Dott as well. By moving on from Mooney, he is sending a message that he wants nothing to do with match-fixing, even if it's just alleged.
It makes a stronger statement then if he'd have adopted a wait and see approach, whatever level of guilt Mooney has.
yes but if i was accused of something and say a friend of mine was a policeman and he said so long mate i want nothing to do with you immediately despite my innocence that throws doubt over my innocence.
That's nothing like the same thing. This is a business relationship, not a personal friendship. If I worked with/for somebody who got accused doing something illegal at work, I would be reluctant to work with them again, in case I was tarnished.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 150749
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 08 May 2010 Read
thats where you and me differ big time i would stay and back up someone to the hilt if i thought they was innocent i would never in a million years run away when the going got tough.
i do accept people are different though
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Bourne » 08 May 2010 Read
Wild
-
Bourne
- Posts: 17471
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: UK
- Snooker Idol: Judd Trump
- Highest Break: 150
by JohnFromLondonTown » 08 May 2010 Read
Graeme Dott has to distance himself from this, period.
-
JohnFromLondonTown
by Wildey » 08 May 2010 Read
Bourne wrote:Wild
don't give me that rubbish
i don't for one minute think dotts involved i don't think for one minute higgins is involved but i say how i would do it and running away is a cowards way out period.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Templeton Peck » 08 May 2010 Read
His sponsors might have threatened to walk or anything. The fact that Mooney named a couple of players who they could bring into the deal and that Dott and Maguire are the two WS regulars then I don't blame him for steering well clear.
-
Templeton Peck
- Posts: 54
- Joined: 27 April 2010
by Wildey » 08 May 2010 Read
Templeton Peck wrote:His sponsors might have threatened to walk or anything. The fact that Mooney named a couple of players who they could bring into the deal and that Dott and Maguire are the two WS regulars then I don't blame him for steering well clear.
i also think someone advised him maybe family maybe sponsors but as i say i wouldn't have walked somethings are more important if you believe their innocence. but thats me loyal to the end
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Bourne » 08 May 2010 Read
It probably has nothing to do at all, 0%, with believing his innocence but you're too stubborn to accept that.
-
Bourne
- Posts: 17471
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: UK
- Snooker Idol: Judd Trump
- Highest Break: 150
by Wildey » 08 May 2010 Read
Bourne wrote:It probably has nothing to do at all, 0%, with believing his innocence but you're too stubborn to accept that.
its not important how he sees it how you see it or how i see it i can guarantee you the investigation will be taking a interest in it
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Wildey » 08 May 2010 Read
ive read through all the relevant things from the NOTW perspective and lets be honest they can lie for Britain but if what they say is true this is how i see whats happened.
i think pat mooney is in it up to his neck but John Higgins was rail Roaded in to it in Kiev and in shock he agreed to it without knowing what he was doing. and once they left the meating id put a bet on a god almighty row between them...John after coming home was proberbly in a dilema and wandered what best to do and before he made that decision when you consider this meating was on friday and in the NOTW on Sunday it didnt leave much chance for him to act and land mooney in the rubbish... Greame after a chat with John has decided enough is enough and walked away i think John has told Greame to go.
that is my take on it.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Wildey » 09 May 2010 Read
we now starting to get the picture as to why Dott left mooney
THE two top snooker stars who shamed supremo Pat Mooney claimed he could lure into the match fixing scam are NAMED for the first time today.
Sleazy Mooney bragged that he could persuade Graeme Dott - runner-up in last weekend's Crucible World Championship Final - and ace Mark Selby to MAKE SURE games against disgraced John Higgins ended in an exact score.
The grasping promoter even believed the two unsuspecting players he managed would fall for his lie that they HAD to play a certain number of frames to fill TV coverage slots on a World Series Snooker tour of Europe later this year.
At a meeting in a plush Kiev hotel to thrash out frame fixes that he and Higgins thought would net £261,000, Mooney told our undercover reporter: "I'd say to Graeme, 'Graeme, for television we need this to go 5-3 either way, right'.
More Here http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/80 ... ooney.html
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Roland » 10 May 2010 Read
wild quit speculating about stuff you don't know about.
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-
by Wildey » 10 May 2010 Read
Sonny wrote:wild quit speculating about stuff you don't know about.
its not speculating its obvious you have to be a half wit to think otherwise
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64441
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Roland » 10 May 2010 Read
What's obvious is that you've been speculating throughout this and the other Mooney/Higgins related articles.
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-