Post a reply

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Pink Ball

Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Ck147

BSP, don't push it, don't push it or you'll get a war you won't believe, let it go, let it go.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Ck147

Pink Ball wrote:
Ck147 wrote:BSP, don't push it, don't push it or you'll get a war you won't believe, let it go, let it go.

This is like McLovin begging Mike Tyson to bring it on

:lol:

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Dan-cat wrote:Baddy is jesting.

Well there is a point in there. I think it is very likely that the guilty verdict was correct.

It always felt they needed to provide evidence of deliberate missed shots or fluffed safeties. The fact that they could not do this did feel unsatisfactory. I will have a look at the link Pinkball sent as I don't think I ever did this at the time.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Ash147

Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0


There's no evidence to suggest that he was deliberately missing there. In fact, Hendry was missing easier shots than Lee. I think that it was just a poor frame of Snooker.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Ck147

He's not going to look like he's deliberately missing now is he...come on. He's definitely a crafty one that big fella, could see it in his eyes, guilty as hell.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Iranu

Ash147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0


There's no evidence to suggest that he was deliberately missing there. In fact, Hendry was missing easier shots than Lee. I think that it was just a poor frame of Snooker.

To be fair what evidence would you expect to see? A fistpump every time he misses?

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Ash147

Iranu wrote:
Ash147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0


There's no evidence to suggest that he was deliberately missing there. In fact, Hendry was missing easier shots than Lee. I think that it was just a poor frame of Snooker.

To be fair what evidence would you expect to see? A fistpump every time he misses?


I'm just saying that there was nothing in that frame that wouldn't occur in any other frame of Snooker.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Well that's what I mean really. I have not watched the link yet but to say he is guilty because you can see it in his eyes does not cut it when a player has lost his livelihood. To restate, I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty convincing. My point is not that he was innocent - rather that there is no 'smoking gun'.

I do understand that if you are a professional player then it is easy to mess up without it being obvious.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Pink Ball

Ash147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0


There's no evidence to suggest that he was deliberately missing there. In fact, Hendry was missing easier shots than Lee. I think that it was just a poor frame of Snooker.

There is, though. There were irregular betting patterns suggesting he might lose that frame. He played very poorly, and lost the frame, as irregular betting patterns suggested he would.

In isolation, no big deal. But that there were SIX other instances where this happened and the result went as the irregular betting patterns suggested they would... don’t be bucking daft.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Pink Ball

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Well that's what I mean really. I have not watched the link yet but to say he is guilty because you can see it in his eyes does not cut it when a player has lost his livelihood. To restate, I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty convincing. My point is not that he was innocent - rather that there is no 'smoking gun'.

I do understand that if you are a professional player then it is easy to mess up without it being obvious.

People who are up to bad carry on aren’t known to make it obvious that they’re doing so.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Ash147

Pink Ball wrote:
Ash147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0


There's no evidence to suggest that he was deliberately missing there. In fact, Hendry was missing easier shots than Lee. I think that it was just a poor frame of Snooker.

There is, though. There were irregular betting patterns suggesting he might lose that frame. He played very poorly, and lost the frame, as irregular betting patterns suggested he would.

In isolation, no big deal. But that there were SIX other instances where this happened and the result went as the irregular betting patterns suggested they would... don’t be bucking daft.


Coincidences.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Well that's what I mean really. I have not watched the link yet but to say he is guilty because you can see it in his eyes does not cut it when a player has lost his livelihood. To restate, I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty convincing. My point is not that he was innocent - rather that there is no 'smoking gun'.

I do understand that if you are a professional player then it is easy to mess up without it being obvious.

People who are up to bad carry on aren’t known to make it obvious that they’re doing so.

Of course but not always.

Remember Burnett vs Maguire

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Pink Ball

Ash147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Ash147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:An impressive copy and paste affair then.

I repeat - show me one shot - just one - that you think indicates a deliberate miss.

Surely can't be that hard to find. Then I will be satisfied.

But you won't be able to.

Not one shred

Here’s a frame full of them.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0HKesFOT0


There's no evidence to suggest that he was deliberately missing there. In fact, Hendry was missing easier shots than Lee. I think that it was just a poor frame of Snooker.

There is, though. There were irregular betting patterns suggesting he might lose that frame. He played very poorly, and lost the frame, as irregular betting patterns suggested he would.

In isolation, no big deal. But that there were SIX other instances where this happened and the result went as the irregular betting patterns suggested they would... don’t be bucking daft.


Coincidences.

Extraordinary coincidences.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby SnookerFan

Ash147 wrote:Coincidences.


It's a rather large coincidence if he keeps fluffing routine shots at a time that several supposedly unrelated people have put on bets of several thousand pounds.

Maybe if one punter put on a large bet, and the player he bet on to lose missed a difficult frame ball, I'd believe it was a coincidence.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Pink Ball

SnookerFan wrote:
Ash147 wrote:Coincidences.


It's a rather large coincidence if he keeps fluffing routine shots at a time that several supposedly unrelated people have put on bets of several thousand pounds.

Maybe if one punter put on a large bet, and the player he bet on to lose missed a difficult frame ball, I'd believe it was a coincidence.

A coincidence that happened seven times.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby SnookerFan

gallantrabbit wrote:It's very clear Lee was at it. Only not as clear as Burnett being at it. Gawd how he got away with that I don't know...


If Burnett was at it, Maguire was too.

They were either both in on it, or neither were.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Dan-cat

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Well that's what I mean really. I have not watched the link yet but to say he is guilty because you can see it in his eyes does not cut it when a player has lost his livelihood. To restate, I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty convincing. My point is not that he was innocent - rather that there is no 'smoking gun'.

I do understand that if you are a professional player then it is easy to mess up without it being obvious.


I think the large payments into his wife's bank account the day after losing were quite damning.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby SnookerFan

Dan-cat wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Well that's what I mean really. I have not watched the link yet but to say he is guilty because you can see it in his eyes does not cut it when a player has lost his livelihood. To restate, I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty convincing. My point is not that he was innocent - rather that there is no 'smoking gun'.

I do understand that if you are a professional player then it is easy to mess up without it being obvious.


I think the large payments into his wife's bank account the day after losing were quite damning.


What?

His wife was losing snooker matches for money as well? :shock:

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby SnookerFan

Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:I have never seen conclusive proof.

I would love to see it.

The match that was the centre of the case never gave me cause for concern.

Is it possible that Lee was just a marked man for some reason?

Just saying...

Yes, he was a marked man for some reason, that reason being that he was fixing lots of matches.


rofl rofl rofl

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Wildey

And then he was going to take World Snooker to court.


well that petered out in to ummmmmmm NOTHING.


if there was insufficient evidence no court in the land would have backed World Snooker and he knew that well after his solicitor told him anyway. but if the evident was there he would have lost the same case twice and his reputation really screwed.

as it is there are still a few gullible people some on here that still think hes innocent and he was banking on that to try and get his career back on track.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Johnny Bravo

Wildey wrote:And then he was going to take World Snooker to court.


well that petered out in to ummmmmmm NOTHING.


if there was insufficient evidence no court in the land would have backed World Snooker and he knew that well after his solicitor told him anyway. but if the evident was there he would have lost the same case twice and his reputation really screwed.

as it is there are still a few gullible people some on here that still think hes innocent and he was banking on that to try and get his career back on track.


So what if he conceded a few frames, I still want him back. I like the way he played.

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby Iranu

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Wildey wrote:And then he was going to take World Snooker to court.


well that petered out in to ummmmmmm NOTHING.


if there was insufficient evidence no court in the land would have backed World Snooker and he knew that well after his solicitor told him anyway. but if the evident was there he would have lost the same case twice and his reputation really screwed.

as it is there are still a few gullible people some on here that still think hes innocent and he was banking on that to try and get his career back on track.


So what if he conceded a few frames, I still want him back. I like the way he played.

<doh>

Re: Stephen Lee - 12 year ban for match fixing

Postby SnookerFan

Wildey wrote:And then he was going to take World Snooker to court.


well that petered out in to ummmmmmm NOTHING.


if there was insufficient evidence no court in the land would have backed World Snooker and he knew that well after his solicitor told him anyway. but if the evident was there he would have lost the same case twice and his reputation really screwed.

as it is there are still a few gullible people some on here that still think hes innocent and he was banking on that to try and get his career back on track.


Yeah, Stephen Lee is a bellend.


   

cron