The criminal investigation into the Stephen Maguire-Jamie Burnett match at the 2008 UK Championship, which attracted an unusually high volume of bets on the correct scoreline, has been dropped.
The Scottish Crown Counsel say there is insufficient evidence to justify a criminal prosecution.
However, the WPBSA has announced its disciplinary committee will review the case.
"We are treating this case very seriously. We will now be given access to the evidence connected with the case, and our disciplinary committee will review that evidence thoroughly," said Jason Ferguson, WPBSA chairman.
A significant number of bets were placed on Maguire to win the first round match at Telford 9-3.
Burnett had a chance to win the 12th frame but grossly over-cut the final black.
Shot analysis would have formed only a small part of the police investigation, although they did interview TV commentators for their views of the match and shots played.
The bulk of the police case would have been in linking either player to the bets placed, which they have clearly been unable to do to the satisfaction of the prosecuting authorities.
A WPBSA investigation would focus more on the shots played, although an analysis of any match would throw up some odd shot selections because that is the nature of the game, particularly when a player is under pressure.
However, it is right that this case is properly investigated by the governing body, although it goes against the WPBSA's earlier statement that its new disciplinary process would only investigate matches played since it was set up.
33 comments:
"However, it is right that this case is properly investigated by the governing body, although it goes against the WPBSA's earlier statement that its new disciplinary process would only investigate matches played since it was set up."
___________________________________
i guess this is such a high profile case they cant just forget it.
over the years ive seen strange shots played there was a few during the WC. as you say pressure does make you play strange shots.
If the SCC have dropped their case then what are wpbsa gonna do ? If higgins got away with what he did given the evidence against him,then what for these pair ??? Just forget about it !!!!!!!
Noticed an interesting observation in the Guardian making the distinction between police and disciplinary investigations:
'Whereas the standard of proof for a criminal prosecution is “beyond reasonable doubt”, that for disciplinary proceedings is “the balance of probabilities.” If disciplinary charges are preferred, shot analysis evidence could be considered by people with long involvements in the game'
I wonder if this will reach the same conclusion?
I would have thought the CPS investigation finding no evidence of guilt would have been an end to it, but I guess the integrity unit wants to show it means business and Burnett has drawn the short straw...
I would be slightly surprised if one of Tian, Li or Zhang did not make it through this cue school.
Right then. On to the next unsolved case from the previous decade. Three years to look at the betting patterns and look at wether or not it was linked to the players? That is ridiculous and honestly, quite unfair to the players as well. I hope Jason Ferguson will speed through this case and end this marathon investigation. A thousand days of investigation....think about it.
The Fiscal has to decide if there is sufficient evidence to justify putting a criminal prosecution to the court. He has concluded there isn't, but that's quite a different judgement to the one which a disciplinary panel will need to make - which can be roughly paraphrased as, "did the player give 100%?".
I hope they get the great WT to give his opinion.On the betting patterns that is.Frame winning chance !!!! xxxxx
The Procurator Fiscal said it wasn't in the public interest. Not quite the same as there not being enough evidence. They will argue that public funds are better spent prosecuting other cases. This happens more and more these days. You have to justify not only that the person(s) are guilty but also why funds should be used to prosecute.
Assuming the WPBSA treat all players equally they must also investigate the Ebdon v Wenbo match during their retrospective investigations.
Apparently Ebdon's shot selections defied all logic of conventional wisdom.
The referee at the time was Alan Chamberlain, who still works for the WPBSA. His opinion should be enlightening as he was seething at the time.
It's most unfortunate that the tape of this match has been lost! However I'm sure someone could help them out with a copy.
So WPBSA can you walk the walk? Because empty rhetoric doesn't do anyone any favours.
I would be tempted to let this one go myself.
I think players now know that match fixing will not be tolerated, and there is no real incentive to pull a stroke that could end a career for no more than a few thousand.
Perhaps a journeyman pro in the final throes of his career might find an opportunity for one last payday, but anyone playing regularly on television would have too much to lose.
In the case of the Glasgow two, the police would have been able to identify the holders of the gambling accounts that benefitted from that match, and were obviously unable to connect the beneficiaries with either Maguire or Burnett, otherwise the case would not have been dropped.
The desire for natural justice could justify the WSA investigation, but the expense, negative publicity, and bad feeling that would accrue for an inconclusive result might outweigh any benefits.
There is also the possibility that the player(s) involved might have grounds to sue for loss of earnings/reputation etc.
I'm not advocating sweeping such cases under the carpet, but there is a get out in that the alleged indiscretion occurred under the previous WSA management, and I would imagine anybody who was connected with anything dodgy then, would probably wipe their brow with relief and say "never again".
Can we keep comments off that do not relate to the topic.
Please tell me what a person's thoughts on who will win Q School has got to do with the Maguire & Burnett case
perhaps now the video will reappear on youtube
betsy, what do you mean burnett has drawn the short straw?
(i thought there were two players...)
Apparently Ebdon's shot selections defied all logic of conventional wisdom.
So no change there then....
Back on this topic, it would be nice if the clips where made available again on youtube for all to see. Particularly the bizarre walk around the table that one of the players did to touch a ball with his hand. I'd also appreciate another look at how that pink went in.
There is flawed logic in some of what Kildare Cueman says. Because as we all know greed knows no bounds and at the end of the day there are only 2 measures of money - not enough and none at all.
did you bet the correct result SB?
Maybe I'm just being cynical, anon. But my point is that the CPS decision was a perfectly valid reason to lay this case to rest, so why would the WSA want to dig it up again three years later? I think the Integrity Unit faces the problem that it doesn't have any real credentials until it has hung someone out to dry. A journeyman who played some dodgy shots and was at the centre of a criminal investigation is an ideal candidate for the Integrity Unit to show it means buisness. Maguire won't get banned because he didn't miss the balls, so the only thing they could possibly connect him to is taking a bribe, which the CPS has cleared him of. Burnett on the otherhand has to explain some strange shots, and if I were Burnett I would be very, very, worried, now that the WSA has decided to pursue this.
I would also be very very worried if i were a bloke called Betty....
Does this mean that the bookmakers who have with-held winning punter's money not just on a 9-3 scoreline but also on Maguire just to win the match - will now legally have to pay up?
maguire missed balls in that match too, betsy
@8.53 Lol. No I didn't, but I did notice the lack of correct score odds the day before the match and flagged it on the net. Apparently before anyone else. This resulted in a visit from the police.
Snookerbacker, you can expect a visit from 4 burly glaswegians in Celtic strips shortly.
I do make some effort to stay on topic but wanted to express my thoughts on the blog. Don't see why people get so touchy about it. I am still talking snooker.
To be honest bored about hearing stuff on this investigation.
12:01 "To be honest bored about hearing stuff on this investigation"
Wrong article, of all articles to comment on then. Jeez.....
I'd still love to see the timeline of the investigation. What did they spend YEARS doing? And when did Ebbo play this strange match of his; and has he commented on it?
If there ever comes a case like this I hope the WPBSA draws its own conclusions independently of the police without waiting.
What did the scottish police say when riding a turtle? Wheeeeeeee!!
If you want to talk snooker go to a forum like TSF this is a blog.
Ebdon has denied any part in match fixing and the gambling commission found insufficient evidence to proceed with an investigation. His case would be more complicated for the WPBSA to investigate now as there is no tape of the match.
As for Burnett/Maguire, Strathclyde Police passed on their evidence to the Procurator Fiscal's office and it was they who decided not to proceed.
Jamie you are a joke. Your bored with it? So why comment twice on this page?
There are plenty of times when people have talked about something not related to the original topic.
I don't go on forums because it is full of people insulting each other and the players in a petty way.
There are sadly some who do that here, but, at least you have some fair-minded people like Dave, Janie and others who are providing good comment.
I know Dave doesn't totally like people going off topic, but in wasn't anything too drastic, and to be honest couldn't be asked to locate the right post for my comment.
Have a day off will you....it's clear that something funny was going on and there's absolutely no reasonable explanation for irregular betting patterns on 9-3 as a scoreline and that was the score. I'm not saying both players are involved but I'm saying something isn't right even if it can't be proved, and that's not a derogotary comment - it's just it's highly unlikely to be a coincidence - don't you agree?
9.36
it is highly unlikely
in fact its probably less likely than highly unlikely
however (and im guessing you feel the way i do about it), 9-3 is probably an average score line that maguire would beat someone of Jamies ranking, so we can all gues what we want.
no smoke without fire? maybe.
as is, theyve both done nothing wrong and so theyre innocent in my mind. whether future examination proves that different will have to be waited to be seen
Alan Chamberlain has reviewed 52 HOURS of Stephen Lee's *supposed* dodgy frames / matches and not found ONE SINGLE SHOT to be dodgy.
So expect that to be dropped anytime soon too ...
whered u get that info?
Post a Comment