Shailesh
Jogia, the world no.57, has been banned by the WPBSA from playing professional
snooker until the start of the 2014/15 season following a disciplinary hearing
into suspicious betting patterns on his match against Matt Selt at last season’s
Shootout event in Blackpool.
A
number of bets were placed on Jogia to lose, a fact he attributed to injuring
his knee in an accident. He subsequently withdrew from the tournament. The investigation
found four bets had in fact been placed before he sustained this injury and seven
more before he sought medical treatment.
Phone
records revealed he sent 33 text message to one person placing bets on him to
lose and 42 to another.
The
WPBSA disciplinary committee, headed by Nigel Mawer, said Jogia “has failed to
provide a consistent or detailed explanation as to the reason for the contact.”
£4,830
was placed on Jogia to lose in 14 bets in the Leicester area, where he lives,
with £2,300 in four bets and another undisclosed amount declined.
The
Shootout is something of a lottery given its format, with all matches lasting
only ten minutes and a shot-clock.
Jogia,
36, was nicknamed Joe by Willie Thorne’s mother. He has reached the last 32 of
four world ranking events, including last season’s UK Championship.
He
was originally suspended in May pending the investigation and made some ill conceived
allegations about the WPBSA being racist in pursuing him.
This
ban is potentially career-ending as he will be relegated from the circuit and
have to re-qualify in 2014.
The
full WPBSA statement is here.
31 comments:
So basically the white guy who is caught on video gets banned for six months (most of which is taken up by his summer holiday) and the Asian guy who is caught sending text messages gets banned for two years? What a joke.
You have to be spectacularly stupid to do this in a tournament no sane person would bet on
I believe 33 + 42 = 75 text messages are neither Asian nor "white".
I love the wording in "spectacularly stupid".
What an idiot - deserves his ban. Good riddance.
Not racist, but unfair when compared to the Higgins situation. Q. Hann was punished quite heavily as well, so why was Higgins let off? Because he was the world champion and more established?
Higgins wasn't "let off", he was banned for 6 months for the much lesser offence of failing to notify the authorities of an illegal approach, there was no suggestion he ever threw a game or did anything on the table to bring the game into disrepute.
He was also set up, by the NOTW (good riddance to the "fake Sheik") and his own manager, who received a far bigger punishment for his part in the proceedings.
I think a few of us are a bit tired of the party line. Higgins was filmed negotiating a bung and saying how he'd throw games, and was banned for only 6 months for not reporting the 'approach'. Jogia gets banned 2 years for sending text messages to two people who put bets on him, the contents of which are unknown. Neither the Higgins or Jogia match went ahead, but the nature of both crimes don't differ in severity to the tune of 18 months.
If Jogia had been filmed in Higgins' situation it would have been a 2 year ban, and if Higgins had been caught up in Jogia's predicament it would have been 6 months. We all know it's true.
Jogia's sentence is actually spot on. There is enough evidence and unanswered questions to compromise the WSA, but not to the extent that there is proof he actually cheated. A two year ban seems about fair in those circumstances, as it would have been in the Higgins case. They both compromised the sport to the same extent, Higgins possibly more, but Higgins got a slap on the wrist and Jogia got his career ended more or less. Either ban them both for 6 months or 2 years, but at least apply justice fairly and consistently.
That said I don't think there is a racism element either because if it had been Ding caught up in this I think he would have copped a 6 month summer special too.
The Higgins case is a red herring. The Jamie Burnett case is more relevant to Jogia's predicament.
I think the Burnett case is much more serious actually, since the match went ahead, people bet on it, and it produced the suspect score and a bunch of dubious shots. The evidence was sufficient for the CPS to consider a prosecution but the WSA never even held an inquiry. Staggering...
The bookies won't be satisfied 'til they've ruined the careers of half the circuit.
£8k worth of bets? If that is all it takes to send them squealing, then it shows what a shabby, fragile organisation a bookmaker is.
As I've said often......if they're greedy enough to chalk up prices for a single frame novelty event, then they deserve to be cleaned out....although hopefully next time by a pro cleverer than Joe Jogia.
I detest how the snooker circuit is being supported almost exclusively by this scumbag industry....they are so greedy, and their profit margins so excessively tightened, that they contribute very little to the sport.
The gambling industry brings misery to many families every day. If tobacco sponsorship can be wiped out because its product is linked to poor health and death, then why are bookies allowed to bring their dirty money to the table, time after time?
Glad about the Betfred news. Our great sport needs to be rid of this poison.
Does anyone know if the subsequent bets on the Maguire / Burnett fiasco were actually honoured ? Seeing the case was dropped, I'm assuming they were ? Staggering that it was dropped ...
joe should have known if guilty he would be banned especially after higgins scandal.though i feel higgins should have received the same punishment.but there you go..i still believe with all my heart steve davis genuinly beat him in the second round of the championships in 2010...the thing im wondering why would joe do this??i met him at ptc finals in dublin 2 years ago and he seemed a very jumpy character and was looking at the bets etc..
Jim
the Betting industry was seeing as a Good way of making money for Jogia so you cant condemn a Industry and support a player that was prepared to use them for his own Gain.
i do agree though the way they open Books on everything these Days are asking for trouble but it don't justify Jogia taking snooker once again to the gutter.
the Jogia case was the first to be brought up before a tribunal under the new regime, so rules are now different and will be dealt with harder because following the higgins case Barry Hearn and WPBSA Made of point of Telling players what WILL Happen next Time so apart from anything else Jogia should get another years Ban just for being STUPID.
World snooker seem increasingly more like the CIA or the Israeli secret service. All too often they are bragging on their official site how they have punished this players for doing this and another player for saying that.
No wonder Ronnie walked away from these petty ruthless control freaks that are now running snooker
The bets were honoured in the Burnett-Maguire match.
Pity really. I liked watching Jogia as a player. Hope he gets back after his ban although can't see it.
The Burnett black attempt said it all...in black and white!
Absence of consistency - it is an utter disgrace that John Higgins was allowed to play in the Worlds.
The mind boggles that people take a different view but there you go.
the mind boggles that some retarded people make both cases out to be similar!
jog on, jogia
People moaning about the "double standards" re: Higgins...
Can anyone point out to me which match John Higgins was to play in, which bookie took the money, and how much money???
If your answers are no, no and no, how can you compare the two??
8.57
after the higgins scandal everything was pointed out to players in black and white and this idiot still did it.
his stupidity is staggering.
Can anyone point out to me which match John Higgins was to play in, which bookie took the money, and how much money???
Can someone please give us the link to the video footage of Joe negotiating his bung and saying how he'd miss his shots?
to those "snooker fans" mentioning higgins....
im sorry youre bored now that ronnie isnt playing.
2:01
Exactly - the cases are completely different.
One case has evidence supplied by a bookie, and phone records.
The other has nothing to do with a bookie, just a journalist doing a bit of acting with a video recorder. If the journalist had followed it through, and money had changed hands, then yes it becomes more serious - but the journalist wanted a "story" - and published it - and didn't go through the proper channels ie the snooker authorities or even the police. So if you want more punishment for Higgins, blame the journalist, not the snooker authorities.
Both have been found guilty (in my opinion rightly so), but in terms of punishment - I don't think the two are comparable
higgins wasnt found guilty
he was fined and banned for failing to REPORT an approach
Higgins was actually found guilty by Sports Resolutions on the all charges he was tried on.
but those charges he was tried on werent match fixing ones, which is what is being implied.
higgins was not tried and found guilty of match fixing etc..
Snooker should just be played for fun, maybe for some money at times.. Is it the pressure or habit which causes players to lose focus and fix matches ..? Maybe they are just greedy..
PS: you can check out my blog on snooker at
http://www.cue-ball-control.blogspot.in
Post a Comment