More detail has been released.
It looks like the bets weren’t on who’d win the Brownlow, which would have still been a gamble even with a bit of inside info. The bets placed were not gambles at all as the votes in particular games were known to a certainty. It also doesn’t seem that Cripps was the only player whose votes were at issue. From the punters perspective, it wasn’t important who received votes, save that perhaps the bookies were only offering bets on the Brownlow favourites rather than every player in the league. But perhaps that’s not an important rider as it may have been possible to bet against a favourite receiving a vote in a certain game.
Fair dinkum, Bookies really create a problem for sporting integrity by offering “exotic” or spot betting options. That was at the heart of cricket betting scandals as players were paid to bowl a wide on specific balls in the game so punters or bookies could clean up on bets concerning the outcome for those deliveries. Why the hell are they offering bets on the votes on particular games? That creates a massive opportunity for leaks to translate into certain wins.
Quote: Chief football reporter at the Herald Sun, Mark Robinson, wrote one betting agency was alerted to “a punter or punters placing bets on players’ votes in different matches and winning every time.”
“By the end of the count, a red flag was beside his name.”
The league, Robinson wrote, then cross-checked the betting patterns with other betting partners and found the same individual/s placing similar bets.
Subsequent cross-checking on the games themselves then reportedly showed Pell as the one constant.
It looks like the bets weren’t on who’d win the Brownlow, which would have still been a gamble even with a bit of inside info. The bets placed were not gambles at all as the votes in particular games were known to a certainty. It also doesn’t seem that Cripps was the only player whose votes were at issue. From the punters perspective, it wasn’t important who received votes, save that perhaps the bookies were only offering bets on the Brownlow favourites rather than every player in the league. But perhaps that’s not an important rider as it may have been possible to bet against a favourite receiving a vote in a certain game.
Fair dinkum, Bookies really create a problem for sporting integrity by offering “exotic” or spot betting options. That was at the heart of cricket betting scandals as players were paid to bowl a wide on specific balls in the game so punters or bookies could clean up on bets concerning the outcome for those deliveries. Why the hell are they offering bets on the votes on particular games? That creates a massive opportunity for leaks to translate into certain wins.