Ssb - maguire v burnett: Wpbsa statement

[MySockPuppet]

The WPBSA has issued the following statement following the news that Strathclyde Police had detained Stephen Maguire and Jamie Burnett today:

"We are aware that Stephen Maguire and Jamie Burnett have been detained by Strathclyde Police. This is currently a Police matter and we are awaiting developments. There will be no further comment at this stage."https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29605452-3988971322283092480?l=snookerscene.blogspot.com


More... (http://snookerscene.blogspot.com/2009/08/maguire-v-burnett-wpbsa-statement.html)

[ADR147]

they have both been released without charge.

[wildJONESEYE]

they have both been released without charge.

if they are guilty.....

i never want to see either of them with a snooker cue in theire hands ever again...

they are scum

but i dont believe for 1 minute burnett is and defanatly dont think maguire is involved.

[spike]

but i dont believe for 1 minute burnett is and defanatly dont think maguire is involved.

I totally agree with you!

[wildJONESEYE]

I totally agree with you!

theres a arguament going around that lower rank players is forced in to this because lack of cash.

ok point taken however to do it on BBC TV during a UK Championship ????....

suerly the place to do it is pontins infront of a few people and no tv cameras............yes thats changed now though with 110sport tv.

[steedee]

just watched that frame again. as dodgy as it looks im certain that both players a good enough to fix a result without making it so obvious. surely earler on in the frame burnett could have split the pack whilst "missing" leaving maguire with a clearence?

seems a bit too obvious to be true, they are too good to be that foolish

[wildJONESEYE]

just watched that frame again. as dodgy as it looks im certain that both players a good enough to fix a result without making it so obvious. surely earler on in the frame burnett could have split the pack whilst "missing" leaving maguire with a clearence?

seems a bit too obvious to be true, they are too good to be that foolish

thats a great point

they couldnt have made it look more obvious if they tryed ...but i dont look at the table or shots i look at the player and unless Burnett is the most cleaver con man ever then he isnt guilty.

[dantuck_7]

Before the match had started there had been rumour that a shed-load of money had been placed on 10-3... somehow this was passed onto the players and ended up influencing the way Burnett was playing (in that he was desperate to avoid that scoreline). He was quoted afterwards as saying this was the most nervous he had ever been during his career. Anything is missable when the pressure is on... explains it in some respects, just a tad 'unfortunate' it did end up 10-3.

[Rob G]

Where abouts can I go to see the re-run of the particular frame in question??

[dantuck_7]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgQEIBUlMg4

Think there is a playlist around there somewhere as well.


Just checked these were all snookerfan92'.... who has been wiped out.

D'Oh.

[Rob G]

Just clicked the link and it says video has been removed??

[dantuck_7]

Yep unfortunately these were under snookerfan92's account. Maybe he could upload the video's somewhere else???

[Templeton Peck]

Whether they cheated or not, some of those shots were disgraceful for a professional. They should boot Burnett off the main tour and make him re-qualify. To draw an analogy, if he were driving a car he would be prosecuted for dangerous driving, banned for 12 months and forced to resit his test. I don't see why they can't have a similar procedure for players who play crap.

[RocketRoy1983]

The piece of evidence that was new to me was that several online betting accounts were newly created shortly before thew match in question and then sums of money put on 10-3 to Maguire?!

[atm147iwish]

Whether they cheated or not, some of those shots were disgraceful for a professional. They should boot Burnett off the main tour and make him re-qualify. To draw an analogy, if he were driving a car he would be prosecuted for dangerous driving, banned for 12 months and forced to resit his test. I don't see why they can't have a similar procedure for players who play crap.

behave yourself!

[wildJONESEYE]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgQEIBUlMg4

Think there is a playlist around there somewhere as well.


Just checked these were all snookerfan92'.... who has been wiped out.

D'Oh.

thats why i couldnt see it then ....if you want to see the final black its on the bbc site with some harsh words from john parrott but whoever saw his qualifier against Michael White last month would have seen him missing shed loads of easier pots than that on the way to a 5-0 rout by young white.

[wildJONESEYE]

The piece of evidence that was new to me was that several online betting accounts were newly created shortly before thew match in question and then sums of money put on 10-3 to Maguire?!

9-3 mate ............

[jb134]

Whether they cheated or not, some of those shots were disgraceful for a professional. They should boot Burnett off the main tour and make him re-qualify. To draw an analogy, if he were driving a car he would be prosecuted for dangerous driving, banned for 12 months and forced to resit his test. I don't see why they can't have a similar procedure for players who play crap.

There would be some amount of footballers back at the training academy.

We can all miss, no matter what our level from top pro right down to rabbit, we all have days when even for our relative abiltiy we cannot believe what we are missing.

The worse we play the worse it gets and pressure makes it worse.

[noel]

Scots snooker pair released without charge by police in betting probe
Aug 27 2009

TWO Scots snooker stars have been released without charge after being detained by police probing irregular betting patterns during a UK championship match last year.

Stephen Maguire, 28, and Jamie Burnett, 33, were helping Strathclyde Police with their inquiries in connection with the outcome of the UK Championship match between the pair in Telford last December.

Both of the snooker players were later released without charge.


Good news.


=o)

Noel

[snooker66]

I hope they are both innocent, but two good friends and practice partners. 9-3 heavily backed off the boards (rare to have large amounts of money on a correct score) with much of the money in the Glasgow area. And then the way it happens. It really does stink, I really hope there is nothing too it though.

I work in the betting industry myself and the whistle was blown on this some time before the match. If there is nothing going on, there was a lot of coincidences. Hopefully that is the case. What I can confirm is that the betting patterns were highly unusual. It isn't unusual to have large bets on the outcome of matches, but bets (at least highly stakes ones) are more unusual on correct frame betting. The fact there were so many of these bets on the same scoreline (so much so that many firms pulled the betting some time before the match started) is a little concerning.

Having said that I still faith that nothing went on. I hope so.

[snooker66]

Another thing that crossed my mind was this...And I guess this could be perceived as bad too as in effect it would be match-fixing but....

If neither of them had anything to do with it and they were well aware of this speculation pre-match, wouldn't it have seemed sensible for Maguire to have allowed Burnett to win frame 12? It would have been highly unlikely that Burnett would have reeled off the next five frames. This is assuming no party involved wanted the 9-3 scoreline.

They will be cleared anyway I am sure, these things are very hard to prove. If people remember the incident with Nikolay Davydenko in Poland a year or two ago in the tennis,they will know what I mean! I am not even suggesting Davydenko was guilty, but something went on. That was a incident involving much much more money than this (millions of pounds) with most of the money originating in Moscow, Russia potentially with some sort of Mafia involvement.

[GOMH71]

Another thing that crossed my mind was this...And I guess this could be perceived as bad too as in effect it would be match-fixing but....

If neither of them had anything to do with it and they were well aware of this speculation pre-match, wouldn't it have seemed sensible for Maguire to have allowed Burnett to win frame 12? It would have been highly unlikely that Burnett would have reeled off the next five frames. This is assuming no party involved wanted the 9-3 scoreline.

They will be cleared anyway I am sure, these things are very hard to prove. If people remember the incident with Nikolay Davydenko in Poland a year or two ago in the tennis,they will know what I mean! I am not even suggesting Davydenko was guilty, but something went on. That was a incident involving much much more money than this (millions of pounds) with most of the money originating in Moscow, Russia potentially with some sort of Mafia involvement.

You say you work in the betting industry ? What do you do exactly ?

I ask because you exhibit an incredible amount of naivety ...

[snooker66]

In what way am I displaying naiviety? I am merely the bizarre amount of "coincidences" on the match in question. I am not for one moment saying I am convinced it is dodgy, but I certainly think it requires careful investigation.

The bookmaking fraternity will typically suspend a market if they feel they are taking an unusually amount of money on a one particular outcome which puts them at risk. While admitedly some will run scared from one large bet or series of smaller ones (which may well be innocent), it was reported widely amongst a whole bunch of different firms that unusaully large stakes were being placed on the match in question and in particular on a correct scoreline of 9-3.

It might not be unusual for a gamble to develop on just who was to win a match. Maybe for a reason emerging of an ill player, or someone has lost their cue or had it broken. This has happened many times before. Admittledly Maguire would have been very short for his encounter against Burnett around (1/10), but even so the sheer interest on the correct score market (bear in mind most firms pulled this market well before the match start time) sounds very dodgy to me indeed. It is pretty unusual for such a high volume of stakes to be on particular correct score in the frame betting.

The fact that the bulk of the money was placed from accounts in the Glasgow area on a match between two friends and practice partners is also pretty suspicious.

As for the job I work for SIS who serve the betting shops with their pictures and text information. We will sometimes get messages from bookmakers to warn shops via the text system not to take bets or limit stakes on a particular wager. I does not happen much but the Maguire v Burnett was one of these. The same happened with a football match between Bury v Accrington, and a Blue Square Premier game on the last day of last year (Forest Green if I remember rightly). It doesn't mean they are "bent matches" but there is widespread industry concern that "something is going on".

People can argue as long as they like that 9-3 was a likely scoreline (yes it was), but I would suggest it is others who are naive if you are prepared to just write it off as a coincidence and not at least investigate it. Of course I don't know the figures involved but the bookmakers must have been reasonably concerned to suspend the market on the correct score (much like they did on the White v Francisco match a few years ago) and we know what happened there.

I don't think anyone can look at this honestly and not think it at least deserves a in-depth investigation. If you believe otherwise I'd be intrigued to know why.

Jon.

[poolqjunkie]

Was there also considerable amount of bet on 9-4 and 9-2 or 9-5, or was almost all the bets only placed on 9-3?

[Monique]

Was there also considerable amount of bet on 9-4 and 9-2 or 9-5, or was almost all the bets only placed on 9-3?

Only on 9-3. New accounts, big amounts and focussed on just one score. That's what set the alarms ringing and why the bettings were "frozen" and the authorities in charge of monitoring the betting market did contact WPBSA days before the match.
For me the strongest point in favour of the players innocence is that they knew what was going on (all players knew), they knew the bettings were frozen, they knew the match would be recorded and analysed. Why carry on with it then? Burnett always claimed his "strange" behaviour and dodgy shot selection was caused by his extreme nervosity. Well put yourself in his shoes and you will see that's not at all impossible.

I don't know on what ground WPBSA decided to push the matters to the police for this match and not for the Liang-Ebdon match and now that case is close I accept they must have had good reasons for that. But if you look at the circumstances only you wonder. Here also there was massive betting on just one score lines and new accounts opened. Here also WPBSA was alerted before the match although the notice was shorter. The "suspect" score being a whitewash was easier to achieve by the loser alone, the match was a qualifier and happened in front of about nobody except the ref, it was not recorded for analysis neither ... so from the potential "cheater" perspective the risks were a lot lower.

Of course the match analysis is just one element of such enquiries and probably not even the more important one. Connections to where the betted money comes from and possible gains go to are far more significative. And such connections are usually very hard to find and prove when the whole set-up is done by specialists in financial crime and "money laundry". That's why I find some reactions regarding the time taken for the inquiry extremely naïve.

[matoski]

I would put some money on 9-3 for Maguire. It,s not a surprising result having in mind the form of the two players.
The betting companies are sometimes very paranoic i must say. As an example, two seasons ago some guy puts a lot of money on Zulte Waregem match. The odds were 1.6 to 1 for Zulte Waregem to win the match. The rumour has been spread among all betting companies in Skopje that the match was fixed, and the match was banned from further betting. Eventualy, the match ended 1-1.:eek: All that paranoya for nothing.

[snooker66]

Was there also considerable amount of bet on 9-4 and 9-2 or 9-5, or was almost all the bets only placed on 9-3?

Only 9-3. Tons of money, a lot from newly formed accounts with IP addresses in the Glasgow area on a specific score between two friends and practice partners. It then finishes 9-3 in strange looking circumstances.

[snooker66]

I would put some money on 9-3 for Maguire. It,s not a surprising result having in mind the form of the two players.
The betting companies are sometimes very paranoic i must say. As an example, two seasons ago some guy puts a lot of money on Zulte Waregem match. The odds were 1.6 to 1 for Zulte Waregem to win the match. The rumour has been spread among all betting companies in Skopje that the match was fixed, and the match was banned from further betting. Eventualy, the match ended 1-1.:eek: All that paranoya for nothing.

You are correct, very often these "dodgy" gambles turn out to be anything but. However they are far more easily explained when it a bet on an outright market such as your example. And these are more easily explained in individual sports, confidence could grow that a player is ill, has had his cue broken, has split up with his wife or whatever and a gamble develop on his opponent.

What is most unusual about this is that it targeted one specific score. If there was just general confidence why not back Maguire on the match handicap (-3.5 frames or so) or cover some other close scorelines. It all stinks to me :-(

[wildJONESEYE]

but if they knew about it before the match players included...and it finished 9-3..

would it be ok if maguire threw 1 frame away to stop all this talk ?

or they played it legit and it just happened to finish 9-3..

[snooker66]

but if they knew about it before the match players included...and it finished 9-3..

would it be ok if maguire threw 1 frame away to stop all this talk ?

or they played it legit and it just happened to finish 9-3..

I take your point it would not be good for Maguire to throw a frame away either. And that will be their argument I suppose. If they hadn't done anything it would have been the way to clear both their names though, assuming that is what they wanted to happen. Remember by this stage all the bets were on.

[Templeton Peck]

The circumstancial evidence is overwhelming - heavy betting from new accounts localised in one area. The fact that some of the shots look well dodgy, well Francisco was banned on less compelling evidence if you ask me. You're not going to get 100% proof in a case like this, but on the balance of evidence available it was fixed in my view. I'm not for ending someone's career unless it can be proven in a criminal court, but I think both players should be dropped at least 16 places in the rankings and given an extra round to qualify through because on balance it was a fixed result.

[snooker66]

The circumstancial evidence is overwhelming - heavy betting from new accounts localised in one area. The fact that some of the shots look well dodgy, well Francisco was banned on less compelling evidence if you ask me. You're not going to get 100% proof in a case like this, but on the balance of evidence available it was fixed in my view. I'm not for ending someone's career unless it can be proven in a criminal court, but I think both players should be dropped at least 16 places in the rankings and given an extra round to qualify through because on balance it was a fixed result.

Thank you! At last someone else seeing it as it is. Yeh you can't prove it 100% but the evidence is pretty overwhelming if you ask me...

[Monique]

Thank you! At last someone else seeing it as it is. Yeh you can't prove it 100%but the evidence is pretty overwhelming if you ask me...but there again according to another forum member earlier in this thread I am just naive.

The "naïve" remark was targeted at people who wonder why police inquiries take time. There is a huge difference between being strongly convinced of something and proving it in law. Common sense isn't enough and hard evidence holding in front of a court is much harder to establish!

Moreover, why again carry on with it when it was all exposed already?

[snooker66]

The "naïve" remark was targeted at people who wonder why police inquiries take time. There is a huge difference between being strongly convinced of something and proving it in law. Common sense isn't enough and hard evidence holding in front of a court is much harder to establish!

Moreover, why again carry on with it when it was all exposed already?

No Monique! It was not aimed at you! Another user GOMH71 said I was personally naive earlier in the thread!! I quite agree with you police investigations should take time and be correct in their conclusions.:D

[snooker66]

whatever happened to quintan hann?

Banned for fixing! Playing Pool I believe. I think his ban was 8 years or something. Maybe we will see him qualifying on the PIOS one day...or maybe not.... :-)

[spike]

Maybe we will see him qualifying on the PIOS one day...or maybe not.... :-)

I doubt it very much..

[Templeton Peck]

There was a lot of money at stake. Gangsters wouldn't have been thrilled if they had changed the result to cover their backs. If the result had been 9-4 then the bookies probably would have paid up on that score and collected on 9-3. By sticking to the plan the stakes on 9-3 will presumably be returned once the investigation is over, since some of those would have been legitimate bets.

[wildJONESEYE]

look there is no excuse for any enquiery to take this long...

years ago maybe but for christ sake things have moved on and on this the investigation has been dragged out from all common sense...

what evidence they got now they havent got in january february ill answer it sod bloody all.....its been tied up in bureaucracy and Red Tape crap..thats suffocating and hindering the legal system in britain and proberbly the world...

you know what a policeman cant take a pair of binoculars with him on the street without asking permision of the chief constable that would proberbly take a few hours and forms to fill so they cant be bothered...

[snooker66]

There was a lot of money at stake. Gangsters wouldn't have been thrilled if they had changed the result to cover their backs. If the result had been 9-4 then the bookies probably would have paid up on that score and collected on 9-3. By sticking to the plan the stakes on 9-3 will presumably be returned once the investigation is over, since some of those would have been legitimate bets.

I quite agree with your post mate. I would just saying had they both been innocent they could have made it 9-4 and pretended that was legit. I think they made it 9-3 because they were both in on it. Don't like to say it but there's a large amount of evidence all be it circumstantial.

[wildJONESEYE]

I quite agree with your post mate. I would just saying had they both been innocent they could have made it 9-4 and pretended that was legit. I think they made it 9-3 because they were both in on it. Don't like to say it but there's a large amount of evidence all be it circumstantial.

if they both was inocent a scoreline would finish how it finishes like Hendry losing 9-0 in 1998 you cant start to say if they inocent it would finish 9-4 if maguire was 9-3 or 9-2 better than burnett.

[snooker66]

if they both was inocent a scoreline would finish how it finishes like Hendry losing 9-0 in 1998 you cant start to say if they inocent it would finish 9-4 if maguire was 9-3 or 9-2 better than burnett.

Maybe but even so given the damage it could potentially have done to the career, it might have been the logical thing to do *if* they are innocent. You could make the argument that then they would also be fixing a match when innocent. I have to say I do not believe they are innocent anyway.

[jb134]

I have to say I do not believe they are innocent anyway.

What do you base that opinion on?

[Looki]

Do you think they're both guilty? And if so what speaks for them both to be guilty and not Burnett alone?

[Templeton Peck]

I'm no Einstein, but it takes two players to guarantee a 9-3 scoreline. If only Burnett was in on it then you would have seen a pattern of covering bets on 9-2, 9-1, and 9-0.

[Migtsf]

I’ve just found out what happened.

Apparently someone overheard a conversation in a bar in Glasgow. Two men were talking about the match between the two players and one of them said at some point he strongly believed Maguire was going to win 9-3.

A 3rd man, someone who already had a bit too much of alcohol, overheard this conversation and he thought the other man meant 9-3 was a sure thing. Well, that 3rd man happened to be a postman, and one who likes to talk a little too much too. So, instead of keeping this valuable piece of information to himself, he spread it the next day when he was delivering the mail.

You all know what happened next.

[wildJONESEYE]

I’ve just found out what happened.

Apparently someone overheard a conversation in a bar in Glasgow. Two men were talking about the match between the two players and one of them said at some point he strongly believed Maguire was going to win 9-3.

A 3rd man, someone who already had a bit too much of alcohol, overheard this conversation and he thought the other man meant 9-3 was a sure thing. Well, that 3rd man happened to be a postman, and one who likes to talk a little too much too. So, instead of keeping this valuable piece of information to himself, he spread it the next day when he was delivering the mail.

You all know what happened next.

so the long winded police investigation in to a potential match fixing probe was hanging by word of mouth of a drunken busy body postman ?....after a exchange of words in a glasgow bar ???

is that a legitamate post Migtsf or a wind up ?

[snooker66]

If Maguire and Burnett are pinning their hopes on this postman theory they are in trouble :-(

[Migtsf]

so the long winded police investigation in to a potential match fixing probe was hanging by word of mouth of a drunken busy body postman ?....after a exchange of words in a glasgow bar ???

is that a legitamate post Migtsf or a wind up ?

None, actually. :D

Obviously I made that up, but my point was, betting patterns or other circunstancial evidences don't always tell the story.

One can have water on the floor, but that doesn't mean it rained inside the house.

For the record, I have no idea if they are innocent or guilty.

[wildJONESEYE]

If Maguire and Burnett are pinning their hopes on this postman theory they are in trouble :-(

think of it like this it could tie in very nicely to theire next job doing poridge sawing up mail bags :D

[wildJONESEYE]

One can have water on the floor, but that doesn't mean it rained inside the house.

but it could meen someone pi$$ed all over the floor :D

[Templeton Peck]

The variance in betting patterns can be precisely measured statistically, and the likelihood of such 'deviant' results occuring naturally can then be calculated exactly. It's almost like a fingerprint. The likelihood of the betting pattern occurring naturally can become so unlikely that it becomes a virtual certainty that match-fixing has occurred i.e. this pattern has less chance of occurring naturally than life on Earth being wiped out by a meteor over the next year. The problem for the police is that they probably don't have a witness which they will need for a criminal prosecution so that is why it is being "dragged out", but the reason they are still pursuing it is because the maths says they did it.

[noel]

but it could meen someone pi$$ed all over the floor :D

Approaching the front door you notice the screen is partially ripped open.
Entering cautiously you see nothing unusual in the hallway or on the stairs.
You walk into the lounge and [GASP] there you find Stephen laying on top of Jamie,
wet and naked and dead on the floor. Broken glass everywhere.

WTF happened!?!?



=o\

Noel

[wildJONESEYE]

The variance in betting patterns can be precisely measured statistically, and the likelihood of such 'deviant' results occuring naturally can then be calculated exactly. It's almost like a fingerprint. The likelihood of the betting pattern occurring naturally can become so unlikely that it becomes a virtual certainty that match-fixing has occurred i.e. this pattern has less chance of occurring naturally than life on Earth being wiped out by a meteor over the next year. The problem for the police is that they probably don't have a witness which they will need for a criminal prosecution so that is why it is being "dragged out", but the reason they are still pursuing it is because the maths says they did it.

if theres not evidence or witneses file it and move on dont waste time while people getting stabed on out streets.

[Migtsf]

What I find funny about all this is when we were talking about Ebdon, many members of this forum came in his defence, even if there were larger amounts of money involved in the suspicious betting patterns.

Right now, I don’t see many people defending Maguire, and even fewer defending Burnett. They must have that guilty look…

[wildJONESEYE]

What I find funny about all this is when we were talking about Ebdon, many members of this forum came in his defence, even if there were larger amounts of money involved in the suspicious betting patterns.

Right now, I don’t see many people defending Maguire, and even fewer defending Burnett. They must have that guilty look…

persanally i dont think they are guilty and never has but if they proven guilty then i hope i never see theire ugly mugs ever again.

[snooker66]

I hope they are not guilty too (in fact I have always liked the par of them). But my head says it looks very very bad :(

[jb134]

Am not fully au fait with the Ebdon match, was betting suspended on it?

[Monique]

Am not fully au fait with the Ebdon match, was betting suspended on it?


it was at least in some offices ...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/sep/20/snooker

[noel]

Here's a hint... they drowned.

Any theories or guesses what happened????


=o)

Noel



Approaching the front door you notice the screen is partially ripped open.
Entering cautiously you see nothing unusual in the hallway or on the stairs.
You walk into the lounge and [GASP] there you find Stephen laying on top of Jamie,
wet and naked and dead on the floor. Broken glass everywhere.

WTF happened!?!?



=o\

Noel