SA Footy

i dont have any info on it, and not even sure if it has anything to do with Bock making bets. But it's got to do with a betting plunge on him in round 24 against Hawthorn, in which he started up forward, a rarity for him.

storey is brewing.....

Press conference at 6pm (SA time)

just off the top of my head, he did kick the first goal in that game, didn't he?

GC are going well with their uncontracted players taken from the SA clubs.

the big bang wrote:just off the top of my head, he did kick the first goal in that game, didn't he?

yep it was a bomb from about 55-60m

but in reality the media saying that it was a massive betting plunge from $101 into $21 is an over reaction. It wouldnt take a big bet to make that price shorten. Bookies dont take much risk on these novelty bets.

Bock fined $10k and suspended from first 2 rounds next season

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 6222227281

Quite amazing to think, after all of the education process with the Shaw case, that is has happened again.

The quoted payouts suggest two bets of $200 and $400.

CK wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/bock-banned-for-leaking-information-that-led-to-successful-40000-bet/story-e6frf9jf-1226222227281

Quite amazing to think, after all of the education process with the Shaw case, that is has happened again.

The quoted payouts suggest two bets of $200 and $400.

Yes but all up there are reports of $40,000 being wagered on it.
Stupid man. After all the drama around Shaw and Maxwell i reckon he should have got 10 weeks for stupidity

He is as dopey as his Mum's dealings.

Comes from a smart family as well

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Bock fined $10k and suspended from first 2 rounds next season

Shaw got 8 weeks- where's the consistency?

Punk Rooster wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Bock fined $10k and suspended from first 2 rounds next season

Shaw got 8 weeks- where's the consistency?

Agree. Probably should've got half the season (and yes I would still say that if he was still at the crows)

The Herald Sun report reads in part:

..The former Adelaide Crows star, who made admissions to club officials 15 minutes after the Hawthorn match, admitted to feeling concerned as soon as the goal was kicked.....
"I know how seriously the AFL takes inside information ... it was just a careless conversation with a mate and a family member. I'm deeply remorseful."...

"An investigation found Bock broke the rules recklessly, but, importantly, he did not intend the information to be used for betting," Anderson said....

So if Bock did not intend for the information to be used for betting why did he feel "concerned" as soon as he'd kicked the goal?

westozfalcon wrote:The Herald Sun report reads in part:

..The former Adelaide Crows star, who made admissions to club officials 15 minutes after the Hawthorn match, admitted to feeling concerned as soon as the goal was kicked.....
"I know how seriously the AFL takes inside information ... it was just a careless conversation with a mate and a family member. I'm deeply remorseful."...

"An investigation found Bock broke the rules recklessly, but, importantly, he did not intend the information to be used for betting," Anderson said....

So if Bock did not intend for the information to be used for betting why did he feel "concerned" as soon as he'd kicked the goal?

Herein lies the intrinsic problem with the whole issue, and its not just for Bock, but any player that leaks information, intentionally or without thought. What if he, or any player, had the same concern as they were about to take the shot - how long before a player deliberately shanks the kick, to avoid a potential problem?

This problem will only keep happening and the big worry is, that even with all of this education process, players still do it. How long will it be before a player admits deliberately missing a shot, either to avoid this particular problem, or to keep a score at a certain level for betting purposes (eg. line betting).

bloods08 wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Bock fined $10k and suspended from first 2 rounds next season

Shaw got 8 weeks- where's the consistency?

Agree. Probably should've got half the season (and yes I would still say that if he was still at the crows)

Completely different to shaws situation. Similar to maxwell so consistency is shown

I don't know about all of you but when I was playing the guys at work would ask me on a Friday morning where I was lining up on the Saturday. I know the AFL are trying to stamp this kind of thing out but it must be hard for the players to not be able to discuss with family and friends these kind of things.

The only way to try and fix this is to start the players in the positions they are named.

IMO this has nothing to do with protecting the integrity of the game. Rather it’s the AFL’s attempt to protect the interests of the betting agencies, who pump zillions of bucks into the league.

Easy answer is to get rid of stupid bet types like first goal kicker. If the betting agencies want to put up a market for these types of bets they do so at their own risk. The chances are they will get burnt from time to time.

Feel a bit sorry for the player in this instance, assuming it was all said “innocently” as claimed.

saintal wrote:
Easy answer is to get rid of stupid bet types like first goal kicker. If the betting agencies want to put up a market for these types of bets they do so at their own risk. The chances are they will get burnt from time to time.

According to the AFL though they will keep these bet types as they can trace them. If they are banned it is then taken underground and open to 'corruption'.

saintal wrote:IMO this has nothing to do with protecting the integrity of the game. Rather it’s the AFL’s attempt to protect the interests of the betting agencies, who pump zillions of bucks into the league.

Easy answer is to get rid of stupid bet types like first goal kicker. If the betting agencies want to put up a market for these types of bets they do so at their own risk. The chances are they will get burnt from time to time.

Feel a bit sorry for the player in this instance, assuming it was all said “innocently” as claimed.

Adrian Anderson made some very good comments in the presser yesterday.

By keeping the spot betting with agencies such as the TAB, Betfair,Sportsbet etc it is possible to track betting fluctuations, who made the bets, CCTV footage from "walk-in" agencies etc.

To take this away from listed betting agencies it would drive the betting underground and make it impossible to track and trace the people making these bets. It makes sense to keep it in the public forum where the powers that be can investigate the incidents thoroughly.