Insight
SPORTS BETTING The future of in-play
The Wood Inquiry also argued that law-enforcement agencies and regulators lose visibility of offshore wagering activity, in unregulated markets making it harder to effectively monitor wagering markets for possible match-fixing. Combined this has created a low-risk, high-profit environment for the manipulation of sports competitions at all levels, but particularly “at sub elite levels.”
it was concerned it had “no intention” of changing its position regarding the prohibition of online in-play wagering.
Te Wood Inquiry also argued that law- enforcement agencies and regulators lose visibility of offshore wagering activity in unregulated markets, making it harder to effectively monitor wagering markets for possible match-fixing. It highlighted Asia, because it is in a similar time zone, making wagering on Australian sports convenient. Combined this has created a low-risk, high- profit environment for the manipulation of sports competitions at all levels, but particularly “at sub elite levels” making it an “attractive avenue for organised crime to engage in money laundering.”
It is, therefore, the Asian betting market and not licensed European markets that have been the preferred choice for organised crime due to the high-liquidity of the market coupled with the high degree of anonymity of making a bet.
All the same, moves are afoot to ban in-play in some other jurisdictions including the UK. In June 2020, Te Gambling Related Harm All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) called for a ban on in-play betting "to venues or via the telephone,” bringing it in line with Australia. Ireland's largest sporting organisation Te Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) said it would like to ban in- play betting options offered on games.
Restrictions on some in-play bets are also maintained in the new German State Treaty after Germany’s legal online casino market went live in July. Fixed odds in-play betting is only allowed on the final result, next goal, or similar, of a sporting event. A list of permitted bets, however, has yet to be published.
Germany’s Sports Betting Association criticised the restriction saying that this would be unappealing to players, meaning players will simply bet via offshore sites where more in-play options are available.
“What is particularly problematic for us is the very tight criteria of live bets held exclusively on the final result or on the next goal in sports with a small number of goals, such as football,” said the head of the Association, Mathias Dahms, in January 2020. Meanwhile, integrity body Te International Betting Integrity Association (IBIA), argued that in-play betting product restrictions coupled with the turnover-based tax in Germany could cause consumers to bet via unlicensed sites.
P32 WIRE / PULSE / INSIGHT / REPORTS COURTSIDING
Unfortunately, the popularity of in-play betting in unregulated markets has given rise to the increased practice of courtsiding: the transmission of information from sporting events for the purpose of gambling, or of placing bets directly from a sporting event.
Courtsiding gets its name from tennis, where it is most prevalent, and gives bettors the chance to exploit time delays of just a few seconds between a point being won or lost and the umpire inputting the score into an electronic device. Unlicensed bookmakers can also use information at courtside to change the odds and accept or reject bets. Te first tennis player to be charged with the offense was Spanish player,
In August 2016 the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) highlighted the links between
organized crime and match fixing in sports, and offered suggestions for the relevant authorities on how to combat match fixing. The report highlighted the importance of specialist betting monitoring companies and their role in
uncovering potentially irregular and suspicious betting patterns.
Gerard Joseph Platero Rodriguez, who was handed down a four year suspension and fined $15,000 after being convicted of courtsiding in October 2020.
Courtsiding has been reported in other sports as well. In July 2020, a number of people working for illegal offshore bookmakers were found to be present in netball stadiums in Auckland. Additionally, courtsiders are using new ways to transfer information while remaining under the radar. An accredited cleaner at Delhi’s Feroz Shah Kotla, was used by illegal bookmakers to help an in-play betting scam in a cricket match in May. In a separate incident two bookmakers were arrested for allegedly entering a stadium with fake accreditation cards in the Arun Jaitley Stadium in New Delhi in June 2021, as part of another courtsiding scam.
Indeed courtsiding is becoming increasingly prevalent in cricket, especially in lower tier matches in Europe. Streams of some cricket
games being played in Germany attracted around a million views on Facebook and YouTube, mainly from the Indian subcontinent. Reports of courtsiding and potential corrupters have also been recorded in Finland, Denmark and Switzerland.
When match-fixing does occur it is harder to detect whenever it occurs outside licensing systems. With courtsiding and the rise of betting on lower tier sports, professional integrity system are playing a more important role than ever in helping maintain the integrity of these sports. In August 2016, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) highlighted the links between organised crime and match fixing in sports, and offered suggestions for the relevant authorities as to how to combat match fixing. Te report highlighted the importance of specialist betting monitoring companies and their role in uncovering potentially irregular and suspicious betting patterns.
DOES BANNING IN-PLAY WORK AND HELP PROTECT SPORTS INTEGRITY?
According to the latest research, banning in-play is not only unwarranted, but could make the situation worse as bans on in-play betting only serves to push consumers to bet via unlicensed operators.
In its latest report, An Optimum Betting Market: A Regulatory, Fiscal & Integrity Assessment, the IBIA argues that potentially corrupt betting activity is, in general, just as likely to have taken place pre-match as in-play on football matches. According to the report “up to 99 per cent of turnover is wagered on markets that are also available pre-match, negating any supposed integrity benefit from prohibiting in-play betting on regulated markets.”
Te IBIA has put forward the argument for some time now that any ban on in-play markets may serve to encourage corrupt elements to seek out offshore operators to place in-play bets. Tis is because there can be no requirement to report any related suspicious betting activity. Te IBIA argues that sporting integrity is best served by encouraging all consumers within a jurisdiction to bet with operators licensed in that jurisdiction, and to require that those operators monitor and report suspicious activity across all of their markets. In addition, some jurisdictions have opted to ban in-play for certain lower tier leagues. Tey do so on the assumption that this will drive players from gambling on these markets and therefore ensure the integrity of these sports.
According to the IBIA, banning in-play on more obscure markets makes it easier for criminals to target and corrupt players due to a lack of government scrutiny. Banning in-play will mean that corrupt elements will be able to hijack these markets with more ease and develop new ways of doing so, meaning more opportunities for corruption and a further erosion to sports integrity in the process.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128
