|
Title: "Betting affected length of title fight, admits Froch" Post by: Skippy on February 20, 2012, 10:54:43 AM http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-17088977
Story says Froch didn't win a fight in round 4 since all of his mates had money on round 5. What do you think- is this "go to jail", perfectly fine, or somewhere in between? Title: Re: "Betting affected length of title fight, admits Froch" Post by: AndrewT on February 20, 2012, 11:17:12 AM No difference between this and what those cricketers got sent to jail for.
In fact, this is worse as there was always the chance that it could affect the result if the opponent caught Froch with a lucky punch whilst Froch was pissing about. Title: Re: "Betting affected length of title fight, admits Froch" Post by: kinboshi on February 20, 2012, 11:20:57 AM The daft thing is admitting it (which he did years ago, but repeated it again recently - hence the article).
Title: Re: "Betting affected length of title fight, admits Froch" Post by: Josedinho on February 20, 2012, 11:41:46 AM Always shady but not worse than the cricketers as he can't fix the result. Bowling a no ball was effected by no other players. Knocking somebody out in the 5th is only fixed if the opponent is paid to go down in the 5th isn't it?
Title: Re: "Betting affected length of title fight, admits Froch" Post by: Karabiner on February 20, 2012, 11:42:38 AM Well they didn't send Matthew Le Tissier to jail for doing something similar.
He tried to kick the ball out of play direct from the kick-off after they had a spread-bet on the time of the first throw-in. |