Garbage-TimeWhy are Players Allowed to Gamble?
August 20 2007 08:28 PM Filed in: Rant
With the Donaghy scandal raising more questions about
the integrity of the referees in the league, Donaghy
is said to have information that 20 referees broke
the collective bargaining agreement with the league
by gambling, it raises the question why are players
allowed to gamble but the referees are not allowed to
gamble besides at the horse track during the off
season?
I understand the reason why the league would ban gambling, because if a ref got into serious trouble, and had a debt that they could not pay off, that they may be put in a situation where they could attempt to shave points, or provide inside information.
So why are players allowed to gamble? Aren't they just as likely to get into trouble with debt, or a bookie? Aren't they even more capable of shaving points in a game? For example Charles Barkley has stated that he has lost millions of dollars gambling, wouldn't a player losing this type of money be more likely to try to fix a game to make up for the insane amount of money that he lost?
I don't see the problem rising from a player betting on games they played in like Pete Rose. I could see players getting into trouble playing blackjack or craps, or placing a bet on football, and if the player gets into trouble wouldn't the idea of fixing a game be an easy solution?
I'm not saying this would ever happen its highly unlikely, but we all thought a ref interfering in an outcome of a game highly unlikely, but what it happened?
All I really want to know is why there is a double standard between players and referees. Why are players allowed to gamble and referees are not?
I understand the reason why the league would ban gambling, because if a ref got into serious trouble, and had a debt that they could not pay off, that they may be put in a situation where they could attempt to shave points, or provide inside information.
So why are players allowed to gamble? Aren't they just as likely to get into trouble with debt, or a bookie? Aren't they even more capable of shaving points in a game? For example Charles Barkley has stated that he has lost millions of dollars gambling, wouldn't a player losing this type of money be more likely to try to fix a game to make up for the insane amount of money that he lost?
I don't see the problem rising from a player betting on games they played in like Pete Rose. I could see players getting into trouble playing blackjack or craps, or placing a bet on football, and if the player gets into trouble wouldn't the idea of fixing a game be an easy solution?
I'm not saying this would ever happen its highly unlikely, but we all thought a ref interfering in an outcome of a game highly unlikely, but what it happened?
All I really want to know is why there is a double standard between players and referees. Why are players allowed to gamble and referees are not?
|