• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Wales coach Rob Howley sent home from Rugby World Cup amid betting allegations

I know everyone knows you dont bet yourself... i bet EJ still has some contacts out there to bets on for him:D

Stupid by Howley and i do agree with the rule. Great final act as a Wales coach.
Why do you agree with the rule? As far as I can see it, after a 10 second ponder, there is no reason for it if you have no control over the outcome, I.e your team isn't involved.

Sure, you may have better information than others, but is that not a problem for the betting company rather than world rugby? Or maybe such a company sponsors the world cup? Or just world rugby is acting on behalf of all betting agencies out of the kindness of their hearts? It is more efficient rather than having all of them do their own policing. And, I suppose if part of fans' interest is derived from the joy of betting then I guess world rugby has incentive to maintain the integrity of that aspect.

Ok, so maybe it makes sense
 
Why do you agree with the rule? As far as I can see it, after a 10 second ponder, there is no reason for it if you have no control over the outcome, I.e your team isn't involved.

Sure, you may have better information than others, but is that not a problem for the betting company rather than world rugby? Or maybe such a company sponsors the world cup? Or just world rugby is acting on behalf of all betting agencies out of the kindness of their hearts? It is more efficient rather than having all of them do their own policing. And, I suppose if part of fans' interest is derived from the joy of betting then I guess world rugby has incentive to maintain the integrity of that aspect.

Ok, so maybe it makes sense

I guess the main reason is to do with insider information and unfair advantage. Also any betting leads to questions about other possible bets. I think it's a case that you could spend years dealing with each case individually if you had looser rules and so a blanket unambiguous rule is simpler and more effective.
 
I guess the main reason is to do with insider information and unfair advantage. Also any betting leads to questions about other possible bets. I think it's a case that you could spend years dealing with each case individually if you had looser rules and so a blanket unambiguous rule is simpler and more effective.
Good points. Still the confusing thing for me, at least initially, was just that World rugby has enforced this when it is Not their issue, it is an issue for the betting agencies. Why do you think that is? Were the hypotheses in my last post valid, do you think ?

Edit: obviously world rugby doesn't want match fixing. After that I suppose your other points about a blanket rule make more sense.

if what oggy says is true that is very far from minor. He was potentially going to have some say in those selections. I wonder what the odds were. I also wonder what the odds were before the last lions tour and how much he earned then. I mean Gary ringrose should have been selected ahead of Wyn Jones at lock right? but more seriously, you have to wonder. And given how much some people care, many on this forum not to mention the players who miss out, about these selections, it would be pretty evil for them to be subject to match fixing.

@The Oggmonster were you serious or taking the ****?
 
Last edited:
This is a very strange story. A small flutter can kill a career? Everybody knows that match fixing is not allowed, I mean it never happens in football?

I remember back in 2007 there was talk of some hedge funds betting big on SA. Nobody believed it, but it was strange that both NZ and AUS flew home from the QFs on the same plane leaving the door wide open for the Boks.

Maybe this is all just a heavy (public) clamp down on an individual to hide much bigger shenanigans behind the scenes?
 
if what oggy says is true that is very far from minor. He was potentially going to have some say in those selections. I wonder what the odds were. I also wonder what the odds were before the last lions tour and how much he earned then. I mean Gary ringrose should have been selected ahead of Wyn Jones at lock right? but more seriously, you have to wonder. And given how much some people care, many on this forum not to mention the players who miss out, about these selections, it would be pretty evil for them to be subject to match fixing.

@The Oggmonster were you serious or taking the ****?

Happy to confirm it was a p*** take before Howler's lawyers start to hunt me down.
 
Good points. Still the confusing thing for me, at least initially, was just that World rugby has enforced this when it is Not their issue, it is an issue for the betting agencies. Why do you think that is? Were the hypotheses in my last post valid, do you think ?
I just think there have to be no grey areas. And in many ways stuff is linked. Like, you could always find a hypothetical way that one team's coach could indirectly affect the outcome of another coach - by tailing off at the end of the previous game to avoid injuring key players because you're betting them next week, for example. A kiwi going easier on an Australian opponent in a SR game when you've bet on Aus against Argentina next week. Unlikely? Maybe - but if every coach and player is allowed to gamble, then there will be hundreds of opportunities to make those little decisions, whether consciously or unconsciously. Why allow even a slight possibility?

Given there is zero advantage at all to World Rugby in allowing gambling, there's no reason not to ban it completely.
 
Considering you can bet on pretty much every aspect of a game a guy who knows team selections way in advance could make some informed bets

Like if he knows the first choice fullback is playing against the tier 2 side you're gonna blow away - the coach puts a chunk of change down on the first choice fullback making the most metres in the game at slightly elevated odds because the bookies expect 2nd choice 15 to play

Blanket ban makes most sense and is easiest to enforce
 
Considering you can bet on pretty much every aspect of a game a guy who knows team selections way in advance could make some informed bets

Like if he knows the first choice fullback is playing against the tier 2 side you're gonna blow away - the coach puts a chunk of change down on the first choice fullback making the most metres in the game at slightly elevated odds because the bookies expect 2nd choice 15 to play

Blanket ban makes most sense and is easiest to enforce
It's gotta be more about the fixing aspect than betting advantage though,, because the latter is the betting agencies' problem, not world rugby's. Right?
 
It's gotta be more about the fixing aspect than betting advantage though,, because the latter is the betting agencies' problem, not world rugby's. Right?

I guess it's to avoid bringing the game into disrepute. Again it's simpler to have a clear, blanket rule, than to constantly spend your time debating if someone is in the wrong. I can't believe Howley is so hard up he needs this money for retirement or something and if he does have financial problems then maybe this is linked to it.
 
It's gotta be more about the fixing aspect than betting advantage though,, because the latter is the betting agencies' problem, not world rugby's. Right?
It's the tiniest of tiny steps from "knew the first choice FB would be playing" to "influenced Gatland to select the first choice FB"
 
Apparently he's been under investigation for a couple of months. If that is the case it seems daft them flying him out to Japan in the first place

Where did you hear this from? Going form WRU's statement they were only told informally last Wednesday from a betting company and they might need to investigate. There's not much point speculating what it is as it could be a number of things from him betting on Wales games, to him telling family members to bet on certain odds and just even him betting of a France vs Italy 6 nations game.
 

Latest posts

Top