Not just about match fixing

Portuguese football has not been immune to the match fixing scandals that have tested the integrity of the sport worldwide. Last year there was even reference to a game that never existed, between second division teams Freamunde, from Portugal, and Ponferradina, from Spain. Bets were actually being made in relation to this game on a few betting sites. Federbet were on top of things and denounced these remarkable circumstances, thereby involving the leagues and the national polices. So far, we have yet to hear about the results of the ensuing investigations, but this was definitely a case of taking the concept of match fixing to a whole 'nother level. It’s not even match fixing per se, because the match never actually took place.

Federbet were at it again in 2014, when they indicated that the results of the Portuguese Second League games opposing Oliveirense to Benfica B, Trofense and Portimonense had been compromised. Oliveirense denied the possibility of match fixing but this week José Godinho, their president, stated that the club would be decreeing internal preventative measures, in order to avoid any possibility of match fixing. As of June 2015, Oliveirense players and staff may not access the internet or use their cell phones and tablets from the moment they assemble in preparation for matches – which may trigger a few individual fundamental rights’ issues if not properly handled – and any employee caught betting will be disciplined the club.

This is certainly a step in the right direction, but match fixing demands the direct intervention of the bodies governing the competitions. While speaking to a few players in the industry, I realized sports’ betting fraud is a much more pervasive feature than generally perceived and it materializes in many different, deceptive ways.

I was most surprised by a technique that apparently is widely used: scouts (the guys relaying results live to the betting agencies, the ones who basically ensure that results are reported with minimum delay) are approached on the stadiums and required – in terms that vary from friendly to outright menacing – to refrain from, or delay the reporting of information that may seem innocuous to most but is of significant value. Most typically people will bet on results, i.e. goals scored, and the fight against match fixing is principally aimed towards this end. However, there is lots of money to be made on insignificancies such as the number of yellow cards, corners or fouls in any given game. In this instance, the timing of the occurrence and the urgency with which the information is passed on is of utmost importance.

Let’s think about this very simples situation: John bets that blue team will benefit from a throw-in within the next two minutes. Just imagine how much John would have to gain if he actually had that sort of information live and could manage to withhold the information from betting site for a vital few seconds. He would be able to place the bet and then collect the corresponding gain.

The fight against match fixing is, in a sense, a very limited way to approach the ill effects of illicit sports’ betting. One would think that the reliability of the final result in a game, which is typically compromised by approaches to players or referees, is as fundamental to the integrity of football as the trustworthiness and timing of the information being passed on to betting sites and companies. Therefore, governing bodies are pressed into looking at the possibilities arising from sports’ betting under a different light.

Surely the ownership of clubs is of paramount importance. There is little doubt that players, referees and other agents must be protected from any approaches with the aim of rigging the end result of a game. But little attention has been paid to the reliability of the information upon which bets are being made. Betting companies must discuss their procedures for collection of data with governing bodies, which in turn must ensure that scouts and other personnel involved in the collection of data is properly identified, licensed and protected within stadiums.

This, we contend, would be a very welcome addition to current guidelines on the fight against fraud in sport.