Snooker
Topic: John Higgins tribunal today and tomorrow

Just in case anyone is interested...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/snooker/8973869.stm

I hate that paper now!

Reporters are scumbags whether it turns out Higgins is guilty or not.

John Higgins has been found not guilty of all bribery claims made against him by the News of the World.

But at a hearing he was found guilty of bringing the game into disrepute by not reporting the illegal approach made to him to discuss throwing frames.

The three-time world champion was fined £75,000 and banned for six months which was backdated to May when he was originally suspended.

Higgins had always strenuously denied all the allegations.

Higgins was suspended after he and his manager Pat Mooney were filmed by the Sunday newspaper allegedly accepting £261,000 to fix matches.

Higgins defended himself for nine hours on Tuesday at a two-day independent tribunal in London.

The paper published the story on 2 May.

The video appeared to show Higgins and Mooney meeting with an undercover reporter in Kiev, Ukraine, and agreeing to alter the outcome of frames in return for money.

The newspaper alleged that Higgins inquired at the meeting about the best way to conceal the 300,000 euros (£261,000) he would receive for losing frames in four separate matches.

In a published transcript, Higgins said it would be easy to affect the outcome of a frame.

The behind-closed-doors tribunal was conducted by Sport Resolutions UK, a London-based independent dispute resolution service.

Higgins has won 21 ranking titles during his career and if he is cleared, he could make his comeback at the World Open in Glasgow, which begins on 18 September.

Higgins receives £75,000 fine, £10,000 costs, 6 month suspension.

Judge's full summary published here...

http://www.pro9.co.uk/html/viewtopic.php?forum=5&topic=3737&start=0#f72788


-----------------

Authorised Pro9 forum advertiser/sponsor

That was from the BBC website by the way.

Mine was from the judge!

Higgins will make double that when he sues the NOTW...

If i was him i wouldn't bother sueing, just let it lie now, its done and dusted, he'll make more than that getting back into playing snooker, no point in dragging it on any further

On 2010-09-09 13:41 , Tookster Wrote:

Sueing is the last thing he will do, as he is so guilty he won't want a truly independent panel reopening this case.
A disgraceful decision, but to most of us an unsurprising one.
Maybe now they'll let Quentin Hann back in?

Just read on the BBC that Higgins got off with the match fixing charge on a technicality.

According to Hearn, if the match they were talking about was a World Snooker event then we would have seen Higgins being banned for life.

Would've liked to see the official 'evidence' for Quinten Hann too.

It should not matter if it's a non world snooker event
Fixing is fixing end of, he could just afford a better brief than mr hann

On 2010-09-09 15:30 , MachineGun Wrote:

Got a link machinegun? Cannot see it on there.


-----------------
Chris @ Pro9

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/mobile/other_sports/snooker/8983814.stm
Doesn't say what is noted about just that different rules as not a world snooker event

load of trash guilty as sin ,,

Although he was not found guilty of any match-fixing, he WAS found guilty of "giving the impression" he'd throw a match to the NOTW, which is just about as bad as it could have got because the match never took place. Can't really find a guy guilty for something that "might" happen, at least not without some clear evidence of collusion.

So basically the guilty verdict of "giving the impression" that he'd take a bribe says what you saw in the press and in the video was a fair reflection of what happened and not "selected highlights" out of context to make him look bad ie the NOTW didn't manipulate anything or stitch him up.

As such, although journalists are scumbags, he has no grounds to sue.

He's parted company with Mooney too so that suggests Mooney at least was in on it all, although it would be hard for him to deny it credibly. Considering he's also gone on record loads of times to say he considers snooker a job and a means to make money, and that because he has higher priorities in life (ie his family) he's never been the sort like Hendry to practice all day long every day to build a legacy, it does look bad - occum's razor and all that.

Just my opinion though. If it is all rubbish, then I feel sorry for him because he'll never be able to shake this off and it's tarnished a great career, plus he's always come across as a genuinely nice guy (not that this would change that obviously).

The thing that confuses me and why after reflection I think he's guilty above anything else is the fact that he so calmly suggested how to put the money into a mortgage on a spanish property. That's not the sign of a man who is intimidated or scared of being there.

On 2010-09-09 15:30 , MachineGun Wrote:

This says nothing about Higgins being treated differently if it was a world snooker event. What it actually says is a quote from Barry Hearn saying that Mooney would have had everything thrown at him (including possible prosicution) if it was a world snooker event. No mention of Higgins there at all.

On 2010-09-12 02:16 , OJD Wrote:

Guessing that they have parted as Mooney is now banned from snooker for life.

Oops. I blame the author! The part about the technicality had Higgins as the subject so I skipped over the name at the end ("would have charged Mr Mooney with everything").

Still, I should read properly!

On 2010-09-13 08:01 , Ads Wrote:


And why was Mooney banned? That's kind of my point.