Which is where the money came from in the Rozier fix.
Billups was the ‘front man’ for the rigged, big-money poker games run by the mob. He was responsible for luring the suckers to the table.
Here’s a wild one Damon Jones played in the NBA from '97-'09 and was an assistant coach from '16-'18. He made $22 million as a player but had very expensive taste and was broke. He was also best friends with LeBron and was part of his entourage and got to hang out with the team on the bus and in practices. He wasn’t an employee but had the same access as trainers and coaching staff.
He was feeding information to associates about things like the status of LeBron’s health. For example knowing that LeBron wasn’t going to be playing in a particular game before it was announced.
26 more people, including a dozen NCAA men’s basketball players, have been charged now with fixing games. Some in the NCAA, some in the Chinese Basketball Association.
I can understand why the leagues and teams would be against this kind of thing. They have hired these players to try to play their best. If they don’t, that seems like a pretty clear breach of contract.
But why is it illegal?
Or has this been asked already?
It’s illegal because there’s a law against it:
18 U.S. Code § 224 - Bribery in sporting contests
Whoever carries into effect, attempts to carry into effect, or conspires with any other person to carry into effect any scheme in commerce to influence, in any way, by bribery any sporting contest, with knowledge that the purpose of such scheme is to influence by bribery that contest, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Well, yeah, but why is there a law? The NBA makes money because people are interested in its games, and that interest would wane if people can’t trust that the results are fair. So why is it the FBI’s job to make sure the NBA runs its events honestly?
Why are there laws against fraud? Because this is fraud, plain and simple. And there are laws against it because fraud is bad, corruption is bad, theft is bad. People who enter a contest thinking that it is fair and unbiased become victims of it.
That’s like asking why any business that rips off its customers should be penalized by the law, since they already suffer a loss of reputation when their scheme is revealed. The reason is because that isn’t punishment enough on its own to stop that predatory behavior.
That’s not quite what this is, though. If a company employed me to hang wallpaper, and I didn’t do the best job I could, I would expect my employer to be none too happy with me, but I don’t think that rises to the level of fraud. If someone (for whatever weird reason) slipped me some money to do a poor job, does that becomes fraud? The employer is not getting the service they believe they have contracted for, but that seems like a civil matter.
Is professional wrestling a fraud, or was it back when the promoters swore it was real? How 'bout lip-synching during a concert, or Milli Vanilli, who weren’t even the real singers? Which of those rise to the level of criminal fraud, and who do you charge?
Depending on the circumstances it absolutely could. Keep in mind that I work for a government agency that investigates contractor fraud. I’m not directly involved in that work, but I support many folks who are. You may be surprised that this can be criminal behavior, but again, depending on circumstances, “not doing the best job you can” might constitute a crime.
Penalties are usually in the form of fines, people don’t serve time for it, but these are fines levied by regulators, not money a victim goes to court to sue for. Because often lawsuits aren’t judged to be enough of a deterrent.
And if a person really goes to extremes, such as (using your example) they are paid to hang wallpaper, claim they did, send out fake invoices, receive money in advance, and don’t do the work, then they might actually serve prison time.
Kirkland, Washington, contractor sentenced to prison for defrauding more than two dozen customers
Again, it depends, but sometimes it’s a civil matter, and sometimes a criminal matter.
If you really want to get down to it, the reason why some of these things are called fraud and others aren’t, is because people cared enough something to get legislators to make it illegal. Sports bribery is illegal because in the 1960s, there was enough interest to get laws passed.
Here is a little information on the background:
CQ Almanac 1964 - Sports Bribery
And more detail on what led to that in this article:
The Sports Bribery Act: A Look Back At Attempts To Aid Integrity
As you might imagine, it was a reaction to scandals in sports that bothered people enough that Congress felt it needed to take action. That’s generally where all consumer protection laws come from. People are upset, they petition their legislators, and laws get passed.
Really informative post. Thanks.
Okay, but who gets charged with the fraud in this case? Is it the remodeling company that gets charged for defrauding a customer, or is it the employee who does a less-than-optimal job defrauding his employers (the remodeling company)?
Maybe that’s why I find this situation unusual. It’s not the leagues, or the teams being charged with fraud for presenting fixed sporting events to people who are paying to see the real thing, it’s the players. Most companies seem to bear responsibility for the actions of their employees, and must make the effort to monitor the actions of the employees. Sports leagues have gotten the government to do that job for them.
And I do appreciate the informative post.
The NCAA and other sport organizations have their own investigators.
I think it depends on who is responsible. Most fraud cases are financial in nature, and involve sending bogus invoices, or not getting licensed. But usually contractors are self-employed.
I’m not sure you can make a great comparison between an athlete and a guy who puts up wallpaper unless there’s a thriving betting market around how well that wallpaper is hung.
I’m not a gambler, never have been. Not even penny slots or the lottery. Never seen any appeal in it. But there is a huge business around gambling, and when players take bribes to influence the outcome of wagers, that can affect many people and results in the loss of millions of dollars. It’s almost like an indirect sort of embezzlement I guess.
I don’t know how leagues can police that sort of thing, and if you can’t effectively hold them responsible it doesn’t make sense to penalize the league when a player takes bribes, unless you can prove that they’re complicit. That’s a common sense reason why athletes are targeted and not the league or team.
Gambling provides the incentive to pay athletes to perform less than their best. Supposed there was some similar incentive in the wallpaper example. Fred’s Home Remodeling gets their big break and will be doing the wallpapering on an episode pf This Old House. Fred’s competitor, Al, knows that the free publicity will boost Fred’s business and the cost of his own. Al pays Rob, one of Fred’s employees, to mix the paste too thick so the wallpaper will be lumpy.
Is Rob a criminal?
I thought the NCAA was more worried about athletes who were being paid to win, not lose.
That isn’t the crux of the matter, and since this initial premise is incorrect the rest of your post is invalid. These players aren’t just underperforming a bit. They aren’t performing at all; in other words, they aren’t actually trying to win. When a player is no longer actually trying to succeed, and is in fact trying to fail, then they aren’t doing their job. They’re doing the opposite of their job. It would be like a cop who is being paid off by criminals to intentionally screw up cases and get their guys to go free. You’re severely downplaying how important an athlete’s role is in this industry, and the significance of taking a dive.
You made an analogy about wrestling being fake. If you had major wrestling organizations, like the WWE for example, claiming that wrestling was real, and it was established that this was a legitimate sport where wrestlers were legitimately doing everything they could to win, and it was revealed that this was fake, I expect there would be legal issues with that.
Historically, yeah. But, in recent years, between the NIL (name, image, likeness) deals which NCAA athletes are now allowed to sign, and much looser rules on transfers (the “transfer portal”), the NCAA has figured out how to allow top athletes to get “paid,” while not actually receiving salaries.
I think my comparison is apt. The players who are being paid to throw a game, or just shave points, have to be subtle enough that it’s not blazingly obvious what they’re doing. It’s not like they’re throwing the ball in their own basket. They’re paid to play basketball, and they are playing basketball; not the best that they can, but well enough that their performance doesn’t become a farce.
It’s probably even possible that with one player on the take that the team could still win.
It’s not. The reason why you can’t compare a guy messing up paste for wallpaper is because it doesn’t have any actual impact. It typically takes a serious consequence before you’re going to raise to the level of criminal behavior. It’s the same reason why the SEC doesn’t go after lemonade stands.
You can’t just compare an action in isolation and say it’s the same. It’s like measuring something wrong with a recipe and ruining a batch of cupcakes versus measuring something wrong with a dosage of medicine and causing someone to die. The actions aren’t really all that different, but the impacts are, and so are the consequences.
Aha, but much of the betting was proposition bets on an individual’s performance; rebounds, points, …, without regard to the team’s performance. In MLBaseball, bets were being placed on individual pitches in some cases.