(02-20-2023, 09:23 AM)imtheblkranger Wrote:

(02-19-2023, 06:01 PM)Dimson Wrote: If he bet on them to lose, I could see that, but he didn't.

This is what I never understood. Same with Pete Rose. If you're betting on your own team to win, where's the harm? Essentially you're betting on your team to win every Sunday you step on the field and get a paycheck.

I understand the "slippery slope, could evolve into more" argument. But just betting on your own team to WIN is a non-issue for me. Players can play fantasy football though which I think lends itself much more to affecting games than just win or lose. Just so much irony and double standards round the whole thing.

Pete Rose is a little bit of a different situation.  As the manager, he had a lot more control over the game.  The argument was that he was essentially betting against his team on days where he didn't place a bet.  For example, let's say he has a big bet on Friday's game but none on Thursday.  Rose may be reluctant to use his best closer on Thursday because he wants him fresh for the Friday game to win his bet.  They then maybe lose on Thursday when they otherwise wouldn't.  It may be little things but sports leagues are afraid of even giving the tiniest impression that the team isn't 100% trying to win.  Otherwise, fans will quit watching.  It's also a case where there is zero need for a player/coach to place a bet, so they see no harm in having tough penalties.

---