Gambling has been a growing issue within both professional and amateur sport. With the ever-expanding range of betting options for punters, the appeal to athletes and officials within sports is higher than ever. This article will discuss the risks associated with sporting integrity issues for sporting organisations, as well as strategies to mitigate the damage that can impact organisations.
The A-League Scandal
The recent match-fixing scandal in the A-League Men’s competition, the premier national league for football (soccer) in Australia, has reintroduced the conversation around betting within sport, and has resulted in five professional players being criminally charged. The players of Macarthur FC, based in Campbelltown south-west of Sydney, were charged with multiple offences.
It is alleged that the main perpetrator, former English Premier League club Chelsea midfielder Ulises Dávila, took instructions from an organised crime figure in South America to receive a yellow card in certain games. He was charged with number of offences, including two counts of engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event.
It is alleged that Mr Dávila then paid other players of Macarthur FC $10,000 to receive yellow cards in games. Those players have been charged with multiple offences, including the participation in a criminal group.
The Law
Criminal Offences
Match-fixing has been criminalised in most states and territories, meaning any charges are laid within the relevant state or territory law enforcement agency (i.e. Victoria Police).
In Victoria, the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) prohibits activity which may constitute match-fixing. These include:
- engaging in conduct that corrupts or would corrupt a betting outcome of an event or event contingency;
- facilitating conduct that corrupts or would corrupt a betting outcome of an event or event contingency;
- concealing conduct, an agreement or an arrangement that corrupts or would corrupt a betting outcome of an event or event contingency; and
- use of corrupt conduct information for betting purposes.
These offences carry a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.
Ulises Dávila and his counterparts have allegedly breached similar provisions in the New South Wales Crimes Act.
Sporting Policies
Within sporting codes, competition rules and regulations can contain offences relating to match-fixing or betting. These act in conjunction with Government legislation and the case law. For example, Racing Australia and its state and territory bodies have introduced the “Racing Rules”. These are hundreds of pages of rules for the sport, which includes prohibitions on jockeys, trainers, stewards, owners, or any other official involved in the sport from betting on races.
The National Integrity Framework (NIF) is a consistent set of policies created by Sports Integrity Australia (SIA), in collaboration with the Australian Olympic and Paralympic Committees. Sporting codes in Australia can opt-in to the framework, which will then make the sport subject to the policies made for the NIF.
The NIF provides an example of the policing of match-fixing matters, contained in the Competition Manipulation and Sport Gambling Policy (CMSGP). This is utilised by organisations that are signatories to the NIF such as Athletics Australia or Swimming Australia. This policy outlines what prohibited competition manipulation conduct is, as well as how complaints and allegations will be managed.
For the NIF, the CMSGP refers complaints to the Complaints, Disputes and Discipline Policy (CDDP), which sets out the investigatory and disciplinary processes. Similar types of policies can be adopted for other sporting organisations to have clear alignment of rules and processes for issues such as match-fixing.
The types of sanctions that can be made under the CDDP, and through guidance provided by SIA for gambling and match-fixing offences includes:
- For betting on one’s own sport:
- Formal conciliation or mediation;
- Counselling;
- Restricted duties or access;
- Supervision and mandatory oversight;
- Mandatory education and programs; and/or
- Temporary suspension from relevant event /entity /club.
- For match fixing, any of the above and/or:
- Formal Reprimand;
- Requiring an apology;
- Role change;
- Withdrawal of accreditation from the relevant sporting event;
- Permanent suspension /exclusion from the event /entity /club; and/or
- Return of awards.
Although Football Australia is not a signatory to the NIF, Ulises Dávila and the other members of the Macarthur team could be subject to a range of disciplinary measures from the Club (Macarthur FC), League (A-Leagues), and National Body (Football Australia). This could include Football Australia’s Code of Conduct and Ethics, which is applicable to all professional players within Australia and contains a prohibition against match manipulation under clause 2.10.
The Mitigation Strategies
Although sporting administrators can be charged with match-fixing offences, it is primarily the athletes or players that are involved. The greater issue is the flow-on effect of instances such as the A-League scandal that have a significant impact on a particular sport or sporting organisation. Football Australia CEO James Johnson stated that the conduct of Macarthur FC players was “very troubling news for the Australian football community and beyond… the conduct that has been alleged has no place in our game”.
In the 2011 National Policy on Match-Fixing in Sport, expectations were set out for sporting organisations and sport controlling bodies (i.e. Football Australia) in protecting the threat of match-fixing and the corruption that flows from it. This included:
- Adopting an anti-match-fixing/anti-corruption code of conduct which aligns with the nationally agreed principles;
- Applying the code of conduct to all players, player agents, support personnel, officials, and staff;
- Applying a disciplinary framework within the code of conduct including sanctions and appropriate investigative processes with minimum and meaningful sanctions;
- Developing and entering into national integrity agreements with betting organisations in relation to the provision of betting and information sharing on the sport;
- Providing appropriate information to betting agencies to support preventative and investigative measures in a timely manner;
- Providing appropriate education of players, player agents, support personnel, officials, and staff on their responsibilities under the code of conduct and to provide information on match-fixing to assist with prevention, detection and disciplinary actions in accordance with the policy; and
- Providing and exchanging information on suspected match-fixing or corrupt activities with the over-sighting/coordinating agency, betting agencies, and law enforcement agencies.
The advice from the policy is still practical today. Having an appropriate integrity policy or code of conduct can set out how organisations address these issues, and provides clarity to senior management, members, and fans in times of trouble. This document can instruct athletes on what they are not allowed to do, and the process of responding to requests to engage in match-fixing.
Among other things, an effective competition manipulation and gambling policy should:
- Clearly describe what match-fixing is and provide examples of how it can occur;
- Explicitly state the possible consequences of match-fixing;
- Clearly describe the disciplinary process which is used to deal with allegations of match-fixing, ensuring that the process is procedurally fair (meaning providing opportunities for alleged offenders to hear the case against to them, including any evidence, having the opportunity to respond to allegations, and having independent, unbiased investigators or decision-makers); and
- Clearly describe the circumstances in which the sports organisation should direct the allegations to law enforcement for investigation.
It is recommended that sporting organisations seek legal advice from law firms experienced in sports law and sporting integrity matters to assist in the creation and implementation of such a policy or code of conduct.
Sporting organisations must ensure that their athletes, staff members and clubs are aware of this policy. Ways to do this could include:
- Set out time for when an athlete or staff members first joins the organisation to read and acknowledge all policies. This can then be followed up with a quiz or questionnaire;
- Providing training and education programs which are aimed at developing and enhancing people’s understanding of the policy and why it has been put in place. Such training and education should include details of the consequences of breaching the policy;
- Keeping the policy up-to-date and providing updates and training (where necessary) to people to ensure that their understanding of the policy is current; and
- Ensuring that the policy is accessible to all athletes, clubs, and staff members, including hard copies in the workplace where appropriate.
In terms of internal procedures, the policy should generally require the sports organisation to thoroughly investigate any allegations of match-fixing. The investigation must be done in a procedurally fair manner, in which the alleged perpetrator is provided all details of the allegations made against them, and a fair and reasonable opportunity to respond to such allegations. After the investigation is completed, the organisation should inform the alleged perpetrator of its decision. It is generally up to the organisation whether it would like to provide reasons for its decision.
If the alleged perpetrator is found guilty, the organisation should provide them with an appropriate sanction which is proportionate to their offending after providing them an opportunity to make submissions on penalty. Additionally, if the conduct may constitute a criminal offence under the relevant state or territory law, then the organisation should refer the matter to the relevant law enforcement body.
Conclusion
Although Ulises Dávila may not see the football field any time soon, the impact the scandal has had on the sport in Australia and its national body is deep and troublesome. To avoid a similar situation, sporting organisations must set clear policies and procedures, handle complaints correctly, and provide fair and reasonable sanctions for any competition manipulation wrongdoing. It is imperative that athletes, coaches, and officials are all aware of their obligations in match-fixing on an ongoing basis to protect the reputation of individuals, organisations, and sports.
SportsLawyer is here to assist sporting organisations and clubs in mitigating sporting integrity risks, including policies and procedures, board and governance consulting, dispute resolution, and more. Please call (03) 9642 0435 to meet with our award-winning Sports Law team.
Disclaimer: Nothing in this article should be relied upon as legal advice. The contents of this article should be regarded as information only, and for specific legal matters, independent advice should always be sought.
