Gambling on small divisions

[alani123]

In some countries amateur federations ban gambling and sometimes even will cancel a match for discovering there's a market opened for it.

If it's not a crucial match then either team gets no points. If it's a final then a tribunal may decide when the next replacement match could be and it could even be at a neutral venue with no tickets so the teams will bear all the costs with no income. This makes gambling on such situations extremely undesired by the teams in spite of there might being demand by viewers and fans.

I know an instance in local amateur divisions where matches have been cancelled apparently because some English site had decided to include playoffs of local amateurs in their gambling. It was discovered only during the semi finals though and some cried foul when the referees utilized this rule because one team was doing better. The semis where then schedules to take place without an audience which burdened the teams because one of them would be rising divisions and could really use some extra cash to upgrade their roster.

What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

[Nwada001]

What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

If a match has already started, the best thing is to let go even if there is a reason for it to be stopped, knowing fully well that the organizers and both teams have already spent resources to make that match happen.

Whether the federation should have such restrictions or not is up to them since it's arguable that match rigging is mostly very common in such games. This could be the reason why they might decide to add such restrictions, especially when they notice bets being placed on such matches.

[bitcoindusts]

What do you think about this situation?

I think it is ok.  It is one way of protecting citizen from getting defraud or scammed by the match  through match fixing or coercing players to giveaway the game.  Since we all know that small divisions payment isn't that big like those major league, it is easier for the player to get swayed of amount higher than their monthly wages.

Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions?

If that helps the sports integrity in small divisions then I am all for it.  It would be devastating for the sports industry if its integrity is compromised because of these fraudulent activities.

And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

Yes since it is a rule, I do not think that it is unfair.  This will also discourage bookmakers to offer a betting option on small divisions.

[Ruttoshi]

I feel such countries don't like gambling, they're against it. However, there's nothing anyone can do about the cancelation of those matches because it was done by the government. I wonder if that country is an Islamic country.

If I'm leaving in such country, I wouldn't bother myself to bet on their local matches. I will use VPN to gamble in a global casino on big leagues and enjoy the fun. I can't say if it's right or wrong because there must be a reason why the government of that country is against gambling.

[swogerino]

In some countries amateur federations ban gambling and sometimes even will cancel a match for discovering there's a market opened for it.

If it's not a crucial match then either team gets no points. If it's a final then a tribunal may decide when the next replacement match could be and it could even be at a neutral venue with no tickets so the teams will bear all the costs with no income. This makes gambling on such situations extremely undesired by the teams in spite of there might being demand by viewers and fans.

I know an instance in local amateur divisions where matches have been cancelled apparently because some English site had decided to include playoffs of local amateurs in their gambling. It was discovered only during the semi finals though and some cried foul when the referees utilized this rule because one team was doing better. The semis where then schedules to take place without an audience which burdened the teams because one of them would be rising divisions and could really use some extra cash to upgrade their roster.

What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

I know that in these amateur leagues a lot can happen behind closed doors, I personally believe that these matches can easily be fixed if both owners of the amateur clubs decide on a mutual agreement that the end result will be for example a draw of 4-4 or 5-5 which has tremendous odds and imagine if such owners through their trusted circle of people manage to bet on total in such event a minimum of 100.000 dollars to get a payout of 2 million dollars if they win. I know that many teams or clubs in lower divisions in almost all leagues have been prone to such happenings and that is why I think it is a great move from local federations, judges or justice institutions to cancel such events. The truth though is that the casino/sport bookies cancel them by themselves as they fear for their own money.

[alani123]

I know that in these amateur leagues a lot can happen behind closed doors, I personally believe that these matches can easily be fixed if both owners of the amateur clubs decide on a mutual agreement that the end result will be for example a draw of 4-4 or 5-5 which has tremendous odds and imagine if such owners through their trusted circle of people manage to bet on total in such event a minimum of 100.000 dollars to get a payout of 2 million dollars if they win. I know that many teams or clubs in lower divisions in almost all leagues have been prone to such happenings and that is why I think it is a great move from local federations, judges or justice institutions to cancel such events. The truth though is that the casino/sport bookies cancel them by themselves as they fear for their own money.

There will always be some smartass bookies that will list a match regardless of what the situson is on the ground.
If they have information and amateur division has interest from crowds to gamble of course they will want to chime in.
Sometimes fans on the ground will organise bets among themselves and this is tolerated because also this is peanuts compared to what would be worth enough to sway a match by fixing it.

An online bookies featuring an event virtually means many possibilities open up for fixing a match. It's not just a team winning but also exact scores, who will score first etc. So it makes sense in smaller divisions to ban gambling because it could have a very enticing and disproportionate effect on matches where a team could earn more from fixing than going for fair play and earning through tickets and rewards.

[Hewlet]

In some countries amateur federations ban gambling and sometimes even will cancel a match for discovering there's a market opened for it.

Does this actually happen in real life or we are just making this statement up? For clarity sake, most of the lower division team are always destitute of finance and hence, anything that looks like one that's capable of bringing more money to the table will in most cases lead to an acceptance by them.

If there's a possibility of gambling on a said game and from finding, it shows that the game can be Rigged which will affect the overall outcome of the game, that's going to be the point that such gambling excess gets to be monitored and tried to be curtailed but rarely will Thier be a case of cancellation of games because of such thing

[Findingnemo]

Banning the game, team or the match just because it is possible to bet on that match doesn't even make sense, anyone can chose to include to bet on a match and if government doesn't like then they should take action on the one who make bets not the team who does nothing, this just shows how poor the management of those federations and they have no way of growing to the next stage in the particular sport.

[aioc]

In some countries amateur federations ban gambling and sometimes even will cancel a match for discovering there's a market opened for it.
What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

Every country has its own rules about gambling. If they see that betting can distract or manipulate the outcome, they can make rules that prevent betting, but if it's only on small divisions and they have it on a major division, then I find it strange.
Maybe because the federation saw that small divisions can be manipulated by syndicates, since they can offer money to players in those divisions, but if they have a committee that oversees the games, they can judge whether manipulation is occurring and punish those perpetrators if they see strong evidence.

[Odusko]

Games that it players are under age which sometimes falls between the categories amateur team tournament may face some level of restrictions from the government unlike other leagues that player are adults, so we can't say for sure how the extent of government decisions to restrict this category have bad effect of the league itself.

[criptoevangelista]

I don't have the courage to bet on smaller leagues or amateur leagues; corruption is rampant there, and the vast majority of athletes and teams collude for personal gain. The low salaries and the opportunity to make easy money completely undermine the credibility of betting on these leagues. I think most people feel the same way and avoid this type of betting.

[EluguHcman]

What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

I don't know if there was such conditions as part of the policies in the sport games. I am only aware that those unpopular football teams and leagues are very much risky to bet on the bookies because all their arrangements of the events will be very unprofessional and players too have their own inexperience in the game.

Once such event is being including in the bookie, it will easily be manipulated and makes it more risly for bettors to bet on it with the strategy on analysing the games stats before taking your decisions. There is why popular events and games with high interest on both teams are observed is better to bet on because it lower your risks possessions when the game is played genuinely.

[Mindyspace]

It's understandable that federations are genuinely concerned about betting in amateur divisions, as these championships are much more vulnerable to manipulation. Limiting bets might even make sense in this context.

The problem is how this can be done. Canceling games or removing the public after the championship has already started, or because a website opened betting without anyone asking, is unfair. Clubs and players end up being punished for something they don't control, precisely when they most need money and visibility.

If this rule exists, it should be clear from the beginning and applied preventively, not in the middle of the tournament. As it happens today, the intention may be good, but the result ends up harming those who are least to blame, unfortunately.

That's my opinion.

[qwertyup23]

I don't have the courage to bet on smaller leagues or amateur leagues; corruption is rampant there, and the vast majority of athletes and teams collude for personal gain. The low salaries and the opportunity to make easy money completely undermine the credibility of betting on these leagues. I think most people feel the same way and avoid this type of betting.

I definitely agree with you on this one.

The problem with amateur leagues are its regulation when it comes to official matches. Most of these matches are not that regulated given the size of the competition and the players involved. As a result, corruption and game-fixing are common in these matches since they believe they can get away with it.

What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

Let's answer the first question- gambling should always be prohibited in sports given that it destroys the integrity of the match and the sport. Regardless if its an amateur/lower division sport or an official large match, gambling should always be prohibited.

As for the second question- I would still answer in the affirmative that the rules regarding prohibition of gambling should be enforced in practice even if the match had already started. Again the reason is simple- it will destroy the integrity of the game if it were allowed in the first place.

[Stablexcoin]

For the longest time, i have not played on smaller leagues because of their consistency and cases of fixed matches and that has being going well for me.

The last time I played on a league I know little about, it was really a bad experience because the outcome was very unexpected as the match ended in a goalless draw which was the least expected outcome.

There have being occasions of several fixed matches on smaller divisions, even selling of fixed games to the public and all so it's not always trusted, and personally I don't enjoy betting on teams I'm not familiar with so it's a "NO" for me.

[JiiBs]

It's understandable that federations are genuinely concerned about betting in amateur divisions, as these championships are much more vulnerable to manipulation. Limiting bets might even make sense in this context.

The lower division leagues always make a risky bet but due to these possibilities of match fixing and the grip on regulations there is not so tight.

I don’t like gambling on lower divisions and probably wouldn’t. That’s due to the fact that, I can’t rely on statistics alone to make insightful predictions. Having no idea of the players and how they would perform, that I find challenging.

[Slow death]

What do you think about this situation? Should federations have such restrictions against gdmbling in their amateur and lower divisions? And also do you think it's fair for such rules to be enforced in practice after a match has started?

Rules are rules, and whether good or bad, people must abide by them. In this case, the people playing on the field must comply with the rules without complaining. It's true that it's a situation that will generate a lot of discontent when a team is winning and the game is interrupted because some betting market on the game has been discovered.

This could open up space for any team in that country that knows they have no chance of winning the game against another team to deliberately place bets and report it to the federation, so the game would be canceled and they would have more time to prepare.

[xbetz.io]

This is a tricky situation, but I understand why restrictions exist at amateur and lower levels. Once betting markets are available on matches where players are unpaid or semi-professional, it creates pressure and incentives those environments aren’t designed to handle. Even if no match-fixing occurs, the perception alone can damage the integrity of the competition.

That said, canceling matches after they’ve already started feels unfair to teams and fans. If federations want to enforce these rules, it should be done proactively, not retroactively once a market is discovered. Clear rules, enforced consistently before kickoff, would avoid most of these issues.

[coinlary]

There's no problem with betting allowing gamblers  to place bts on them, but I think I would reconsider this based on how popular a league is and its fan base. If it's just a few hundred people, then it's not worth it, as the game could actually be subject to rigging by a majority like family members and the like, since the players would eventuallyget pay less.
But with a league having tens to hundreds of thousands of active fans, then there's absolutely no problem as long as the rules that prohibit the club and officials from gambling still stand, in my opinion.

[Hispo]

The problem with small divisions and gambling is how easily they can be corrupted when compared to higher divisions, that is why there is so much scrutiny on gambling market.
So while I am not okey with heavy regulation on gambling markets, it is always okey to get an eye on the behavior of criminal organizations and how they are moving on those gambling markets, because there could always be some fixing going on.

That is also one of the reasons why the biggest casinos keep markets only opened for the biggest leagues.