Question about Officials Rigging Games

[Outshined_One]

With the Tim Donaghy scandal starting to pick up steam, I'm noticing some people are discussing the likelihood that he was not the only official who's ever engaged in this kind of behavior. Let's face it, officials can do quite a bit in attempting to fix the outcomes of certain games. Whether it's something as simple as expanding or contracting a strike zone or ignoring a minor foul on a player or whether it's something huge like a holding penalty on a TD pass, officials have a lot of power when it comes to determining the outcome.

 

Moreover, it seems like people are inclined more to believe that officials are incompetent rather than believe the officials are intentionally affecting the outcomes of games. However, with this Donaghy thing happening, there might be a bit of a shift in the other direction. Maybe this issue is more of a problem than we think?

 

So, here's what I'd like to delve into regarding baseball.

 

Would it surprise you to find out an umpire has been affecting the outcomes of games for gambling purposes?

 

I'd like to see what you all have to say.

[seanimal]

It'd be hard to see the monetary motivation as far as rigging baseball is concerned, as from what I understand, betting on baseball isn't incredibly lucrative. I could be wrong though.

 

I wouldn't doubt the possibility, there's a bad apple in every bunch, but in general I assume incompetence long before I assume rigging.

[Electron Blue]

It'd be hard to see the monetary motivation as far as rigging baseball is concerned, as from what I understand, betting on baseball isn't incredibly lucrative. I could be wrong though.

 

I wouldn't doubt the possibility, there's a bad apple in every bunch, but in general I assume incompetence long before I assume rigging.

 

Everytime you hear about someone losing self-control in gambling, the "monetary motivation" seems to not be much of a factor. It's the Gambler's Rush, or whatever. Maybe that's just anecdotal, but that's what you always seem to hear.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

Considering that inside every clubhouse and umpires locker room from rookie ball to the Majors there is a huge series of posters stating the rules on gambling to the punishments for. They are in English and Spanish. They are not in small print. They are posted in a spot so that you cant avoid not seeing them.

 

When I was hired to work in a minor league clubhouse I was told three things.

 

1) They are serious about the gambling issue.

 

2) You will be treated like crap by the players until you earn their trust.

 

3) Dont ever, even jokingly, make a comment about betting on a baseball game. Football, horses, dogs, the odds of a guy getting lucky that night are ok. Never, ever, ever on baseball.

 

During a clubhouse inspection as part of the BPA I was asked by a league official about the gambling rules posters. When they had been put up, were we ever told to take them down, ect, ect. I was told later when the GM was in town to look at the farm team to put extra tape on them to make sure there was no chance they would come down.

 

As far as umpires go, baseball to me would be one of the hardest sports to fix. With so many things going on on each play you would have to be obvious in your calls/non-calls.

 

I can see a soft strike zone helping a guy get to "X" k's on a night. Then you could say maybe but even then you have to match up with umpire and pitcher and outside sources.

 

I would be more worried about this in college baseball where I have personally seen umpires make calls to get even with fans/parents in the stands. Doing so to make a little extra money isnt that far of a step.

[NCCubFan]

It'd be hard to see the monetary motivation as far as rigging baseball is concerned, as from what I understand, betting on baseball isn't incredibly lucrative.

Pete Rose begs to differ. :D

[shnsajax]

Baseball and hockey and would rank at the bottom of all sports in terms of gambling potential. College football I would watch very closely though, followed by the NFL.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I like Bruce Froeming has been affecting the outcome of Cubs' games for years.

[JimSorgi]

I like Bruce Froeming has been affecting the outcome of Cubs' games for years.

I think that has more to do with him being an idiot.

[Soul]

Regardless of whether it is lower on the gambling totem pole than other sports, it could still happen. Baseball has already been host to two of the most high-profile gambling scandals.

 

You can still make money off it. It can still happen. All those hundreds of umps that come through the majors over the years? Wouldn't suprise me one bit if one or two have shaved points.

[hawkcub]

Baseball and hockey and would rank at the bottom of all sports in terms of gambling potential. College football I would watch very closely though, followed by the NFL.

 

I agree with you completely. Right now I think CFB already has a problem with rigging of games. But not for gambling. There are officials who are alumns of a university but are still allowed to officiate games of the school whom they have graduted from.

 

With hockey and baseball there is less scoring so less chances for shaving points.

[Outshined_One]

As far as umpires go, baseball to me would be one of the hardest sports to fix. With so many things going on on each play you would have to be obvious in your calls/non-calls.

 

I can see a soft strike zone helping a guy get to "X" k's on a night. Then you could say maybe but even then you have to match up with umpire and pitcher and outside sources.

 

I liked your post quite a bit, but I'm not totally sure I agree in full with this part.

 

I agree with the fact that there are certain aspects of baseball which an umpire could not rig a baseball game through. The second base umpire does not call balls and strikes. No umpire is going to call a single into center field a foul ball. Moreover, with the close plays that could heavily impact a game one way or another, the umpire cannot predict what it will be or whether he will be in position to call it one way or another.

 

However, there is one aspect of the game which an umpire can heavily impact: when he is standing behind home plate. If you give one pitcher a tight zone and another one a loose zone, that will greatly help one team while greatly hurting the other. There's no guarantee that you will get the desired outcome, but you're upping the odds quite a bit by doing so.

 

Yet, that umpire will only be in that position once every four games. So, at the very least, there is that safeguard.

 

And yes, baseball is quite easy to bet on. Quite honestly, there are plenty of people out there who will bet on anything. You can bet on it game to game in different forms, to boot. You can bet on who will win, how much they'll win by, what the combined score is, and so on. I think this perception might be a result of the popularity of gambling on baseball compared to gambling on other sports, though.

[erik316wttn]

I KNOW there have been umpires who have affected their calls due to petty personal biases. I don't know about gambling, however. They would be an easy target, though.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

However, there is one aspect of the game which an umpire can heavily impact: when he is standing behind home plate. If you give one pitcher a tight zone and another one a loose zone, that will greatly help one team while greatly hurting the other. There's no guarantee that you will get the desired outcome, but you're upping the odds quite a bit by doing so.

 

Yet, that umpire will only be in that position once every four games. So, at the very least, there is that safeguard.

 

I agree with you that two strike zones can affect a game. However looking at how many pitches are thrown, balls put into play, then fielded and thrown, it's just to hard and a waste of resources to buy an umpire to put them in that situation.

 

An umpire that gets into trouble is another issue entirely. However considering that MLB employs retired FBI/CIA/experienced criminal investigators I would think that an umpire that found themselves in that situation could receive official forgiveness for coming forward and saying that I was contacted by "X" to rig some games because I have some debts with them. Because no doubt is left that they will find out. They make sure you know they will.

 

The Black Sox and Rose scandals rocked baseball. It has become baseballs boogie man that another betting/gambling incident will come again. The Steroids problem is getting ready to blow. Bonds is just the very visable tip of the iceberg.

 

Baseball will be in trouble from a perception point for a while afterwards. A umpire/player in trouble for gambling might be a bigger blow than they want because of the steroids. That is why I believe that an edict has gone out to all the teams and players to watch your friends carefully.

[Brian]

I do think that a home plate umpire as a lot better chances at swaying a game to another team than a basketball ref does.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

Thinking about the question posed, I could see a crew being able to do it. But it would take a huge commitment of resources on the part of the group that wanted to rig the games.

 

1) You have to be close enough to a crew to be comfortable enough to float the idea. Considering how paranoid baseball is about underground interference your contact with them would have to be a "clean" individual.

 

2) Umpires are well paid and compensated for what they do. During the off season, once they make the majors, holding camps and speaking engagements can double what they make during the season. They get what amounts to four to six weeks of vacation paid during the season. The medical package is top notch, and its like teaching, once you are there full time you can stink it up; because you will always be there.

 

So you have to be able to top that package to make it worth their while to risk it. Trust me when I say they know it is a huge risk.

 

3) People talk. So it would have to be a very quiet operation on your part. That is why I dont believe the conspiracy theories, to many people have to not talk. Even then you have to guarantee that no one on the umpires side gets cold feet and turns you in.

 

4) How do you measure your success? You have a crew in your pay, when and how do you use them. Playoffs and World Series are out. They pull individuals and make up umpiring crews. When the best play the worst team? Who is going to bet against you and then do it consistantly?

 

You cant control the players. That means mistakes that are launched, routine grounders that are bobbled, highlight plays made are all out of your control. Do you try to get them to shave runs? K's in a game? Runs scored?

 

I can think of more than a few games where a pitcher had nothing and won because everything hit was hit at someone. The opposite is true too.

 

Its just to hard to say that you didnt pay off because "its one of those nights" or your crew didnt do its job good enough. Push them to hard and they turn on you. Hello Feds and RICO.

 

A manager might be easier just because you are dealing with one person. But your troubles multiply. Since Rose I would imagine that the security office in the New York offices pays very close attention to managers, lines, and game outcomes.

 

Granted I am just scratching the surface but I would think I could get a bigger return out of drugs, prostitiution, and protection than I could get out of trying to rig a baseball game.

[Outshined_One]

Granted I am just scratching the surface but I would think I could get a bigger return out of drugs, prostitiution, and protection than I could get out of trying to rig a baseball game.

 

Organized crime is a strange thing.

 

Gambling is a massive enterprise which can be incredibly lucrative, as Vegas has shown us. It's not about betting on games and rigging the game so that a certain outcome will occur; that's rather foolish. As it has been mentioned, numerous crazy things happen in games all the time and nobody wants to raise any eyebrows. If you bet a million dollars on a game, you don't want to be out a million dollars because of a fluke result.

 

The real money is made with the bookies. While plenty of these criminal organizations run illegitimate sportsbooks, plenty of them also operate legitimate ones. They make a ton of money off of it in the process. This isn't about shaking down a hooker for $500 a week or about forcing a business to pay $1,000 a month for protection. Those are peanuts compared to what a large-scale gambling operation can pull in a night. Granted, an organization can still take part in those activities, but they're still relatively small-time.

 

So, let's say you own a casino, so you're already a substantially wealthy person. Let's further say you have a huge baseball game coming up which is going to attract a lot of gamblers. The line on the game has caused a very large number of people to bet on Outcome A happening with a smaller number of people betting on Outcome B occurring. Odds are pretty darn good that if Outcome B happens, your casino will make a pile of cash. You want Outcome B to happen pretty darn badly and would be willing to take certain measures to make sure it does. However, if Outcome A occurs, you probably won't be too badly off since the Outcome B people blunt the financial blow.

 

Now, granted, this is not the only way things can happen. Donaghy sounds like a compulsive gambler that got in debt to some small-time bookies who in turn got lucky he fell into their laps. However, the Gambinos are allegedly involved. Who knows what the real story is right now?

 

My point is that there are plenty of people out there who have the resources, motivation, and organizational competency to pull something like this off and profit in a major way from it. Donaghy said he was going to cooperate with the feds. If he's not the only one who's doing this, the fallout could be unthinkable.

 

At the very least, every major professional sports organization in the US has to be incredibly nervous about what's happening to Donaghy. If he knows other officials involved in this, it could be absolutely devastating. Having a problem like this be systematic has to be the worst nightmare of everyone associated with professional sports.

[CubFanPhilly]

So, let's say you own a casino, so you're already a substantially wealthy person. Let's further say you have a huge baseball game coming up which is going to attract a lot of gamblers. The line on the game has caused a very large number of people to bet on Outcome A happening with a smaller number of people betting on Outcome B occurring. Odds are pretty darn good that if Outcome B happens, your casino will make a pile of cash. You want Outcome B to happen pretty darn badly and would be willing to take certain measures to make sure it does. However, if Outcome A occurs, you probably won't be too badly off since the Outcome B people blunt the financial blow.

 

If you're the Casino, bookmaker, whatever, you're interest is in weighting the odds of Outcomes A & B so that you get equal action on both sides. You take the vig and walk away happy.

 

I think Dirt Dog's got it right. Baseball's too random for one ump (or even the crew) to assure the outcome. The Black Sox scandal allegedly involved most of the starters and even then the fix was almost blown.

[Outshined_One]

If you're the Casino, bookmaker, whatever, you're interest is in weighting the odds of Outcomes A & B so that you get equal action on both sides. You take the vig and walk away happy.

 

The vig is part of what blunts the blow, but it's pretty much a given that there will be an unequal number of bets for two possible outcomes. If you track point spreads over a given period of time (i.e. if the Bears start out the week as 7 point favorites, but become 8.5 point favorites by game time), you can clearly tell which way the majority is betting on a given game. In that case, you'd like to have the majority lose.

 

However, if you'd rather not get involved in these matters, you're right. Take your bookie charges and whatever money you get from the losers and walk away happy. Those are not the kind of people I'm talking about and who seem to be involved in this mess.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

I still think it would be too hot a potato to involve an organization in to heavily. You are right when you say a hooker here, bookie there, and protection over here. However when you look at it as 5,000 hookers, call girls, and strippers daily here, 500 bookies daily there, and whole sections of town that you are providing protection monthly to... Then you start to talk about some serious capital that is relatively safe.

 

I am already having to grease police, judges, keep a few lawyers, pay my associates, and make sure I dont draw to much attention that I become the target. Why run the risk? Be the crocodile who waits in the cool water for the unwary beast instead of the flashy peacock who has to show off to get what he wants.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

If you're the Casino, bookmaker, whatever, you're interest is in weighting the odds of Outcomes A & B so that you get equal action on both sides. You take the vig and walk away happy.

 

The vig is part of what blunts the blow, but it's pretty much a given that there will be an unequal number of bets for two possible outcomes. If you track point spreads over a given period of time (i.e. if the Bears start out the week as 7 point favorites, but become 8.5 point favorites by game time), you can clearly tell which way the majority is betting on a given game. In that case, you'd like to have the majority lose.

 

However, if you'd rather not get involved in these matters, you're right. Take your bookie charges and whatever money you get from the losers and walk away happy. Those are not the kind of people I'm talking about and who seem to be involved in this mess.

 

As far as falling into a bookies trap, the umpire most likely could go to the league, gain official forgiveness, and a transfer to the Umpire Evaluation section. Granted they wouldnt ever call a game but they still would be employed.

 

As I was saying before baseball takes gambling very seriously. Any umpire who found themselves in those circumstances would have to know that there was a safety net for them to prevent such things.

 

I just thought about the bookie too. The bookies bosses cant be too happy that a spotlight is headed their way.

 

I would think that a bookie wouldnt do this w/o someone saying yes. That someone would have to know that risk, especially after this. Given the security baseball keeps around you would have to think that risk in the long term dosent = reward.

 

 

Edited to add thought about bookies.

[MPC]

university of hawaii football has been rumored to heavily into gambling, ref fixing, etc.

[wekse]

baseball should go to a computerized umpiring system for home plate.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

kudos to you, ESPN, for your excellence in journalism:

 

The FBI is investigating allegations that veteran NBA referee Tim Donaghy bet on basketball games he officiated over the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 seasons, including ones in which he officiated.

[NCCubFan]

kudos to you, ESPN, for your excellence in journalism:

 

The FBI is investigating allegations that veteran NBA referee Tim Donaghy bet on basketball games he officiated over the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 seasons, including ones in which he officiated.

As opposed to games he officiated in which he did not officiate. :lol: