Lee's Match Fixing Hearing date set

Suspended snooker player Stephen Lee will face a hearing on 9 September into allegations of match fixing.
Lee, 38, who has been suspended since October 2012, denies corruption allegations which centre on eight matches at four tournaments in 2008-09.
Sport Resolutions UK will hear the case which could lead to a lengthy ban.

Lee can't afford to ruin the WPBSA by taking them to Court like Higgins so they'll probably throw the book at him........

Disgraceful, I wonder if its a problem rife in the game.

Also going on from Hann, an 8 year ban minimum.

I would expect a life ban to be honest . I see Ronnie has backtracked and said he was taken out of context when he said there were lots of players fixing games

Ronnie, what an idiot. He never learns. As for Lee, I hope he gets a life ban. I hate seeing his fat, chain-smoking face on TV

If top players are involved in match fixing I think that - over the longer term - they stand quite a significant chance of getting caught.  Once they've done it and got away with it a few times they are very open to blackmail, or they may become gradually get less careful; also open to exposure by stings by undercover investigators.

Ronnie has probably been up for a few foot in mouth awards over his career!

The rotund one has had a 24 hour stay of execution. Hard to imagine that he won't be asking 'Do you want fries with that ?' before the week is up though.

Given they have deferred the decision until today i worry he wont get a life ban but more like 2 - 3 years

The are going to bottle it imo

Apparently he's not being tried under the new rules - which would give him an automatic life ban - but under the old rules, where players get several years. Anything less than 5 years is a sham, I'd hope for something that would take him to age 45, meaning he can't compete at the top level ever again.

He's got 12 years. Should have been life.

Duty281 wrote:He's got 12 years. Should have been life.

Yes just seen that on SkySports news , he is expected to appeal which is probably why he was given 12 years so they can reduce it by a few years on appeal .

Kenny wrote:

Duty281 wrote:He's got 12 years. Should have been life.

Yes just seen that on SkySports news , he is expected to appeal which is probably why he was given 12 years so they can reduce it by a few years on appeal .

And he got a £40,000 fine.

As Bradley Stait pointed out on Twitter to the BBC, he'll just write a book and make back that fine twice over.

12 years ends his professional snooker career. Even if he appeals and it's taken down to 8, he's finished.

The £40k fine is a joke though, he made far more than that through the match fixing alone

Azzy Mahmood wrote:12 years ends his professional snooker career. Even if he appeals and it's taken down to 8, he's finished.

The £40k fine is a joke though, he made far more than that through the match fixing alone

They should have fined him whatever prize money he'd won since he started rolling over like a puppy dog.

I think the 40k is costs Lee has to pay, and not a fine.

Well if that's the case, then it's even more disgraceful. You can't ban a guy and not fine him as well.

Would have thought Lee will get practicing his 9-ball now, may well do well in US.

Strange really him doing this,as he always seemed an ok guy. It does make you wonder just how easily people can get hooked into doing this now you can bet on next frame, next game, next hole in different sports. Personally i still think the Higgins thing was ridiculous for him to escape completely.

Also some irony with Lee, in that his game was in the doldrums for a couple of years, which may have led him to do this, yet now the tour has expanded with more tournaments more often, prior to his ban he was on some good form and i should think earning good money and not needing to think about the risky business or arranging losing frames. Chickens coming home to roost and all that.

Its funny the whole betting thing - conversely Ive always thought being able to bet on yourself to win is completely fine, as you are after all meant to be trying to win - its well known the Jimmy White for example won huge amounts betting on himself to win in his early career while prize money was lower and he was trying to get going in his career etc.

Higgins got away with it because at the time he was one of about 3 half-decent snooker players. If it happened today, it'd be a life ban because he didn't report it, he kept schtum.

Not sure how anyone is going to be happy facing Lee in any sport now, knowing what he's done.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/snooker/24270974

Lee has protested his innocence and will appeal against his 12 year ban.

12 years is more than enough.

Problem Lee has got is that without viewing the evidence..

A case like this is hugely embarrassing to snooker so this kind of case wouldn't be taken lightly.......They must have good reason to target him..

I imagine like Higgins he's bang to rights and I imagine unlike Higgins he hasn't the wealth to sue the WPBSA with top lawyers and risk bankrupting them at court......

hence the 12 year ban for him and the sack all Higgins received.........

Higgins never took money though. He never actually fixed a match, never took money to do so. He listened to the proposal - for which he got the ban - and didn't report it - for which he got the ban - but he technically didn't go anywhere near as far as Stephen Lee did. He fully deserves a 12 year ban.

He shook hands on the proposal and agreed to doing it.......

But didn't do it. Big difference.

He didn't get the chance to do it.......but was on camera agreeing..........

It's a pedantic point you're making............He didn't do it not because he grew a conscience but because The NOW exposed him.......If you remember he went into details about how they could do it etc.......

He is a big fish however like Linford christie so a compromise was reached to spare long expensive court proceedings........

Something Hann and Lee hadn't the finances to pursue.......

Stephen Lee says he has evidence that will prove he is innocent of match-fixing.

He told Talksport: "I have put all the money trails in place to show it is all legitimate and statements from seven players and two top-class referees who saw no wrongdoing.

"I'm going to clear my name. The facts will be coming out shortly."

If he had evidence of his innocence, surely the time to hand it over was during the enquiry? Let's say for arguments sake he's telling the truth, and he has evidence that clears his name.

I'd then charge him with bringing the game into disrepute, and give him a 12 year ban.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:If he had evidence of his innocence, surely the time to hand it over was during the enquiry? Let's say for arguments sake he's telling the truth, and he has evidence that clears his name.

I'd then charge him with bringing the game into disrepute, and give him a 12 year ban.

 

If he's so frigging stupid to not bring about crucial evidence, then he has just dragged snooker through the mud for no good reason.

Unless it's all part of Barry Hearn's plan to get rid of Ronnie. Christ, it nearly worked

Still no sign of his tell all book that was going to 'rock the sport'.