Tim
New member
- Joined:
- May 22, 2010
- Posts:
- 197
- Liked Posts:
- 0
I doubt the fan was trying to **** over Turco. The guy probably thinks Turco is awesome. Unfortunately, the league will take some action. Did I mention Bettman sucks.
bierboy
New member
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,015
- Liked Posts:
- 0
- Location:
- Quad Sillies
“We are following up to understand the circumstances, but no, I would not term it a formal investigation,” deputy commissioner Bill Daly wrote in an e-mail to Sporting News.
Ton
New member
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,991
- Liked Posts:
- 124
- Location:
- Park Ridge, IL
Why do non-stories like this last 3+ pages on IHN but the Alumni charity game only has like 5 posts in it?
Turco doing some pocket change gambling, Keith spraying a fan with water, all this is what makes this sport fun for the fans. Good for Turco to give a fan some interaction instead of putting a wall between himself and the fans. You'd never see this in the NBA or NFL, why? Because they are too high up on top of their high horses to even see the fans.
Turco doing some pocket change gambling, Keith spraying a fan with water, all this is what makes this sport fun for the fans. Good for Turco to give a fan some interaction instead of putting a wall between himself and the fans. You'd never see this in the NBA or NFL, why? Because they are too high up on top of their high horses to even see the fans.
R K
Guest
- Joined:
- Dec 10, 2014
- Posts:
- 7,876
- Liked Posts:
- 1,107
- Location:
- Anacortes, WA via Glenview, IL
jakobeast
New member
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,903
- Liked Posts:
- 21
- Location:
- yer ma's pants
Non issue, plain and simple. If this was any other player not on the Hawks I would say the same thing. If it was a bigger bet, then maybe some eyebrows would be raised, but even then I wouldn't care. Yes there is a rule on the books about gambling. The NHL could absolutely suspend Turco for a game or 2, or forever really, if they thought this act was egregious enough to warrant as such.
However, there would be a huge uprising, not only from Hawks fans, but hockey fans from all over the world, not to mention I am sure players would come out of the woodwork to defend Turco. I hope he maintains his sense of humor and the Hawks don't stifle him either.
However, there would be a huge uprising, not only from Hawks fans, but hockey fans from all over the world, not to mention I am sure players would come out of the woodwork to defend Turco. I hope he maintains his sense of humor and the Hawks don't stifle him either.
bierboy
New member
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,015
- Liked Posts:
- 0
- Location:
- Quad Sillies
In e-mail to Tribune, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly says, "No investigation and no action" regarding Marty Turco...
howcho
New member
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 774
- Liked Posts:
- 40
- Location:
- Abbotsford, British Columbia
Bettman shouldn't bother with a name like that.I was waiting for someone to post this.
Huh? Try English.
JOVE23
New member
- Joined:
- Jun 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 2,458
- Liked Posts:
- 0
bubbleheadchief
New member
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,517
- Liked Posts:
- 1
- Location:
- Middle of nowhere AL
Problem is Pete Rose bet his team would lose, which brought into question him intentionally "throwing" games. Didn't matter how hard it was to do, it still was a huge question mark about his integrity.
This is a non-issue as far as the rest of it goes. Turco was doing his normal thing, which is reaching out and keeping the NHL "real" for it's fans.
- Joined:
- Dec 10, 2014
- Posts:
- 7,876
- Liked Posts:
- 1,107
- Location:
- Anacortes, WA via Glenview, IL
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 17,852
- Liked Posts:
- 2,553
No. Pete Rose never bet against his team. That has not been proven and he to this day says he didn't. The problem is that Pete was in more of a position to alter the outcome of a game, say to make a the line or something, than a backup goalie who sees only practice ice. The main problem with Rose was his betting on other baseball games was thought to have inside info because he was a manager. The thing is, if what he was doing was so wrong, and so outrageous, why isn't he a billionaire by now. I mean for gods sake, he wasn't a very good gambler.
R K
Guest
Rose lied about it.
Permanent ineligibility
Amid reports that he had bet on baseball, Rose was questioned in February 1989 by outgoing commissioner Peter Ueberroth and his replacement, Bart Giamatti. Rose denied the allegations and Ueberroth dropped the investigation. However, three days after Giamatti became Commissioner, lawyer John M. Dowd was retained to investigate these charges against Rose. A Sports Illustrated cover story published on March 21, 1989 gave the public their first detailed report of the allegations that Rose had placed bets on baseball games.
Dowd interviewed many of Rose's associates, including alleged bookies and bet runners. He delivered a summary of his findings to the Commissioner in May. In it, Dowd documented Rose's alleged gambling activities in 1985 and 1986 and compiled a day-by-day account of Rose's alleged betting on baseball games in 1987. The Dowd Report documented his alleged bets on 52 Reds games in 1987, where Rose wagered a minimum of $10,000 a day. Others involved in the allegations claim that number was actually $2,000 a day.
According to the Dowd Report itself, "no evidence was discovered that Rose bet against the Reds."[2] This is in contrast to the case of "Shoeless" Joe Jackson and his teammates in the Black Sox Scandal, who were accused of intentionally losing the 1919 World Series. Those critical of Rose's behavior, including Ohio's own Hall of Fame baseball reporter Hal McCoy, have observed that "the major problem with Rose betting on baseball, particularly the Reds, is that as manager he could control games, make decisions that could enhance his chances of winning his bets, thus jeopardizing the integrity of the game."[8]
Rose continued to deny all of the accusations against him and refused to appear at a hearing with Giamatti on the matter. He filed a lawsuit alleging that the Commissioner had prejudged the case and could not provide a fair hearing. A Cincinnati judge issued a temporary restraining order to delay the hearing, but Giamatti fought to have the case moved to Federal Court. The Commissioner prevailed in that effort, after which he and Rose entered settlement negotiations.
On August 24, 1989, Rose voluntarily accepted a permanent place on baseball’s ineligible list.[9] Rose accepted that there was a factual reason for the ban; in return, Major League Baseball agreed to make no formal finding with regard to the gambling allegations. According to baseball's rules, Rose could apply for reinstatement in one year. Rose, with a 412-373 record, was replaced as Reds manager by Tommy Helms. Rose began therapy with a psychiatrist for treatment of a gambling addiction.
In a December 2002 interview, investigator Dowd stated that he believed that Rose may have bet against the Reds while managing them.[10]
Rose's ban has prevented the Reds from formally retiring his #14 jersey. However, aside from his son Pete Jr.'s brief stint with the team in 1997, the Reds have not issued that number since Rose's ban. Even though the number has not been retired, it is highly unlikely that any Red will ever wear that number again. Uniform number 14 was retired in Rose's honor by the Cincinnati Cyclones of the East Coast Hockey League.
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 17,852
- Liked Posts:
- 2,553
So where does it say that Rose acknowledged he bet against the Reds?
- Joined:
- Dec 10, 2014
- Posts:
- 7,876
- Liked Posts:
- 1,107
- Location:
- Anacortes, WA via Glenview, IL
Call me an ignoramus (I'm not much of a gambler), but does Vegas have an over/under or point spread for baseball games, like they do in football and basketball, so that if the Reds had a lead, but if they won by too many runs, that Rose would lose his bet? If that's the case, betting on your own team is defintely verboten.
supraman
New member
- Joined:
- May 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 8,024
- Liked Posts:
- 196
- Location:
- St.Pete, FL
in defense of...one sport...football players aren't really near the fans in the game the sidelines are so huge and all that but baseball the bullpen is right by the stands and I've heard some of the pitchers are pretty cool to the fans. Basketball...yeah assholes. Hockey the fans are right next to the players. I mean as ALL of us know there are seats just next to the bench.
So yeah hockey players are interactive but the arenas help that too.
Shantz My Pants
New member
- Joined:
- Dec 10, 2014
- Posts:
- 3,923
- Liked Posts:
- 787
I can't believe this was even getting debated here on IHN. It was a simple fan interaction and it was for 5 bucks Canadian, whatever the **** that is in US currency.