Home > Politics, News & Issues > Sports News & Opinion > Sports News & Opinion (Other)
Should gambling on professional sports get an athlete banned for life?
Results so far:
| Yes | 43% | 105 votes | Total: 244 votes | |
| No | 57% | 139 votes |
Yes
by Keith Grieve
Created on: April 13, 2008 Last Updated: October 31, 2008
Gambling has played a big part in the popularity of sports. From placing wagers on games to the immensely popular fantasy sports money changes hands based on the outcome of every popular game.
When the participants in those games take part in the wagering it attacks the integrity of the sport. That damage can be permament and so should the punishment for those found guilty.
Why do we watch sports as fervently as we do?
Some watch because they are in awe of the talent on the field or court necessary to compete at the highest level. Others may watch simply for entertainment.
At the root of every reason we watch sports is the fact that we believe that the competitors are giving their all to win that game. Anything else is cheating the fans.
If a player has secondary motives- like money riding on the outcome- then the motivation becomes a little more individualistic and a little more questionable.
Whether the player has bet on himself to win or lose makes no difference. The fact that the motivation has changed from proving who's best to padding the wallets of the participants cheapens the whole concept.
Now I know there are people who will quickly point out that no professional athlete plays for free. For those of you reading this that immediately jumped out of your chairs, thank you Captain Obvious.
However there's something intangible about the concept of betting that makes it seem less than noble. Each game or match changes from "Let's see who's better" to "Can I make some money because I lost the last three bets I placed".
It has been said that in sports effort should be a given. Wagers placed should have no bearing on whether or not that player plays hard or not. Any professional who admits they would play harder if they had money riding on the game does not deserve that moniker.
The concept of gambling by athletes on sports is one that a league cannot condone. This is simply because the only thing a league can sell itself on is the integrity that each contest is uncompromised by any outside forces. To believe that one can draw the line and let players bet as long as they bet on themselves to win is to ignore the frailty of human character.
There is no place in sports for gambling by athletes and the only rightful punishment is to remove any danger to the integrity of the game- and remove it for good.
Learn more about this author, Keith Grieve.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
by Jeff Axelrod
Created on: April 14, 2008 Last Updated: October 31, 2008
Dwight Gooden. Darryl Strawberry. Leon Durham. Vida Blue. Keith Hernandez. Ferguson Jenkins. Steve Howe. Otis Nixon.
Each of these well-known baseball players has two things in common: They were all suspended by Major League Baseball because of criminal drug use, and they're all eligible for the Hall of Fame.
In fact, Fergie Jenkins is already in the Hall of Fame.
Football player Ray Lewis was indicted on murder charges in a double homicide - although the charges were reduced as a result of a plea bargain - and not only was he not suspended by the National Football League, he was celebrated as the Most Valuable Player in Super Bowl XXXV. He will likely receive strong consideration for football's Hall of Fame.
Professional sports' hallowed Halls are populated by plenty of athletes whose character and morals are hardly beyond reproach - you'll find racists, criminals, chronic alcoholics, and spousal abusers, to name but a few of the flaws.
Yet one of sports' all-time greatest competitors, Pete Rose, remains banned for life from his sport because he gambled.
It hardly seems fair.
In this day and age in which athletes will regularly try to gain an unfair competitive advantage through the use of banned drugs, it seems positively inane that sports will ban an athlete for life because of something that created no competitive advantage.
Of course, there's a very fine line.
If an athlete is betting against himself or his team, then doing what he can to assure a loss, the integrity of the game has been damaged - and a suspension is certainly in order. If the player is given a second chance and the problem is not rectified, further punishment should be considered.
Yes, Pete Rose had a gambling problem. Yes, he bet on baseball games. But he had so much confidence in his own abilities - and those of the other athletes on his team - that he regularly bet on them to win! (If that's viewed as such a crime, sports announcers should be forever banned from using the cliche, "Put his money where his mouth is.") The fact is, there has never been any evidence that Pete Rose bet against his team, or that his gambling activities resulted in the integrity of any game being damaged.
Should Rose have exercised more caution in his choice of extracurricular endeavors? Certainly. But does he deserve a lifetime ban because of them? No.
Ultimately, Rose's is but one case, and each should be judged individually on its own merits.
But there should be no rule that arbitrarily bans an athlete for life because of gambling.
Learn more about this author, Jeff Axelrod.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Write and get published
Share with other writers
Polish your freelancing skills
Quality articles from proven freelancers
Exclusive rights, fast turnaround
Brand engagement, business blogging -- our writers do it all
INFORMATION
Copyright © 2002-2012 Helium, Inc. All rights reserved.
Helium.com: A Service of RR Donnelley