Tennis officials on Wednesday "launched an independent review into their anti-corruption practices after allegations the sport's watchdog had not done enough to stamp out possible corruption in the game," according to Greg Stutchbury of REUTERS. The announcement came in the wake of media reports criticizing the Tennis Integrity Unit "for not adequately investigating" some 16 players repeatedly flagged over suspicions they had thrown matches in the past decade. Recent corruption scandals involving FIFA and the IAAF have "thrown those sports into turmoil" and ATP Chair Chris Kermode said that tennis was "not keen to follow them down that path." Kermode: "We are in a toxic environment for sport at the moment, in terms of it's an easy target for people to have a go with recent allegations at other governing bodies." The review would address issues of transparency and resourcing at the TIU, structural or governance issues, "and how to extend the scope of tennis' anti-corruption education programs" (REUTERS, 1/27). In Melbourne, Peter Hanlon reported execs from the various organizations "reiterated their view" that the match-fixing allegations "had revealed nothing new." Wimbledon Chair Philip Brook, the chair of the Tennis Integrity Board, said, "Most of the problem has been caused by events 10 days ago. We have to repair the damage that's been done. But we acknowledge we can improve" (THE AGE, 1/27).
PUSHING FOR TRANSPARENCY: The BBC reported BBC Radio 5 tennis correspondent Russell Fuller said that the independent panel will "report on the effectiveness" of the anti-corruption program and "make recommendations for change." Fuller: "The panel has been asked to look into how the TIU can become more transparent without compromising the need for confidentiality. It will also consider additional resources for the TIU and structural changes that may enhance its independence" (BBC, 1/27).
'COMPLETELY OPEN REVIEW': In N.Y., Christopher Clarey reported Adam Lewis, a British expert in sports law, will lead the inquiry, which Kermode called "a completely open review" where "nothing is off the table" that will give Lewis and his panel "full access to officials, players and information." Kermode: "All of us, all seven bodies in our sport, believe that with everything in the news and the serious allegations that have been thrown at our sport, the last thing anyone wants is another sports body investigating itself, which is why we have taken this very bold step to commission a completely independent review." Brook defended the work of the TIU, formed in '08 after a "surge in online betting activity and match-fixing concerns." He said, "I think the Tennis Integrity Unit has done very good work over the last seven years. We have a lot of confidence in the team there. I think what the events of the last few days have shown us, however, is that we are in a changed world. Sport is under the microscope" (N.Y. TIMES, 1/26). The AAP reported Brook also expected the Lewis review "to examine the decision" by Tennis Australia to sign bookmaker William Hill as a multi-million-dollar sponsor of its flagship tournament, "even though it had been previously ticked off by the Tennis Anti-Corruption Program." Brook: "One or two players made comments that they didn't understand the relationship. I think it's one of the things we would expect the review to take a good look at" (AAP 1/28).
 |
| Goran Ivanisevic |
IVANISEVIC SPEAKS OUT: In Sydney, Courtney Walsh reported former Wimbledon champion Goran Ivanisevic has issued a "stinging critique about identifying players allegedly involved in suspicious matches." Martina Navratilova said that authorities would need to invest "millions on millions" to properly police corruption as TA President Stephen Healy promised "there is no limit" to what it will pay to help protect the sport’s integrity. Healy "angrily rebuked the investigation that flagged Lleyton Hewitt, among others, as playing in matches with suspicious betting patterns," while Navratilova described the report that dropped on the morning of the Australian Open as "baloney." Ivanisevic issued a strong defense of 2014 US Open champion Marin Cilic, whose name appeared on a Swedish website in '11 on a list of players whose matches "had been flagged as being suspicious." Ivanisevic said, "How hurting is that? Cilic’s name was mentioned in 2011 on the maybe list. The maybe list? What does it mean, this maybe list? Maybe I am going to have a date with Angelina Jolie? Probably not. So how can you say maybe? You either have a list or you don’t have a list." Anger aside, "there is no doubt that authorities understand there is a problem, particularly in lower-level tournaments" (THE AUSTRALIAN, 1/28). In Melbourne, Linda Pearce reported Healy said that the need for greater transparency in tennis match-fixing investigations "must be mitigated by the rights of the individuals concerned." Healy branded as "shocking and appalling" the "unsubstantiated smear" over an '11 Davis Cup match involving Hewitt. Kermode: "Lleyton Hewitt, as we all know, is one of the greatest competitors of all time. I'm not sure he'd give his mother one point when he was playing." Healy said it was "outrageous to target Hewitt's loss" to Stanislas Wawrinka in the final rubber of the '11 world group play-off in Sydney on any list of suspicious matches. Healy said of Hewitt, "I watched the whole of that match, he tried his heart out; it was unbelievable he got as close as he did" (THE AGE, 1/27). REUTERS' Stutchbury reported in a separate piece Ivanisevic said that players are being hounded like "serial killers" and "demanded proof of the match-fixing allegations." He said, "There is no evidence. We are talking about algorithms and mathematics and some computer spits your name out like a serial killer and everyone is chasing you. You need proof. Show me that somebody did something wrong then I will believe you" (REUTERS, 1/27).
INSINUATIONS LINGER: In London, Sean Ingle reported 10 days have passed since BuzzFeed and the BBC "detonated a 9,000-word report," and the "suspicions and insinuations continue to linger like a stink bomb." Hewitt was "forced to deny he was a secret cheat." Dutch player Robin Hasse was accused of corruption on Twitter "based on no evidence." And a mixed doubles match on Sunday "was also called into question by the bookmakers Pinnacle although others disputed whether there were suspicious betting patterns." Kermode: "We are in a toxic environment." Toxic and, in Hewitt’s case, "dangerously indiscriminate." He "was not named" in the report. Suddenly Hewitt found himself "facing trial by algorithm." He admitted, "I know my name’s been thrown into it. I don’t think anyone here would think I’ve done anything corrupt or match-fixing. It’s just absurd." Ian Dorward, a professional tennis gambler who previously worked on the other side of the fence for a bookmaker, analyzed eight of Hewitt’s "allegedly suspicious matches and found no evidence of wrongdoing." Dorward said, "As much as I appreciate BuzzFeed releasing their data, they must have known that it would be possible to identify the players from it." Other betting experts agreed. One said, "Hewitt’s inclusion instinctively made no sense at all, as he didn’t fit the profile. He was far too wealthy, wasn’t a name that had ever been linked to fixing, and had far too much to lose in terms of reputation." Does this mean all of the BBC-BuzzFeed report "should be questioned?" No. Much of it "tallies with what people within the game have said for years." It was "also correct to warn that tennis has a problem with match-fixing" (GUARDIAN, 1/27).
