Stephen Lee found guilty of snooker match-fixing...............

this inverstigation came as a result from the dodgy prem league betting and final frame didnt it?

just been reading the report, its amazing he denied the allegations

deserves to be banned indefinitely

102. Match 8 took place on 22 April 2009. It was between Mr Lee and Ryan Day. Mr Lee lost 10-4.
102.1 On 20 April 2009 there were extensive telephone communications between Mr Lee and Mr Jones,
who also spoke to Mr McDonald, Mr Lockwood and Alexandra McOran-Campbell. On 20 April
Mr Jones placed two small bets on Day to win, one on Day to win 10-4 and one on Day to win
10-5. On 21 April at about 7.30 in the morning Mr Lee and Mr Jones spoke by telephone and
they then exchanged texts over the rest of the day. At about 17.45 on 21 April Mr Jones
embarked on a marathon betting session, placing 66 bets against Mr Lee before the match
commenced, variously on Day to win; Lee to lose; Day to win 10-4; Day to win 10-5; Day to win
by 4-6 frames; total frames under 15, 15.5, 16; total number of frames. A further five bets were placed between the two sessions on 22 April, following a phone call between Mr Lee and Mr
Jones at about 14.30. Some of these were placed using accounts in the name of Turia McOran
Campbell and some were placed with high street bookmakers by Alexandra McOran Campbell.
Over the betting Mr Jones placed about £6,700, won about £15,500 and lost about £1,000.

variously on Day to win; Lee to lose; Day to win 10-4; Day to win 10-5; Day to win
by 4-6 frames; total frames under 15, 15.5, 16; total number of frames.

Talk about over egging the pudding

same punnishment as higgins
look forward to seeing fatty play next season

So the profit from the bets on the WC match v Day were about £8,000 , which must have then been split at least 3 ways

The difference between winning and losing the match was 4 grand , hardly seems worthwhile fixing it


The breakdown of prize money for this year is shown below:[27][28]
Winner: £250,000
Runner-up: £125,000
Semi-final: £52,000
Quarter-final: £24,050
Last 16: £16,000
Last 32: £12,000

How is he going to afford all his food now?!

Sounds like a worse case than Higgins, but don't see how then can justify a life ban given Higgins only got 6 months.

Sep 17, 2013 -- 12:44AM, tobermory wrote:

So the profit from the bets on the WC match v Day were about £8,000 , which must have then been split at least 3 ways The difference between winning and losing the match was 4 grand , hardly seems worthwhile fixing it The breakdown of prize money for this year is shown below:[27][28]Winner: £250,000Runner-up: £125,000Semi-final: £52,000Quarter-final: £24,050Last 16: £16,000Last 32: £12,000

yeh I was thinking about that earlier, doesnt seem like he made enough to make it anywhere near worthwhile, coouldve made the same if not more by just trying to win the games

That's only the money that those investigated found. Could be a drop in the ocean. He could have had up to 10 times thar amount put in offshore accounts as a result of overseas betting. The money located just loose change and money given to his wife just some shopping money to get her off his back.
Plus how longs it been going on for 3,4,5 ,6 years. 
If he emigrates to Asia then it's a giveaway.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/snooker/24122626

hahaha hes a fine one to talk when you consider 90% of the match he has played abroad he didnt give a f uck and put in no effort, I remember a beaut of a match he played v holt in malta, was one of the most blatant fixes or non tries ive ever seen

Lee got his ticket in 92 at the same time as O'Sullivan, Higgins, and Williams all heavily influenced by Hendry who had taken the game to another level.
I don't think any player has hit a snooker ball so sweetly as Lee but a combination of an eating disorder and a lack of grey matter held him back.
I think its fair to say that he was probably at it from the late nineties as his shot selection in many matches was hard to fathom, so much so that a questionable brain was hardly the answer.
Why such a talented player stooped so low is hard to understand but perhaps a liking for a joint and other pleasures has something to do with it.

A 10 year career ending ban is the very least he can expect and more for what they didn't get him on than what they did.

I hope nobody questions his talent because there is no doubt in my mind he would have won a couple of world championships had he the discipline to practice and the will power to conquer the evils of addiction.
Sad for him, his family, and snooker but he is the tip of an ever growing iceberg, especially as it grows in countries where cheating is second nature and a way of life.
Which countries are those?   I couldn't possibly say.

Ronnie calling it as it is.  Snooker used to be a gentleman s game ( Eddie Charlton,cliff thorburn, terry Griffiths) , no gentlemen left and only Ronnie
left with any character.   Didnt like Hendry or Davies but they always played straight to win like sportsmen, now we have to put up with the likes of
Higgins and Lee not knowing if its been pre arranged. That ain't sport.

Did mean to say that betting on snooker results in many countries is huge and would drawf that in the uk so the monies mentioned here are very misleading.
In china and the east in general, getting the nod at a correct result or frame score can be worth thirty times the prize money of even the world championships.

Sep 17, 2013 -- 11:41AM, moondan wrote:

Lee got his ticket in 92 at the same time as O'Sullivan, Higgins, and Williams all heavily influenced by Hendry who had taken the game to another level.I don't think any player has hit a snooker ball so sweetly as Lee but a combination of an eating disorder and a lack of grey matter held him back.I think its fair to say that he was probably at it from the late nineties as his shot selection in many matches was hard to fathom, so much so that a questionable brain was hardly the answer.Why such a talented player stooped so low is hard to understand but perhaps a liking for a joint and other pleasures has something to do with it.A 10 year career ending ban is the very least he can expect and more for what they didn't get him on than what they did.I hope nobody questions his talent because there is no doubt in my mind he would have won a couple of world championships had he the discipline to practice and the will power to conquer the evils of addiction.Sad for him, his family, and snooker but he is the tip of an ever growing iceberg, especially as it grows in countries where cheating is second nature and a way of life.Which countries are those?   I couldn't possibly say.

have never heard about an eating dissorder b4, is that true or u just ripping the pi ss?

granicking,

I think you maybe.

Of course we all know he only consumed healthy food, was the perfect specimen and he never had to attend clinics or specialists.

Id never heard of him atennding any clinics or specialists

World Snooker only got themselves to blame for not coming down harder on Higgins.

Higgins got a small ban but lee will probably get a near life ban

any prospect of suing Stephen Lee for money lost on his bets? I know there are hurdles vis a vis current law but there should be an automatic presumption of guilt/liability where a player has been found guilty of/admitted match fixing. I know that will act as a deterrent to all fixers across all sports...

PMSL at Rocket Ronnie, love transparency etc. Well Ronnie, unless you are hearing voices...................name those that said it,
and the trail will get closer to those fixing matches. Hate people who put comments out there.............but no names.

ronnie KNOWS

they should look at a few of a well known bald snooker player who used to shout a llot but has toned it down,been involved in more disgusting matches than anyone else imo,used to have a pony tail

Sep 17, 2013 -- 3:31PM, pandora1963 wrote:

they should look at a few of a well known bald snooker player who used to shout a llot but has toned it down,been involved in more disgusting matches than anyone else imo,used to have a pony tail

yes, I peronally witnessed a fix of his at the grand prix snooker in aberdeen in 05 or 06, cant remember which, was that dreadful round robin format and he was already knocked out b4 playing tom ford, it was one of the funniest matches ive ever witnessed, he was playing faster than osullivan in his prime, trying 0% on any pot, he even potted a blue full force into the green pocket and did a 360 degree twirl on one leg, there were only about 15 people in the audience including myself and mark selby

they should look at his match against bond at the world champs a few years back,i could have betaten him and my highest break is 5

and his match against white at the mssters years back

Hearn just covering his back to earn more money, his only interest in Snooker is as a cash cow. Not to Ronnies advantage to blow the whistle
could end up instead of finding the fixers it's more a case of finding someone who hasn't .  Higgins got away with it to a large extent and a lot of the gullible snooker public swept it under the carpet.  It needed to be nipped in the bud straight off with a lifetime ban for Higgins , his soft sentence
appears to have led to a free for all and dragged snooker into the gutter.

What a load of b***** Higgins??? where was the evidence that Higgins was 'fixing' he was banned after he was in a room admitting how easy it would be to miss easy pots, was a set up and he knew it, was grinning from ear to ear all the way through it, he thought it was a wind up, and he had the same manager as the two scottish players who had been investigated for a game somewhere, Higgins was a scape goat a smoke n mirrors charge, even got banned when their was no matches to play! Lee was at it before Higgins took his ban and yeah, it has probably been going on for years but only by players who were'nt good enough to win decent money playing the game.

if higgins knew it was a setup why didnt he report it to the authorities?

Higgins knew exactly what this meeting was all about, his friend and manager had 3 meetings with the News of the World undercover guys who said they wanted to hear it from Higgins himself.
They had been tipped off that things could be arranged.

The N.O.T.W made the mistake of not handing over money.

The main reason why Higgins ban was so light was because the match did not come under World snookers rules, it was Higgins own promotion so he was not in breech of any rule.
His lawyers successfully argued that he would agree to admitting to "not reporting an illegal approach" but that is all.
Being a long standing friend of Barry H "earn" did help and the fact he was a 3 times world champion.
There is no doubt whatsoever Higgins was prepared to fix a match on his promotion, his ambition was to become a promoter and he needed all the cash he could get.
I do think its doubtful he would ever have fixed a tour match, but who knows?  the prospect of blackmail down the line had to be a possibility.
His good friend and manager took the fall with no complaints and no doubt a very big thankyou.

Anybody know what the scores were in the relevant Selby and Robertson matches? 

Does the archive of the old BF forum posts still exist?  (Think it was The Magician who set up and hosted it)  Would be interesting to see what was said at the time.

I reckon Mark Williams has been at it

The problem with characters like Higgins and Lee is that its mainly just about the money the trophies are just a bonus.
Don't think you can say that about Hendry and Davies, both driven by titles with the money as a bonus.
Higgins is just as competitive as the other 2 but its driven by greed unfortunately.  Being caught with his hand in he cookie jar is probably just
sliver of what had gone on in the past.
Cannt see how snooker can ever be great again when it's being driven by people who love the sport for the money they can leech out of it and not
just for he game itself.

Be easier to name people who you don't think have been at it.
Hendry,Davies,parrot,thorburn,Griffiths,rearden.

parrot??he would be high on my lst of maybe's

ronnie,hendry and alan mcmanus are three players i can think of who i would definitely say never threw a match

Jimmy White did it at least 7 times ...

Kirk Stevens was at it all the time.

What amazes me about all this is how he was found not guilty by the CPS - was it based on the same evidance or was some of not allowed to be used as evidence for some reason??

The findings are clear cut and cant for the life of me see how he could have got off. I can see why a certain match between two glasgow mates a few years back at the uk champs never seen the inside of the court room if Lee was innocent in the eyes of the CPS.

yeh I agree liamo10

Sep 18, 2013 -- 11:19AM, GRANTCKING wrote:

if higgins knew it was a setup why didnt he report it to the authorities?

If Higgins had been fixing matches, where was all the proof ? Like the proof they had on Lee and others? NOTW reporters didn't hand over money cos Higgins wouldnt have accepted the money, don't you think they would of???  Doesn't make sense that they would ban somebody from the game when their was no snooker on!!! It was a complete red herring, it's like football banning Suarez between june and july.

liamo10
18 Sep 13 15:01
Joined:
29 Jun 11
| Topic/replies: 40 | Blogger: liamo10's blog
What amazes me about all this is how he was found not guilty by the CPS - was it based on the same evidance or was some of not allowed to be used as evidence for some reason??

The findings are clear cut and cant for the life of me see how he could have got off. I can see why a certain match between two glasgow mates a few years back at the uk champs never seen the inside of the court room if Lee was innocent in the eyes of the CPS.




He wasn't found "not guilty" by the CPS - they decided that they didn't have enough evidence to prove "beyond all doubt" that Lee was guilty (i'm not saying this was right or not, i'm just posting the facts).

In a criminal case, proof "beyond all doubt" is required wheras in this case (which was arranged by the wpbsa), it just had to be proven on the "balance of probabilities" which is a much lower requirement.

Just to clarify - the CPS decided not to bring the case to court.

In the case of the two Glasgow mates, I'm not sure the CPS, or the Strathclyde Police, were in possession of all the salient evidence. Had they known about the Premiership footballer, well-known as a bad gambler and who shared the same agent as the two geezers in question, attempting (and failing)  to have a high four-figure sum on the eventual outcome before the match began, then the outcome could have been different.

Doh! just realised that I should have said "beyond all reasonable doubt"

Sep 18, 2013 -- 4:39PM, jed.davison wrote:

In the case of the two Glasgow mates, I'm not sure the CPS, or the Strathclyde Police, were in possession of all the salient evidence. Had they known about the Premiership footballer, well-known as a bad gambler and who shared the same agent as the two geezers in question, attempting (and failing)

^michael chopra?

gin - cheers that clears that up - amazing that is not enough evidence to even bring the case to court. what chance do you have to actually get a proper conviction eh..

Jed - never heard of the link to the footballer - can u give any more clues? cheers

thats who i was thinking

Sep 18, 2013 -- 4:17PM, bananaoasis wrote:

Sep 18, 2013 -- 11:19AM, GRANTCKING wrote:if higgins knew it was a setup why didnt he report it to the authorities?If Higgins had been fixing matches, where was all the proof ? Like the proof they had on Lee and others? NOTW reporters didn't hand over money cos Higgins wouldnt have accepted the money, don't you think they would of???  Doesn't make sense that they would ban somebody from the game when their was no snooker on!!! It was a complete red herring, it's like football banning Suarez between june and july.

didnt quinten hann get banned for exactly the same type of incident? was there proof he actually **** a game? i was under the impression he got done in a similar trap

The footballer is not Chopra.

I think with QH, what cost him was his admission to those trapping him that he had done it before.

I can't name the footballer, not because I'd be bothered about him suing me for libel, but because it might cost a friend his job.

does ur friend work in a bookies?

He works for a bookmaker, rather than in one.

no worries jed - cheers

regardings QH - i believe why he got such a long ban was the fact he never bothered to turn up for the disciplinary case - so they just threw the book at him.

all read sport resolutions.... very interesting can leave in no doubt, but might have been better if Lee had got Mystic Meg to place the wagers, that way excuses for their success might have been more believable!

i really hate to break this to you but is it possible - for entertainment purpose maybe - to prearrange certain matches in order to get a more interesting course of the match?

or, i'll do you one better, let's say there is a tournament named the snooker world championship where every year a young and/or unknown player emerges and makes it to the second round of the tournament, perhaps this is all coincidence?

nah no chance of that

I heard there was a match (dead rubber) between Lee and another now very highly ranked pro a few years back where they were both trying to lose, unbeknown to each other
Ironic that the highly ranked player in Question is now calling for life bans for anyone caught

I think the comparison between the Higgins & Lee case is a non starter.
Higgins 6 months ban & hefty fine was about right, Higgins & his discredited manager Pat Mooney went to Ukraine to arrange a World Series event and, as an deal breaker was asked to throw one frame per tournament in an event which never existed in the first place. It was a News Of The World entrapment arranged to remove Higgins manager from staying on the board.
Mooney has gone and so has the gutter tabloid who orchestrated it all.
Higgins however was wrong and was fined accordingly for threatening to throws frame but not actually doing so in this case.
Lee plotted along with 3 others and the 34 page report proves him guilty.
Don't get bogged down by comparing the two as they are very different cases.

On the face of it, fog, the two cases are very different, but Higgins was only dealt with for a specific incident, namely the one which appeared in the NOTW and which caused the inquiry. Do you think the NOTW were just sitting round one day with nothing to do, and suddenly hit upon the idea of dangling temptation in front of a random snooker player to see what his reaction would be? Or do you think one of them might have watched his Premier League draw with Steve Davis, and several other games he was involved in, and thought, hello, this geezer is bang at it, here's a front page expose waiting to happen.

Stephen Lee is an easy target, he's only a household name to proper snooker fans and chubby chasers. If Barry Hearn were serious about rooting out the rampant corruption in snooker, more heads would be on the block than the one with a pie sticking out of its orifice, and instead of publicly threatening the World Champion for pointing that fact out, he would have sat down with him and attempted to get to the bottom of it.

As a former denizen of the London snooker scene who likes a punt, especially one where the outcome has been decided pre-event, I could quote you at least a dozen examples of fixes to which I have been privy, in ranking tournaments, qualifiers, Championship League matches (they were great, let's draw 2-2 and get the lot.) Everybody with a passion for snooker, who was around the scene when the clubs were busy and the players practised in the clubs, would have stories to tell, albeit perhaps not about the newer players among the current group.

I shed no tears for Lee, he should be banned sine die like all who suborn any sport, but anybody who thinks that he is the worst abuser needs their head read.

A few points here Jed.
Firstly I'm not defending Higgins at all and am aware of the match you mentioned in the Premier League.
I'm merely making the point that proof of Lee being involved in numerous fixed frames & matches is different from Higgins boasting that he can do in an entrapment video.
They are both guilty but it's pretty obvious that very different penalties should be awarded.
Many people on here have compared the two cases alike for like which simply isn't the case.
Regarding why the News Of The World did what they did is as I explained. The usual snooker politics was going on and the new Hearn regime was at an early stage and also Pat Mooney was looking to branch out his fledgling world series events.
This was seen as a threat to other potential promoters and they went for Mooney and got him, taking Higgins down in the process.
If you recall this happened during the world championships and had Higgins beat Steve Davis he wouldn't have even been at the meeting in Ukraine in the first place, it would have just been Mooney in attendance.
I agree that there are other players who may well have been involved to a lesser extent and I don't believe match fixing is rife in the game.
Lee knew the consequences of his actions and deserves no sympathy as what he was doing had the potential to ruin the game for everyone else.
For people to simply say Higgins didn't get the same treatment, so in some way exonerating Lee is plainly missing the point.
I think you see my point right?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/snooker/24213852

the first shot he plays where he misses the jaws of the pocket is lol

Decision on punishment has now been deferred until tomorrow.......

i assume this will be a life ban

12 year ban for rolls royce, we wont be seeing him ever again

12 years could be a life ban because i expect him to let himself go now that he will not be active.

So Lees crime is 24 times worse than Higgins !

Higgins was caught at the proposal stage.

Lee was caught after going through with it multiple times.

It will be life anyway.
When the twelve years are up its unlikely he would be deemed a suitable person to hold a card.

Shame really but thoroughly deserved as his talent could have won him so much.

Higgins had the best lawyers his money could buy and a lesser player without his means would have received a much harsher punishment.
Much more to that story.
However he has to live with the stain and snooker has a world champion that most would agree would have taken the money.
Nobody came out of that episode with clean clothes.

You would think that his personal life will spiral now, what is he going to do now? All he has known is snooker and a good wage.

I think a book would earn a few bob.

Certainly I would buy it, might even blow the lid right off.

Having said that snooker will always be cursed with crooked matches as prize money is poor and expenses are high and across the world cheating is a way of life.

Going back to a tighter system would make it easier to police. I cannot see an alternative even if "the stunning" calls it a closed shop.

The Asians love a good fix, i imagine it will be rife as it spreads.

Agree Moondan and i prefer the closed shop to the conveyor belt approach.

hahah yeah I would certainly buy a book

that would be indeed interesting to read

have just seen him in an interview on sky sports news, he geniunly believes hes innocent

As if this is the first case of match fixing in snooker.Did it ever happen in the "closed shop" days

the stunning.

dont be so difficult in such early days of the season, we all know it went on but it took an aussie to really take the pyss and he only did that because he took one look at hendry and wished he was in alice springs.

What good would a forum be if we all had the same view moondan.You will be shocked to hear i was actually a fan of the said Aussie,loved his party piece of a breakoff,now that would not go down well in your world i know!! The Francisco clan were good in their day too...the days of the closed shop as you put it!!

Could be some mileage in this one yet.

Fűcking fixers!! And what about 5 years jail??? This is a crime! Anyway, where are all the idiots who claim nothing is fixed?!

the stunning,

I think it would be a fantastic forum if everybody agreed with me

I have little doubt that cheating in snooker has always been the hidden evil, and darts is another game where a purposely missed shot looks exactly the same as one that happens without planning.
A premier type league with perhaps a hundred elite players that have come up through the lower ranks seems essential to me to get some stability in the game and though it would not make cheating impossible it would make it easier to police and just as importantly a relationship with the public could thrive.
I think with conditions getting better and more players are able to play to the standard required its going to be very difficult to make a decent living and the time will come when those same old faces who we love to love or hate will make perhaps one tournament a year and tv will lose its reason to televise.
I am just repeating myself but I am sure you get my drift.
In the late seventies it wasn't just the snooker that captured the attention of the nation but the antics of White and Higgins to name just two.

As Angel Gabrial put so well, "conveyer belt snooker" will only make fans tire of the game and I just dont see many of Hearns promotions doing it for most people for much longer.

I probably watch less than 20% of snooker on offer, five years ago I watched a 100% and was left wishing for more, its not just me but my mates as well.

In a way the game is growing smaller not bigger

There have always been good players who could not make a living because they lacked the bottle.

Now, when there are so many more capable players, it will still be the ones who have the necessary steel and matchplay skills who rise to the top, and who will become known to the wider public and not just snooker anoraks like us.

You only need to take a short trip round London and see banqueting suites and supermarkets where the old clubs used to be to know that the game has died something of a death in Britain, but if you refrain from the natural tendency to parochialism you will see that elsewhere in the world it has never been so popular.

It is relatively early days yet for the Hearn regime, and of course we all have our caveats over certain subjects particularly in the light of recent events, but he is at last addressing some of the problems caused and fostered by previous snooker powerbrokers and attempting to take snooker to the world rather than touring round the conference centres of Great Britain. He should be given a chance to realise his vision - snooker won't die if he's not wholly vindicated, it has never died before despite the best efforts of the governing body to kill it off over years.

20 years ago there were over 100 snooker tables in the clubs within a 6 mile radius of where I live. Now there are about 10.

British players will fade out and you will not be able to pronounce the names of the next conveyor belt of players.

Snooker is only exciting to watch if you have the `household names` up against it. Yung tim pong will just be another face.

higgins about as innocent as those 2 chavy bints in Peru 

Yeh...a bit like Italian footballers...

Italien?  excusez moi, monsieur 

Jed.davison,

I take your points but I have no care whether snooker is thriving in other parts of the world especially if the game in this country is on its knees because the money made here is being invested abroad.
I am not a fan of Hearns for a multitude of reasons but this is not the place.

I would have no problem having inter country competition along the lines of the world cup every few years but snooker is a very personal thing and we do need a very strong british game with personalities we know and I would think the chinese would prefer the same.

I do not have your faith in the integrity of the game, far too many changes to the cloth and table construction have been made in the past thirty years also the weight of the balls especially the white that have "not" been done to make the game more difficult but to enhance the chances of bigger breaks.
In fact many players have found the game much easier than they did 10 years ago and while thats been sold under the banner of more tournaments but easier conditions are a much more likely reason.
Our major tournaments are safe for another 3 seasons thanks to the bbc standing up to hearn and stopping him selling them abroad where they will be played in the early hours of the morning and finally killing the game that we knew and loved.
I would not entrust a pet newt in the hands of the Hearn/Davis duo let alone snooker.
Thanks to Davis the players lost by a single vote who they wanted to run the game, many players are completely unhappy with snookers direction and somewhere  down the line a split may be possible,
I live in hope  Just my opinion

agree with the tables being a farce these days, too many shots hitting the rail or jaws and somehow dropping ti

in

Has his public statement, that he said he'd put out on Friday, appeared yet?

I have not heard anything and in all probability we wont.

Lee is in serious financial straights so finding the money for an appeal seems highly unlikely.
He has been ordered to pay a proportion of the costs of this enquiry which seems to me an absurd and unforceable request considering no criminal proceedings ever took place and does this body have the power to act on probability without concrete proof.
Yes of course its in their rules that they do not need proof just substantial suspicion to ban somebody but can they apply for costs against Lee when he did not call for the enquiry.
Perhaps somebody on here can clear up that point.


I don't like players being charged with historic offences it seems to me a dangerous course to take and it seems we should all have the full facts so that we can understand how its taken 5 years to reach a conclusion.
I am not saying Lee is not guilty, I have mentioned in a previous post that his shot selection in many matches have been hard to understand.
He seems adamant that he is innocent and certainly no criminal action took place and its very disturbing that the evidence against Higgins was there for all to see and only a huge higgins fan could have any doubt of guilt was not given a much more substantial sentence.
There has always been questions asked of the integrity or at least competence of snookers rulers and it seems nothing has changed.

Ironic that Lee's must blatant "poor performance" for me was the Premier league game against Higgins,the shot to get on the pink off the blue was comical!!Sure we all remember that game

The stunning,

That's an interesting point.  I am not sure whether the premier league came under the control of World Snooker.
I think it was a private presentation of Barry Hearns and by invitation only.

I do think that many snooker fans do not understand that Higgins got away with much because the match that he was asked to distort was his own private promotion and nothing to do with World Snooker.
Where they got him was the fact that supposed criminals had approached him to fix a snooker match and he was obliged under the terms of him being a pro to report any such approach.  He failed to do that so he was in the shxt.

Can the fat bastard go and play pool professionally like Tony Drago did??

If a story in the Daily Mail this week is to be believed then he can't.

Having said that there is plenty of private money matches to be had in both pool and snooker so he won't starve.
Nothing to stop him giving lessons etc, etc.

Being a professional at anything that is run under rules and regulations it woulds be doubtful he would get a ticket.
Silly boy

Did mean to add and I am sure you knew---- Tony Drago as far as I know is not a disqualified person and still plays the tour
Many snooker players including Steve Davis have for years dabbled in playing pro pool even Ronnie but nobody has managed to regularly beat top class pro pool players with the exception of the jester from leicester.
Amazingly Stephen Hendry is at this present time being paid a fortune by the chinese to teach pool and when he was top of the snooker tree he refused to go to america to play pool with the likes of Steve and Ronnie because he said he had to protect his reputation as snookers undisputed champion.
Ronnie tried a few tournaments but was surprisingly very poor and mostly got knocked out very early. Different game.

If he thinks he can just pick u pool cue up and start playing for cash he's in for a shock,he'll get chewed up and spat out.