WPBSA Disciplinary Hearing Finding: David John and Jamie Jones

After an investigation by the WPBSA Integrity Unit supported by Sportradar and the UK Gambling Commission SBIU, David John and Jamie Jones were found to have a case to answer for serious breaches of the WPBSA Members Rules.

On Friday 11^th January 2019 after a contested hearing the WPBSA Disciplinary Committee found that:

Jamie Jones, on the basis of his admission and other evidence, had failed to report the approach to David John for John to fix his match outcome against Graeme Dott.

David John had previously admitted to fixing his matches against Graeme Dott played on 29^th September 2016 and against Joe Perry played on 24^th January 2017, and failing to cooperate with the WPBSA investigation.

The charges admitted are shown at Appendix 1.

On 24^th January 2019 there was a hearing before the WPBSA Disciplinary Committee to determine sanction and on 6^th February 2019 the Committee reported their decision:

David John: A suspension from attending or competing in WPBSA sanctioned events for a period of 7 years. He was given credit for admitting the charges, so the period of suspension he has to serve is 5 years 7 months. This is to run from 22^nd May 2018, the date of his original suspension, until 21^st December 2023.  He was ordered to pay £17,000 towards the WPBSA costs.

Jamie Jones: A suspension from attending or competing in WPBSA sanctioned events for a period of 16 months. He was given credit for admitting to the charge, so the period of suspension he has to serve is 12 months. This is to run from 11^th October 2018, the date of his original suspension until 10^th October 2019.  He was ordered to pay £9,000 towards the WPBSA costs.

Jason Ferguson, the WPBSA Chairman said: “In the case of David John, this is a clear message that there is no place for match fixing in snooker. However, this case also highlights the importance of professional sportsman understanding their responsibilities to report anything relating to match fixing. Jamie Jones is a well-respected professional snooker player and I have no doubt that has never fixed the outcome of a match he was involved in. It is a real shame to see that this talented player has fallen foul of failing to report his direct knowledge of an arrangement to fix a match.”

Both players have until Wednesday 20^th February 2019 to appeal the decisions of the WPBSA Disciplinary Committee.

The full findings of the Independent Tribunal can be found here.

————————————————————————————————————————————–

Appendix 1

David John charges admitted:

1. That you agreed to fix the outcome of your match with Graeme Dott at the International Championship Qualifiers in the UK on 29th September 2016 in breach of Rule 2.1.2.1 ;  

        And;

2. That you agreed to fix the outcome of your match with Joe Perry at the China Open Qualifiers on 24th January 2017 in breach of Rule 2.1.2.1 ;

And;

3. That you failed to cooperate with the investigation by failing to provide mobile phone itemised billing that was requested of you during the investigation in breach of Rule 4.4 of the WPBSA Members Rules.

Jamie Jones charges:

5. On and after 29 September 2016, in breach of Rule 4.2, you failed to report the approach of ‘A’ to David John to influence the outcome of David John’s match with Graeme Dott as soon as was reasonably practicable.

Appendix 2

WPBSA Members Rules extracts

4. Reporting Breaches
   • In the event that a Member is approached or solicited in any way (whether directly or indirectly) to influence the outcome or conduct of any game of snooker or billiards whether or not in return for payment or any other form of remuneration or benefit (an “Approach”), that Member (the “Reporting Member”) shall report such an Approach to the WPBSA (via the Company Secretary or a Tournament Official) as soon as reasonably practicable and in any event not later than 24 hours after any such Approach being made. Further, the Reporting Member shall provide the WPBSA (via the Company Secretary or a Tournament Official) with all information in his or her knowledge relating to the Approach and shall co-operate in any subsequent investigation and/or other action(s) arising out of such a report

• Each Member shall co-operate with the WPBSA in any investigation carried out by the WPBSA under the provisions of these Rules including (but not limited to):

• Providing the WPBSA with access to all records relating to the alleged breach. This includes, but is not limited to; betting accounts, bank records, telephone records, internet service records, social media accounts, email and other records stored on phones, tablets, electronic devices, computer hard drives or To facilitate this, the Member will surrender any such devices for examination by the WPBSA or its representative.

SECTION 2 – BETTING RULES

2. Betting misconduct

• Corruption:

2.1.2.1  to fix or contrive, or to be a party to any effort to fix or contrive, the result, score, progress, conduct or any other aspect of the Tour and/or any Tournament or Match

The full WPBSA Members Rules can be viewed here.