Snooker:John Higgins has been handed a six-month suspension from snooker and fined €90,000 after admitting breaching rules around betting. During the two-day hearing, the 35-year-old Scot admitted two of the lesser charges levelled against him.
But the more serious charges of match-fixing were withdrawn. The former world champion was suspended in May pending an investigation into allegations of frame-throwing which were made by a British Sunday newspaper.
He admitted "intentionally giving the impression to others that they were agreeing to act in breach of the betting rules" and failing to report the matter promptly to the governing body, World Snooker.
However, the charges of "agreeing or offering" to accept bribes and "agreeing to engage in corrupt or fraudulent conduct" were dropped.
Higgins, suspended by the association on May 2nd, will be banned from the game until midnight on November 1st. He also has been ordered to pay a contribution to the costs of the hearing.
Higgins and his manager Pat Mooney, who resigned from the board of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association, were filmed by the News of the World allegedly agreeing to accept €310,000 in return for fixing the outcome of four frames in matches to be played later this year.
Like Higgins, charges 1 and 2 against Mooney were withdrawn, while he admitted charges 3 and 4. Higgins always denied any wrongdoing and insisted he would fight to clear his name, and the world governing body today agreed the player “would never throw, and had no intention at that meeting of throwing any frame of snooker for reward”.
Higgins had vowed to “vigorously defend” himself in the face of the allegations in May and insisted he was “100 per cent innocent”, saying he believed the meeting with the journalists was to arrange a series of tournaments in Ukraine.
The summary of decision laid the blame for the predicament the Scot found himself in squarely at the door of Mooney, claiming the manager had put the player in “a highly invidious position”.
Explaining the reason for the withdrawal of the more serious charges against Mooney, it read: “The association’s explanation for these withdrawals was very different. The association maintained that Mr Mooney had in fact intended to act fraudulently and corruptly as alleged.
“However, a last-minute argument advanced on behalf of Mr Mooney by Mr Phillips QC, based on a proper construction of the rules to which charges 1 and 2 refer had persuaded the association that it did not have sufficient prospects of proving those charges.”
It continued: “Mr Higgins was put in a highly invidious position by Mr Mooney, who was entirely responsible for Mr Higgins’ presence in Kiev and, in particular, at the meeting there on April 30th. Mr Higgins can be criticised for the way in which he chose to respond to the situation in which he found himself.”