Quote: "Doncaster centre Shaun Leaf has been given an 18-month ban and fined £500 by the Rugby Football League. The RFL found Leaf, 22, guilty of betting against his own club in games with Toulouse in August 2009 and Wakefield in May 2011. He was also found guilty of betting on other games including Gateshead versus Harlequins and Wigan against Barrow. The suspension will commence from the date that Leaf's provisional suspension began, on 12 May 2011.'" news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 549151.stm

Quote: "Doncaster centre Shaun Leaf has been given an 18-month ban and fined £500 by the Rugby Football League. The RFL found Leaf, 22, guilty of betting against his own club in games with Toulouse in August 2009 and Wakefield in May 2011. He was also found guilty of betting on other games including Gateshead versus Harlequins and Wigan against Barrow. The suspension will commence from the date that Leaf's provisional suspension began, on 12 May 2011.'" news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 549151.stm

Seems about a fair punishment to me.

Why much harsher than Long and Gleeson got?

IIRC Leaf bet more than once on his team to lose and in one of the games he was actually playing. Plus Long & Gleeson both were fined far more.

Like Gleeson

True. It might be a tad on the harsh side, maybe 12 months might have been more appropriate but I still think it's not out of the bounds of reason. Plus Long & Gleeson only did it once. There appeared to be at least one other occasion where Leaf had bet against his side from that Sun article a while ago anyway, so it leads you to think there may have been more. And as I say Long & Gleeson got hefty fines, plus after the Long & Gleeson case you wouldn't think any RL player could possibly be that thick.

I'm not defending him at all.I won't even wax lyrical about the disparity between punishment for Super League players and those players in The Championship.
I am just wondering if anyone knows the most serious ban he could have been given because it does seem odd that rlthis particular News International publication got it right on the money over a month agorl

Suspicious in a number of ways - even if it is only a case of phone hacking.

Why was he done for this?

He also admitted not trying as hard in certain games as to loose. It should have been a life ban!

It seems very unfair to me. He bet on games you would expect them to lose. Why ban him for that long? Fines are ok to be different as higher leagues earn more, but bans need to be the same.

Absolute rubbish!

"Leaf was found not guilty of providing privileged information to a third party to assist in betting activity; seeking to influence improperly the result and engaging in a conduct that was corrupt or fraudulent."

It's a ban for being stupid really.

sorry if i sound stupid, i understand its not acceptable to bet against your own team. but what is the problem with him putting bets on a game that doesnt involve him at all ?

If he was throwing games then the ban is fair but if all he is doing is ripping off the bookies he has my sympathy the sooner we have betting away from our sport the better. I have not bought a shirt this year as we are sponsored by gambling & I would like the RFL to stop the gambling industry using our fixtures or results.