(Doing two posts on today's Supreme Court ruling.)
Today was a long-awaited day in the annals of American sport. There was much debate, and there will be much debate.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled 7-2 today that the Federal law prohibiting sports gambling in the other 49 states (than Nevada) was unconstitutional. They have made it a state question (barring a Congressional act that can pass Constitutional states-rights muster), and the states can now legalize and regulate sports betting as they legally see fit.
According to the Washington Post, New Jersey, who brought the lawsuit, is planning to have Monmouth Park be the first non-Nevada sportsbook -- and to have them open in two weeks. (New Jersey passed a referendum to legalize sports gambling seven years ago.) Many are seeing it as a way to supplement horse racing, some are seeing it as a way to augment Indian casinos...
The article also states seven other Eastern states could legalize within 90 days, before the football season starts.
Contrary to what many believe I might think, this is a good decision. A VERY good decision, though not without it's possible potholes (which I will explain in my next post).
The first reason it's a good decision: The entire concept of protecting the integrity of professional and amateur sports in this country is, both in legal theory and in practice, a farce.
I could come out and basically say "Mayer", as in Mayer v. Belichick, New England Patriots, and National Football League, and end that discussion right now. That abomination of a decision legalized rigging of American sporting events, as long as the league or sanctioning body was the party doing so.
Any thought of "protecting" the "integrity" of American sports in the face of that decision should've been ended, and instantaneously. It is understood, especially by this reader of Dan Moldea's Interference, why some would believe that going back to more localized books would create problems.
However, it's time to understand the reality: Pressure to ensure the integrity of sport must come from without, not from within. That's one reason this is a good decision.
Second: The leagues, though final arbiters of where fixes occur, will often take into account Vegas lines and handles and use Vegas as a partner in fixing games. This decision, eventually, removes or stunts that partnership.
How many times have we watched sporting events and seen blatant attempts to cover the spread (or not cover the spread, over, under, whatever...)? This is going to make that much harder.
Third: I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this. I think this might actually force teams like the Miami Marlins and all to become competitive.
I know I'm probably stepping in it on this one. I get that.
One of the main models a lot of people eventually see going over this is the concept that, eventually, you will be able to go to your sporting event, punch up your site of choice on your smartphone, and bet the event -- including in-play, almost certainly.
How's that going to work with blatantly non-competitive teams? I'm the first to understand (largely because people who know more than me on the subject tell me this, and they're right!) about how every team makes money and the like.
Especially if the league gets their 1% (each of the leagues wants 1% of their league's betting, as an "integrity fee", which might push the realistic "even money" bet from 10-11 to 9-10), isn't it finally going to be in the leagues' best interests to force teams who clearly are skimming off the merchandising, etc. money to get as many warm bodies in and not have the following be the model, as Commissioner Blinded By The Light seems to want out of Major League Baseball these days?
Stay tuned, this one's about to get messy.
No comments:
Post a Comment