Ian Blackshaw
  Visiting Fellow, Centre for Intellectual Property Law, University of Pretoria, Fellow, TMC Asser International Sports Law Centre, Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales, Visiting Professor at several UK and European Universities

 46 Volume 4 2013 pp 945
  Download Article in PDF


Wedstrydknoeiery in Sport: ’n Groot Prioriteit en Voortdurende Uitdaging vir Sportbeheerliggame

Die gewildheid, wêreldwye invloed en finansiële impak van sport - wat tans meer as 3% tot internasionale handel bydra - is ook verantwoordelik vir ’n groot aantal noemenswaardige probleme, onder andere korrupsie in die vorm van knoeiery, wat al meer algemeen voorkom en soveel verskillende sportsoorte raak, insluitende sokker - die wêreld se gunsteling en mees winsgewende sport! Sport beheerliggame op internasionale-, nasionale- en streeksvlakke is gedurig besig om hierdie plaag van knoeiery te probeer hokslaan, met gemengde resultate. ’n Groot probleem wat hulle in die gesig staar is om op hoogte te bly met nuwe tegnologiese ontwikkelinge, soos aanlyn weddenskappe wat deur groot weddenskap-sindikate gebruike word om resultate van sport byeenkomste te beïnvloed, wat die integriteit en regverdigheid waarvoor sport bekend is, of ten minste bekend moet wees, ondermyn. Hierdie is ’n deurlopende stryd wat gewen moet word! Hierdie artikel bespreek die voortdurende stappe wat geneem word deur sport beheerliggame en ander organisasies met ’n gevestigde belang daarin om ontslae te raak van knoeiery in sport.

1 Introduction

Sport is all about fair play - or, at least, it should be! Competition is keen in all sports, but it should always be conducted on, to use the standard cliché, “a level playing field”. It is not a matter of winning at all costs and by all means - fair or foul. It is all about “playing the game”.1 Or as the Olympic Creed puts it: it is not the winning but the taking part that counts in sport.

But with so much money sloshing around in sport nowadays, 2 it is not surprising that sport has become a victim of corruption in various forms3 - not least, in relation to match fixing and sports betting, the latter of which is as old as the hills and needs to be regulated.4 Indeed, betting and sport have been - to some extent - uneasy bedfellows probably since the dawn of time: For example, lottery games were originally played in China some three thousand years ago! Not only is it enjoyable to watch a sporting event, but added excitement and interest come from also being able to bet on the outcome of it. In fact, horseracing depends upon betting for its very survival as a sport. But, of course, it should all be fair and above board and no one should gain an unfair advantage over others betting on the same sporting events! In fact, the International Olympic Committee now requires all athletes participating in the Summer and Winter Games to sign a declaration that they will not be involved in betting.

Match fixing may be defined as the deliberate act of losing sports matches, or playing them in such a way as to achieve a pre-determined outcome or result, by illegally manipulating the outcome or result for financial gain or some other unfair sporting benefit.

As Androulla Vassiliou, the European Commissioner for Sport, puts it:

Match-fixing is a complex problem with many sides to it. But one very important element that the European Commission focuses on in our efforts to tackle match-fixing is prevention. In this respect, educational programmes and awareness raising campaigns can have a significant impact by reaching those most at risk of being approached to fix matches - the athletes themselves. 5

Match fixing, sadly, affects many sports in many different ways, but, within the confines of this article, I will concentrate on two popular global sports: cricket and football, which have fallen prey to the match fixers and other cheats who are not prepared to play fair and according to the rules; and I will include two glaring examples from each sport.

2 “Match Fixing” in Cricket

Cricket is not immune from corruption and particular mention may be made, for example, of the recent scandal of “spot fixing” (a species of match fixing) in cricket6 involving the delivery of “no balls” at timed intervals by certain players in the Pakistani national cricket team during the fourth test match against England at the Lord’s Cricket Ground, the ancestral home of cricket, in the summer of 2010. It was alleged and subsequently proved in criminal proceedings, that players deliberately bowled “no balls” at predetermined points in an over, as pre-arranged and agreed with a certain bookmaker, who would take bets on when “no balls” would be bowled during the match.7 The players concerned have received substantial bans imposed by the International Cricket Council (ICC), the world governing body of cricket, and have also, along with the “fixer” involved in this scam, Mazhar Majeed, a businessman based in Croydon, South London, been sentenced to terms of imprisonment by a criminal court (Southwark Crown Court) following criminal prosecutions in England. Salman Butt received 30 months’ imprisonment, Mohammad Asif received 12 months’ imprisonment and Mohammad Amir six months’ imprisonment. The “fixer”, Mazhar Majeed, received two years and 8 months’ imprisonment, having been quoted, following an undercover investigation carried out by the UK News of the World newspaper, as saying that it would cost £400,000 to fix the result of a “Twenty20” Match, £450,000 for a one-day international and £1,000,000 to fix a Test Match. High stakes indeed! Mr Justice Cooke, the trial Judge, said that custodial sentences were needed in the case “to mark the nature of the crimes and to deter any other cricketer, agent or anyone else who considers corrupt activity of this kind.”

So, what are the international and national cricketing sports governing bodies doing about match fixing in its various pernicious forms?

As long ago as 2000, the ICC formed the Anti-Corruption & Security Unit (ACSU), which has actively tried to combat and police any form of corruption within the game of cricket. It is of interest that there were previous incidents that took the game by surprise (as will be referred to below), but nothing quite as shocking and as spectacular as the Butt et al scandal.

The ACSU has very firm objectives in combatting corruption:

for instance, Article 2.1.1 of the ICC Anti-Corruption Code condemns the [f]ixing or contriving in any way or otherwise influencing improperly, or being a party to any effort to fix or contrive in any way or otherwise influence improperly, the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of any International Match or ICC Event.

The ACSU had also previously released reports relating to the late South African Cricket Captain, Hansie Cronje, who was responsible for the shamed Test Match fixing scandal, back in 2000. Indeed, the report prepared by Sir Paul Condon, a former London Metropolitan Police Commissioner, stated:

I believe the blatant cases and excesses of cricket corruption have been stopped. I know from the work of the ACSU that most of the preliminary approaches to players, umpires, grounds men and others, to sound out their willingness to be drawn into corruption, have stopped. What is left is a small core of players and others who continue to manipulate the results of matches or occurrences within matches for betting purposes. They may be doing so out of greed, arrogance or because they are not being allowed to cease. Some may fear their previous corruption will be exposed if they try to stop and some may fear threats of violence if they stop. It will take some time before those who have developed a corrupt lifestyle within cricket have sufficient fear of exposure and punishment to stop.

Fine words, but what action has been taken? The warning signs were present back in 2000 that the game of cricket was being infected with corruption from the source. It is interesting note that Sir Paul Condon went on to note:

From the late 1970s onwards a more insidious and corrosive form of fixing took hold in the game. This involved a player or players under-performing so that the result of a match or occurrences and events within a match were determined and fixed in advance.

This kind of cheating, which runs counter to the uncertainty of outcome of sporting competition, which is the very nature and attractive aspect of sport and sporting endeavour, featured in the 2010 Pakistan cricketing scandal.

More action has been taken in cleaning up cricket as far as the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) is concerned, which bodes well for the future and survival of the game of cricket. The ECB’s ACCESS Group helps combat corruption in conjunction with the ECB’s own anti-corruption code of conduct being applied. The ECB has a transparent nature of operating which can only serve the cricketing world, including its fans and followers, positively and well.

Take, for example, the recent case of corruption involving the first English cricketer to be involved in corruption in the English County Cricket League, namely Mervyn Westfield, the fast bowler, who formerly played for Essex. He pleaded guilty to “spot fixing” involving a county match and was sentenced to four months’ imprisonment in April 2012. Chris Watts, the head of the ECB anti-corruption unit has commented that it was “naive” to think that county cricket had not been affected by corruption in view of the Pakistani scandal that had previously taken place.

Although many sports fans would agree that it is necessary to make an example of high profile sportsmen and women who engage in match fixing by imposing swingeing sporting and criminal sanctions on them, in order to serve as a real deterrent to others who may be tempted by the offers of large sums of money to throw games, one should also spare a thought for the novel practical suggestions made by Nasser Hussein, the former Essex and England Test Cricket Captain, for using cheats to promote a cleaner game as follows

[The ECB should] use him [Westfield], take him around to counties, do a video with him ... use him as an example for future generations of cricketers ... instead of just parking him away somewhere to be forgotten, try to use the lad to make sure future generations don't make the same mistakes he has made.

However, in an extensive article by Cornelius on match fixing in cricket, 8 he is rather sanguine about the efforts of the Cricketing Authorities to tackle the problem and reaches the following conclusions:

If one considers the bigger picture and tie up the various loose ends, the facts speak for themselves. They reveal a world in which there are never more than two degrees of separation between facilities owners, gambling syndicates, bookmakers, organised crime, television networks and cricket. So I would not expect the ICC to pay more than lip service to allegations of match-fixing in cricket. Neither would I expect the ICC to act unless their hand is forced when the media or police reveal their investigations. Again, I would not expect the ACSU to be more than a public relations stunt. After all, it may not be up to the ICC to make the decisions. However, I wait to be pleasantly surprised in the interests of safeguarding and upholding the integrity of sport in general and of cricket in particular!

Be that as it may, the fight against match fixing in cricket will - or, at least, should  - continue in one form or another!

3 Illegal Match Fixing in Football

But, sadly, cricket is not the only sport to fall foul of corrupt practices, many of which are related to sports betting and match fixing. Football - the world’s favourite sport and the most lucrative one - is not immune either from those who wish to make a fast buck unfairly and at the expense of the fans. The situation is somewhat muddied by the fact that betting companies are now sponsoring football teams (for example, Real

Madrid). 9 In fact, in the view of several commentators, football in general is riddled with corruption, not only in relation to the game itself, but also in relation to the administration of the sport. For example, recently there have been scandals regarding the allocation and distribution of tickets for the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, as well as corruption in the form of the sale of voting rights for the hosting of the World Cup in 2018 and 2022. This latest scandal led to the banning of two members of the FIFA Executive Committee (see below).

As a result, and certainly with his eye on re-election on 1 June 2011 as the President of FIFA, Sepp Blatter announced on 2 January 2011 that he intended to set up “an anti-corruption committee to police world football's governing body.”

This development followed closely on the heels of the corruption allegations, which overshadowed the bidding and voting process for the awarding of the World Cup in 2018 and 2022, referred to above, which led, in the event, to bans being imposed on two members of the FIFA Executive Committee, Amos Adamu and Reynald Temarii.10

According to Sepp Blatter: “This committee will strengthen our credibility and give us a new image in terms of transparency.” And he gave the following personal pledge: “I will take care of it personally, to ensure there is no corruption at FIFA.”

The new committee will consist of between seven and nine members, who will be drawn not only from sport, but also from politics, finance, business and culture. This is indeed good news. But, of course, the value of any body depends upon its members and it will be interesting to see who is, in fact, appointed - hopefully not “the usual suspects”! The issue here, however, is well summed up in the well-known Latin tag coined by the Roman poet Juvenal: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”11- “Who will guard the guardians themselves?”

Reference is made to the agreement signed on 9 May 2011 between FIFA and INTERPOL to kick corruption out of football, which provides a useful working example of collaboration at its best. In a $20,000,000 ten-year project, both entities joined forces in order to rid the beautiful game from match fixing. Sepp Blatter commented on the scourge of match fixing affecting sport in general and football in particular in the following terms:

Match-fixing shakes the very foundations of sport, namely fair play, respect and discipline. That’s why FIFA employs a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to any infringement of these values.

FIFA recognised that it could not kick out of football corruption in its various forms, including match fixing, by itself and needed to work with outside bodies and agencies. Hence, the agreement with INTERPOL.

Education is also the name of the game, and, in fact, INTERPOL held a Global Academic Experts Meeting for Integrity in Sport in Singapore at the end of November 2012. The aim of this Meeting was to bring together international experts to identify ways and means in which academia could assist the INTERPOL Integrity in Sport Unit in developing and implementing educational lines of study and training modules.

Not to be outdone by the measures taken by FIFA to kick corruption out of football, Michel Platini, who was re-elected President of UEFA for a further term of four years at the UEFA Congress held in Paris on 22 March 2011, has publicly acknowledged that corruption is also a problem at the European level of football, as well as the global level. He has, therefore, made the tackling of corruption one of his priorities during his second term of office in order, as he says, “to protect football's essential values.”

With corruption linked to betting activities considered as a considerable threat to football’s soul and integrity, Platini has also called for the civil/criminal authorities’ help in combating this growing phenomenon : “We have our suspicions but we will give them to the justice authorities, because we are not policemen ourselves”. This, of course, is one of the problems of football authorities trying to combat corruption; they have to rely on outside agencies of the country/state in which corruption cases arise and come to light. They cannot do it by themselves!

Platini has also appealed for help from the players themselves, because, as he remarked

[t]he players are the protectors of the game. It is they who play football, and it is they who should eventually inform us if people approach them to try and corrupt them. There is zero tolerance. The day that they are caught - players, referees, coaches, officials - they will be out of the game forever.

As to Platini’s second term of office and what it will bring to the game, he had this to say:

How do I see my second term? In football, with its infinite history, there are always things that come along. We have 53 countries with their very different characteristics, mentalities and football. I try to help people to defend their football. My role is to protect the game and develop the national associations’ football - so that children will continue to play football in the future.

Not a bad sporting aim, but one that will, I am sure, be very hard to achieve in practice. Take, for example, a recent glaring case of match fixing on a big scale involving three of the top Turkish Football Clubs. 12

Three out of four 13 major sports clubs taking part in the Turkish Football League during the 2010-2011 season, namely Trabzonspor SK, Besiktas JK and Fenerbahce SK, were involved in this corruption affair, which involved match-fixing and incentive premium initiatives. Out of seventeen games that took place during the second-half of that season, thirteen were proven to be corrupted. It is important to underline that the decision concerned not only these major clubs but also other small clubs with a total number of 93 defendants.

The decision contains 739 pages consisting mostly of the detailed telephone conversations of the parties and the collected police evidence. The records demonstrate clearly the illegal activities of the parties involved. In the case of Trabzonspor SK, the Court held that there was no convincing evidence against Sadri Sener and Nevzat Sakar.14 Therefore, Trabzonspor representatives were acquitted and all doubt about Trabzonspor’s participation in corruption activities was eliminated.

As regards Besiktas JK, the winner of the Ziraat Turkish Cup during the 2010-2011 season, it has been proven that Tayfur Havutcu,15 the trainer of the club at the date, offered money and transfers at the end of the season to two footballers16 of the rival club17 during the final of the Ziraat Turkish Cup. All the individuals that took part in the process were found guilty by the Court.

Tayfur Havutcu was banned from exercising any activity involving direction or supervision of a sports club for life and to attend the sports events/training sessions taking place in a stadium for a year. Ibrahim Akin was sentenced to imprisonment, a fine and was also banned from exercising any activity involving direction or supervision of a sports club for life and to attend the sports events/training sessions taking place in a stadium for a year. Iskender Alin received the same sanctions as Ibrahim Akin.

In the case of Fenerbahce SK, football league champion of the 2010-2011 season, the extent of involvement in the corruption was revealed to be significantly important. The Court held that match-fixing and offers of incentive premiums have been made during 13 games - out of seventeen games in total - of the season. Seven of the games played by Fenerbahce were affected, namely Fenerbahce-Kasimpasa (26 February 2011); Genclerbirligi-Fenerbahce (7 March 2011); Eskisehirspor-Fenerbahce (9 April 2011); Fenerbahce-IBB Spor (1 May 2011); Karabükspor-Fenerbahce (8 May 2011); Fenerbahce-Ankaragücü (15 May 2011); and Sivasspor-Fenerbahce (22 May 2011). Incentive premiums were also offered by the criminal organisation, that the Court found to exist and led by Aziz Yildirim (see below), to the rivals of Trabzonspor and Bursaspor, the closest teams to the championship. Six of the games were thereby affected, namely Manisaspor-Trabzonspor (21 February 2011); Bursaspor-IBB Spor (6 March 2011); Genclerbirligi-Trabzonspor (20 March 2011); Trabzonspor-Bursaspor (17 April 2011); Eskisehirspor-Trabzonspor (22 April 2011); and Trabzonspor-IBB Spor (15 May 2011). Concerning the four remaining games, there was not enough evidence to establish match-fixing and/or incentive premium activities.

Aziz Yildirim, the president of Fenerbahce since 1998, certainly aimed to keep his position that gave him important privileges. In accordance with that intention, he promised three championships in a row at the beginning of the season 2010-2011. As Fenerbahce obtained its last championship in 2006-2007 season, discontent within the club and among supporters was growing day by day and threatening thereby the continuity of his presidency. Hence, the importance for him to keep the promise he made at the beginning of the 2010-2011 season.

As a result of its championship, Fenerbahce obtained, in addition to the prize money allocated by the TFF, 18 million Turkish Liras (TL) 18 as champion’s share; TL21 million19 in accordance with the results obtained within the season (26 victories, 4 draws); TL15 million20 as championship prize; and TL16 million21 for its entitlement to participate directly in the Champions League. Moreover, the club was also entitled to the biggest share of the broadcasting income. In Turkey, the income deriving from broadcasting rights is distributed according to league position. The top three clubs are entitled to 40% of the income, whilst the other clubs share the remaining 60%. Consequently, the sum accorded to Fenerbahce, precisely TL64.1 million,22 was considerably superior to the amounts obtained by the other clubs. For example, Trabzonspor, which completed the league in second position, was granted TL49.875 million.23

Operations were led by, amongst others, Aziz Yildirim, the president of Fenerbahce, Ilhan Eksioglu and Sekip Mosturoglu, board members of the Club.

The Court found Aziz Yildirim guilty of being the leader of a criminal organisation, as well as incentive premiums and corruption activities within football. He was sentenced to imprisonment and a fine. He was also banned from exercising any activity involving the direction or supervision of a sports club for life and to attend the sports events/training sessions taking place in a stadium for a year. Sekip Mosturoglu and Ilhan Eksioglu were found guilty of participating in the activities of the criminal organisation led by Aziz Yildirim, as well as incentive premiums and corruption activities. They were also sentences to imprisonment, a fine, a ban from exercising any activity involving the direction or supervision of a sports club for life and to attend the sports events/training sessions taking place in a stadium for a year.

4 EUROPOL Investigation into Match Fixing in Football

On 4 February 2013, at a news conference held in The Hague, EUROPOL, the European Union’s Law Enforcement Agency, revealed the results of eighteen months’ investigation into match fixing in football in Europe and beyond, which do not make at all good reading for the game and the so-called “football family” around the world.

A Champions League tie played in England is one of 380 matches across Europe that investigators say was fixed, but without naming names. This is a blow to England, the home of football, during this year’s 150 anniversary celebrations of the founding of the English Football Association.

EUROPOL said that they had uncovered an organised crime syndicate, based in Asia that was coordinating the match fixing, with around 425 match officials, club officials, players and criminals under suspicion.

EUROPOL added that suspected matches included World Cup and European Championship qualifiers; two Champions League ties; and several top football matches in European leagues. Furthermore, criminals bet €16 million on rigged matches and made €8 million in profits. Payments of €2 million are thought, by the investigators, to have been paid to those involved, with the biggest payment to an individual amounting to €140,000.

EUROPOL believe that a crime syndicate, based in Asia, has been liaising with criminal networks throughout Europe and also that match fixing has taken place in 15 countries and 50 people, so far, have been arrested. EUROPOL fears that this is “the tip of the iceberg”.

Rob Wainwright, the Director of EUROPOL said: “It is clear to us this is the biggest ever investigation into suspected match fixing in Europe”. And added: “This has yielded major results which we think have uncovered a big problem for the integrity of football in Europe.”

It will be interesting to see how this major investigation into match fixing in football unfolds and what prosecutions and, indeed, convictions follow from it, as well as what action FIFA and UEFA will take as a result of it!

5 Match Fixing in F1?

There have also been allegations over the years of match fixing in Formula One motorsport, whereby one member of a team allows a fellow member of the team in the final stages of the race to overtake and win the particular event, as happened in the 2013 F1 Malaysian Grand Prix. 24

In that race, using the tactic known as “team orders”, the Red Bull team were assured of first and second places, thereby maximising their points for the lucrative Constructor’s Championship!

Of course, it is always argued that Formula One is a team sport not an individual one.

6 Corruption in Australia

The results of a year-long investigation by the Australian Crime Commission (ACC) into Australian sport were announced on 7 February 2013 and again were quite shocking.

The ACC investigation revealed that there is “widespread” doping in some of Australia’s most popular sports, as well as links to organised crime that may have led to match fixing in some of them.

7 Concluding Remarks

Match fixing in any sport is an anathema and contrary to the essential nature of sport, which is fair play, and it behoves sports governing bodies to stamp out all kinds of cheating and methods of gaining unfair sporting advantages in order to protect and safeguard the integrity of their sports.

So, let us hope that the ICC does not let up on its fight against corruption in cricket and that Blatter’s and Platini’s noble words (quoted above) are translated into action to kick corruption out of the “beautiful game”; and let us see how each of them fares against the fraudster barons of cricket and football, who are hell bent on destroying the integrity of these noble and popular sports and their very souls, for their own selfish and financial ends and gains.

This is certainly not cricket, to use a popular sporting expression, and neither is it “the beautiful game” of football! Nor, I would add, is it sport in any shape or form! In fact, the complete opposite!


1. Paper presented at the International Academy of Sports Science and Technology in Lausanne, Switzerland (2013-06-03).

1 As Albert Einstein put it succinctly: “You have to learn the rules of the game. And then you have to play better than anyone else.” Or, as Sir Henry Newbolt put it in his famous poem ‘Vitai Lampada’: “Play up! Play up! And play the game!”

2. Sport is now an industry in its own right, worth globally more than 3% of world trade, and, in the European Union, sport accounts for 3.7% of the combined GNP of the twenty-seven member States.

3. For examples of corruption in various sports, see the report entitled Why Sport is not immune to Corruption published by EPAS and The Council of Europe 2008-12-01: www.coe.int/t/dg4/epas/Source/Ressources/EPAS_INFO _Bures_en.pdf (accessed 2013-09-18).

4. See Anderson, Blackshaw & Siekmann (eds) Sports Betting: Law and Policy (2011).

5. See Press Release of 2013-05-23 on the three-day seminar of EU Athletes, the Federation representing some 25,000 elite athletes in Europe, on “Education against Match-fixing” held in Berlin. The education campaign is based on six main principles: know the rules of your sport relating to betting; it is safest never to bet on your own sport; be careful about handling sensitive information; fixing any part of an event is an absolute no-no; report any approaches; fixers will be caught: suspicious bets are monitored.

6. The genteel game of cricket is probably the last sport where corruption might be expected to take place! However, cricket, in recent years, has become more professional and, as such, may have lost touch with its so-called Corinthian values. Take, for example, the relatively new Indian Premier League (IPL), where players can become “stars” and millionaires overnight! The IPL has also recently been affected by “spot fixing” by three members of a leading IPL team, the Rajasthan Royals. See further on this at www.cricketcountry.com/cricket-articles/Live-Updates-IPL-2013-spot-fixing-controversy-mdash-Ravi-Shastri-to-head-3-member-BCCI-probe-team/26933 (accessed 2013-09-18).

7. For further details of this scandal Blackshaw “Match Fixing in Cricket” The Times 2010-08-31.

8. “Cricket’s Underworld: Fighting Illegal Gambling and Match-fixing” June 2013 Global Sports Law and Taxation Reports 17.

9. See Blackshaw “Kicking illegal betting out of football” at AISLC/2010-01-26, and, in particular, details of the “Early Warning System” (EWS) introduced in 2005 by FIFA. The aim of EWS is to identify irregular betting patterns and manipulation of gaming in international sport. The system is primarily geared towards prevention, wherever possible. But, where this not possible and illegal betting is identified after the event, EWS is available to assist sports governing bodies in pursuing offenders with appropriate sporting sanctions.

10. Idem.

11. For further information on this development, see Blackshaw “FIFA to set up Anti Corruption Body” posted on www.sportslaw.nl at AISLC/2011-01-07 (accessed 2013-09-18).

12. For an interesting in-depth review of and comments on this major criminal case of match fixing in football, see Yazicoglu “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil ... and it will all disappear: The biggest corruption scandal in Turkish football’s history” December 2012/3-4 Int Sports LJ 12.

13. The fourth major sports club is Galatasaray SK.

14. President and Vice-President of Trabzonspor.

15. The offer has been made to the footballers by their manager, Yusuf Turanli. Serdar Adali, the vice-president of Besiktas at the date, was also involved.

16. Ibrahim Akin and Iskender Alin.

17. Istanbul Büyüksehir Belediye Spor (IBB Spor).

18. Approximately €7,725,000.

19. Approximately €9 million.

20. Approximately €6,425,000.

21. Approximately €6,860,000.

22. Approximately €27,460,000.

23. Approximately €21,365,000.

24. See Carpenter “There’s no Vettel in team: sporting match-fixing in F1?” www.lawinsport.com, posted on 2013-03-31(accessed 2013-09-18).