Huge breaking news has erupted from the darting world this week with the DRA suspending Danny Baggish until further notice after allegations of match-fixing surfaced.
If ultimately found guilty, the American arrow-smith could be facing a very lengthy spell on the sidelines and one hell of a stain on his career.
The accusation centres around Baggish’s recent appearance at the MODUS Super Series where the unfortunately and now spectacularly ironic nickname The Gambler suddenly stopped sounding quirky and started sounding like something Netflix would slap on the thumbnail of a true crime documentary.
Danny was prevented from participating in Finals Night after irregular betting patterns on the Under 180s market were reportedly flagged by a US betting company.
Now, to clarify something immediately – as far as MODUS are concerned, they realistically had absolutely no choice but to act.
Their business model is fundamentally intertwined with betting companies. Those firms pay for the right to offer markets on the Super Series and, if MODUS had simply shrugged their shoulders and ignored warnings about suspicious activity, the bookmakers would likely have vanished faster than Jermaine Wattimena when it was his turn to pick up the restaurant bill. Once one leaves, others follow and suddenly there is no MODUS Super Series at all – just a few blokes in Portsmouth throwing arrows at a board in silence or worst still, a plethora of new Owen Binks videos.
So no criticism there whatsoever.
However – and this is the bit that leaves an unpleasant taste in the mouth – the entire thing currently appears to stem from somebody across the Atlantic essentially ringing up Portsmouth and saying: “Hi Brad, we’ve just had our pants pulled down on this Under 180s market. Reckon this looks dodgy?”
Apologies to every American named Brad reading this. Decided to go all stereotypical on your ass!
Now yes, perhaps they are absolutely right. Maybe the betting patterns are deeply suspicious. Equally though, bookmakers are not omniscient crime-detecting supercomputers sent from the future. Human beings are fallible. Mistakes happen. And when someone’s livelihood, career and reputation are hanging in the balance like someone scaling Mount Everest in flip-flops, suspicion alone should not immediately result in somebody being exiled from competition.
Again, no slur whatsoever on MODUS. They followed procedure. If they didn’t – a mass exodus of clients would have ensued meaning game over for the Super Series.
The issue is the system itself which increasingly feels like guilty until proven innocent. Because at present, all we actually have is suspicious betting activity. That essentially means an unusual volume of money was placed on Danny Baggish not hitting a requisite number of 180s and the bookmakers subsequently took a financial kicking when exactly that occurred.
Does it look suspicious? Potentially, yes. Is suspicious automatically the same as guilty? Absolutely not. It’s not like there’s a suspicious smell lingering around the oche in the vicinity of James Wade where everyone instantly knows exactly what’s happened. That would be an open-and-shut case.
Only a darts player truly knows whether they intentionally avoided a target. Elite professionals are more than capable of landing close enough to treble 20 to make it appear convincing. And as for not hitting a maximum, there are countless legitimate reasons. A bed can become blocked. A player may choose to set up a finish. A dart may be hanging like a washing line in a hurricane. Sometimes the thing just does not go in. That’s darts – not robotic surgery.
As things stand, Baggish is now back home seeking legal advice while the DRA conducts its investigation. Which means his legal team must now sift through the evidence and formulate a defence while social media simultaneously does what social media does best – immediately transforming into a courtroom full of amateur detectives armed with screenshots and the IQ of a damp sock.
And that is another problem entirely.
Even if nothing is ultimately proven, the reputational damage is already detonating across the internet. Every day the story lingers, more people decide guilt before any evidence has actually been presented publicly. Apparantly we now live in a world where a suspicious betting graph instantly turns everyone into Sherlock Holmes wearing a Luke Littler shirt.
If the DRA eventually uncover concrete evidence linking bets to Danny, his family or close associates, then absolutely – throw the book at him. Ban him. Punish him properly. Nobody sensible wants corruption anywhere near professional darts.
But it has to be absolutely watertight. Not based purely on speculation and bookmaker hysteria because they have suddenly ended up paying out more money than anticipated. You cannot simply turn to someone and say, “Well Danny, we think you probably shot the suspect. We’re not entirely certain, but you seem our best bet – pardon the pun mate.”
This is not about blindly defending Danny Baggish because he is popular or because people know him personally – myself included. It is about whether someone should effectively lose earnings, opportunities and public standing before guilt has actually been established.
Because if the investigation ultimately finds nothing substantial, what then?
Does Danny simply get told “Sorry about all that old chap, back you go” while the damage to his reputation quietly remains floating around the internet forever? Do MODUS replay Champions Week because he missed out? Of course they do not. That opportunity is gone.
Meanwhile, Baggish now faces two deeply unpleasant options. Spend thousands on legal fees defending himself or sit and wait while the investigation slowly unfolds above his head like a storm cloud in a low-budget disaster movie. It just feels deeply uncomfortable.
We constantly hear that aforementioned phrase – innocent until proven guilty. Yet increasingly, modern sport appears to operate somewhere much closer to publicly suspicious until financially ruined.
It is not a case of “Shit dude, you ran that 100 metres suspiciously quickly. Let’s drug test you because heaven forbid you may have actually trained hard enough to become good at your sport.” Investigation is one thing. Premature condemnation is something entirely different.
For now though, Danny waits. And so does everybody else I guess.
