‘GAMBLING: AMERICA’S NATIONAL PASTIME? / CHARGES, REACTIONS : Magazine Alleges That Rams’ Shaw Bet on Pro Games

Allegations that he bet on pro football games are “outrageous and unfounded” and the product of a bitter divorce, Ram executive John Shaw said Wednesday.

“It’s a thing that came out of the divorce action. People play different games,” Shaw said.

The allegations were part of a Sports Illustrated cover story, “Gambling: America’s National Pastime?” in the March 10 issue. Shaw, the Rams’ vice president for finance and owner Georgia Frontiere’s second-in-command, denied that he had ever bet on a pro football game, particularly any involving the Rams.

“The answer is no,” he said. “That’s an unqualified no, (unless) you’re talking about when I was 12 or something.”

The Times was told, however, that the National Football League plans to hold a formal hearing on the matter with Shaw.

A source close to the Rams’ top management said: “(Shaw) has gambled for years, but I have never known him to bet on baseball or football. He is strictly a horse guy.”

Shaw and the Rams’ front office also issued statements.

Shaw’s said: “The allegations in the article are so outrageous and unfounded that I will not dignify them with a response.”

The Rams’ statement, which cited no source but was apparently approved by Frontiere, said: “The allegations about John Shaw contained in the March 10 issue of Sports Illustrated are without foundation and have absolutely no basis in fact. We stand behind John Shaw and are convinced that he has been engaged in no improper activities.”

The National Football League office offered no such vote of confidence.

Joe Browne, director of communications, read this statement: “We’ve been aware of certain allegations about John Shaw since October of ’85 and our office had spoken to John Shaw and his attorneys regarding these allegations. We are currently reviewing the matter and we will have no further comment until that review is completed.”

Browne said that Shaw had not been suspended from conducting league business during the review.

“Not at this time,” Browne said.

Shaw said that he planned to represent the Rams, as usual, at next week’s owner meetings at Rancho Mirage.

According to Shaw’s lawyers, Larry Miller and Richard Marmaro, Shaw’s former wife, Suzanne, charged in the 1984 action that he “gambled excessively over the last several years” but has made no such allegations since.

Miller, who represented Shaw in the divorce, said: “The original story absolutely started with his ex-wife . . . the original allegations about gambling.”

During the divorce proceedings, Miller said, the two had agreed on a property settlement but disagreed on a custody arrangement for their daughter. Miller said that Suzanne Shaw then filed a declaration “and alleged in it all kinds of things. The gambling is just one of them.

(The Times was unable to contact Suzanne Shaw Wednesday.)

“We were able to resolve the issue and stipulated between counsel that that declaration would be suppressed. The whole declaration was supposed to be sealed. We knew what would happen if somebody were to grab a statement like that, and guess what happened.

“The court screwed up. The court failed to seal the record. They (Sports Illustrated) never would have had a place to start.”

The article also quoted other former acquaintances of Shaw on his gambling habits.

“A lot of people in this town are jealous of John, including his friends who aren’t real friends,” Miller said. “Here’s a kid 34 years old who’s risen far above. . . . I mean, every kid in the country wants a job (as) a GM or vice president of a sports team. Everybody takes a shot at John.

“Basically, I’m shocked that SI would (a) expose themselves like they have and (b) would waste ink on such a ridiculous article. It becomes ridiculous by what it says, not by innuendo. The inference by innuendo is inflammatory. The actual article, if you take it literally, is boring and meaningless.”

Marmaro, who also represents composer Dominic Frontiere, husband of the Rams’ owner, said he wrote several letters to Sports Illustrated when he learned of the impending article.

“The letters we wrote were in reaction to statements that were being made by their reporters or their investigators that were false,” Marmaro said. “We wanted them to know that we viewed the matter very seriously and that anything that was written which was false or in any way erroneous, we would do anything we could to protect ourselves.”

The magazine did not respond, Marmaro said.

“And that’s where the matter stands,” he said. “We haven’t decided what to do.

“It’s very difficult to sue the press because of the broad protections that the courts and the Constitution give for erroneous stories. Our position is that that article contains totally false and unfounded, baseless allegations. We vigorously deny the allegations in the story and believe that they are the result of a vindictive divorce action.”

Marmaro has met with Jay Moyer, the NFL’s general counsel, and Warren Welch, chief of security.

“They haven’t articulated their specific concerns to me,” Marmaro said. “We’ve only spoken generally.”