The six defendants in the alleged match-fixing scandal appeared before an Athens court on Thursday and were granted extensions to prepare their defences – Greek Basketball Federation (EOK) president Vangelis Liolios denies wrongdoing and questions the credibility of witnesses whose testimony contributed to the criminal case against him

Former referee Petros Papapetrou is scheduled to testify on Friday afternoon, while the Greek Basketball Federation president and his close associate Giorgos Mavraganis will appear on Sunday. Referee Vaso Tsaroucha, refereeing adviser Ilias Koromilas and Central Refereeing Committee member Tasos Piloidis are scheduled to testify on Monday.

The six face allegations linked to an alleged network involved in manipulating basketball matches in Greece, including top-flight Greek Basket League fixtures and matches in lower professional and amateur divisions.

Liolios denies allegations and claims he is the victim of a conspiracy

According to information obtained by Proto Thema, Liolios categorically denies the allegations against him, maintaining that he has no connection to the activities described in the indictment.

Sources close to the federation president say he is preparing to challenge the credibility of individuals whose testimony contributed to the criminal proceedings.

Those sources claim that Liolios filed criminal complaints in 2022 against four individuals associated with basketball, accusing them of a series of serious offences. One of those individuals is reportedly among two witnesses who provided investigators with potentially significant evidence.

Liolios’ associates suggest that the overlap raises questions about the motives behind the accusations and points to what they describe as an orchestrated attempt to implicate him.

His defence also disputes the significance of text messages reportedly included in the case file as possible evidence of attempted bribery.

According to sources close to Liolios, only one message directly involving him has been identified. In it, he allegedly informed another individual of the identities of referees assigned to an upcoming match.

His associates argue that the information does not establish wrongdoing because the referees’ names were due to be publicly announced within the following two or three days.

Referee disputes allegations involving €820,000 in cash

Former referee Petros Papapetrou also reportedly denies the charges against him.

According to information from his defence, Papapetrou maintains that he possesses documentation fully accounting for the €820,000 in cash allegedly discovered at his residence during the investigation.

The discovery has emerged as one of the most prominent elements of the case, although the origin of the money and whether it is connected to any criminal activity remain matters for investigators and the courts to establish.

Defence lawyers challenge the evidence and arrest procedures

Lawyers representing other defendants have also rejected the allegations and raised concerns about how the investigation was conducted.

Nikos Galanis, who represents Tasos Piloidis, said his client categorically denies involvement in bribery or illegal betting connected to basketball.

Galanis also questioned the decision to issue arrest warrants before the defendants had been heard by judicial authorities.

“None of those arrested was called to provide preliminary testimony. I believe issuing arrest warrants before the judiciary had heard them was a legal misstep,” he said.

Angelos Peponis, the lawyer representing Vaso Tsaroucha and Ilias Koromilas, said both clients “categorically deny the charge”.

He also questioned whether the case file was based on substantiated evidence or allegations arising from competing interests within professional sport.

Peponis argued that financial rivalries and conflicting interests are an established feature of the sporting environment, making it essential to distinguish verifiable evidence from potentially motivated accusations.

Alleged match-fixing network under investigation

Investigators are examining allegations that the six defendants participated in a network capable of influencing the outcomes of basketball matches through refereeing decisions, bribery and potentially illicit betting.

The investigation reportedly encompasses matches played in Greece’s top basketball division as well as other professional and non-professional competitions.

Among the evidence attracting particular attention is the €820,000 in cash allegedly recovered from Papapetrou’s home.

The authorities are also examining communications that prosecutors may seek to use to establish relationships between officials, referees and individuals associated with basketball clubs.

The allegations have prompted comparisons in Greek media with major sporting corruption scandals, including Italy’s 2006 Calciopoli affair, although the accusations in the Greek case have not been established in court.

The text message at the centre of the investigation

One of the messages reportedly included in the case file was allegedly sent by Liolios to coach Ilias Papatheodorou, who previously worked at Promitheas Patras and later at Maroussi.

According to the reported contents, the message identified the three referees assigned to an upcoming Saturday match before their appointments had been publicly announced. “I don’t know whether it matters or not. But Saturday’s three referees are B, S and H,” the message reportedly stated, using the initials of the referees’ surnames.

“I just asked and found out. But be careful. It’s strictly confidential. I don’t know whether the referees themselves know yet.”

Investigators are reportedly examining whether such advance information could have been used to gain an improper competitive advantage or facilitate attempts to influence matches.

Liolios’ side rejects that interpretation, maintaining that the communication concerned information that would soon have become public and does not demonstrate any attempt to manipulate a result.

Dispute over whether defendants were summoned before their arrests

Another contentious aspect of the proceedings concerns the steps taken before the six defendants were arrested.

According to accounts attributed to judicial sources, the individuals had previously been summoned to provide explanations but failed to appear, leading to criminal charges and the issuing of arrest warrants.

Defence representatives dispute that account, insisting their clients were never formally given an opportunity to respond to the allegations before their arrests.

They also maintain that they had not received the full case file, preventing them from knowing the precise allegations and evidence against them.

The conflicting claims are expected to become part of the legal arguments as the defendants prepare their testimony.

Papatheodorou’s public accusations and the Maroussi complaint

The investigation has also renewed attention on a series of public statements and complaints made by Ilias Papatheodorou during his time as Maroussi head coach.

In November 2025, following a Greek Basket League defeat to Mykonos, Papatheodorou described Greek basketball as a “puppet show”, making unusually forceful remarks about the sport’s administration and competitive environment.

He said Maroussi needed to become stronger and more aggressive to participate in what he characterised as a theatrical performance in which teams were reduced to puppets.

Several days later, Maroussi issued a more measured statement addressing refereeing concerns.

Tensions escalated again on 14 February 2026, after Maroussi defeated Karditsa.

Despite the victory, Papatheodorou delivered another pointed statement directed at unnamed individuals whom he accused of attempting to exercise control over his team. “This is a victory against those who think they can control us,” he said. “We are not afraid of you. We will not be blackmailed. We will not stop.”

His comments drew a response from the Greek Basketball Federation, initially through vice-president and former international player Dimos Dikoudis.

The federation subsequently referred both Maroussi and Papatheodorou to its Ethics Committee.

Following another home defeat to Mykonos in March, during which the visiting team attempted 44 free throws, Papatheodorou announced that Maroussi would pursue measures to protect its interests.

On 16 April, the club formally submitted a complaint against Liolios to the federation’s Ethics Committee.

The complaint was also forwarded to other sporting authorities and the sports prosecutor.

Previous investigation into Liolios’ ties to Promitheas

A central component of Maroussi’s complaint involved messages Liolios allegedly sent to Papatheodorou while the latter was coaching Promitheas Patras between 2023 and 2025.

Liolios has longstanding ties to Promitheas, although he had officially sold his interest in the club in 2020.

The Professional Sports Committee (EEA) subsequently examined whether he continued to exercise influence over the club’s administration despite that sale.

In early June, the committee summoned Promitheas, its shareholders and Liolios for a hearing.

A month later, the EEA announced the revocation of the club’s operating certificate after concluding, based on testimony and messages presented by Papatheodorou, that Liolios had maintained substantial involvement in the basketball company’s management and operations.

That administrative finding has become part of the broader controversy surrounding Liolios’ relationship with Greek basketball clubs while serving as federation president.

What happens next

The next stage of the criminal proceedings will unfold over three days, beginning on Friday with Papapetrou’s testimony, followed by Liolios and Mavraganis on Sunday and the remaining three defendants on Monday.

The case poses a major reputational challenge for Greek basketball, particularly given Liolios’ position at the head of the national federation and the country’s prominent role in European club competitions.

The investigation has also intensified scrutiny of refereeing oversight, conflicts of interest and transparency within the administration of the sport.

Any decisions concerning whether the defendants are remanded in custody or released, as well as the subsequent course of the criminal proceedings, will depend on the judicial authorities’ assessment of the evidence and the arguments presented by their defence teams.

All six defendants deny wrongdoing, and the allegations remain subject to judicial examination.