Exclusive: Dark background in basketball - The 10 "hot" allegations, Liolios, hundreds of thousands of euros, and Costa Navarino

Who ultimately pulls the strings in Greek basketball? Who decides which referees will blow the whistle, which executives will have access to decision-making centers, and what role money plays behind closed doors?

A prosecutorial referral document revealed by BN opens Pandora's box, bringing to light grave allegations that, if proven true, threaten to blow apart any sense of credibility and equal governance in Greek basketball. The main protagonist—as described—is the former president of the Hellenic Basketball Federation (HBF), Vangelis Liolios. Names that do not go unnoticed, staggering amounts, references to 5,000, 10,000, 50,000, and even 300,000 euros, meetings in hotels and cafes, phone communications, referee appointments, and matches placed under the microscope. An explosive mix of allegations in which personal relationships, financial dependencies, and behind-the-scenes influence appear to intersect with the world of officiating.

Depositions contained in the case file explicitly mention specific individuals, including Giorgos Mavraganis and Ilias Koromilas, while describing incidents that raise serious questions regarding what potentially transpired away from the court. Revelations from witnesses are chilling: the issue does not merely concern a single whistle, a controversial play, or a disgruntled executive. It concerns the possible existence of an influence network, as described by complainants, extending from referee designations to the on-court treatment of specific teams. If even a portion of these serious complaints is confirmed, Greek basketball's problem will not reside solely within the court's four lines—it will reside in executive offices, personal understandings, and power dynamics that potentially dictated outcomes fans believed were decided strictly on the hardwood. The case now sits in the realm of judicial investigation, accompanied by a question that cannot remain unanswered: who knew, who influenced, and who ultimately owed it to protect Greek basketball?

English summary of the case file page below:

• Origin of Case File: The criminal case file (A.B.M. ΔI26/74) was formed after complaints (dated April 20, 2026) submitted by Maroussi BC via email were forwarded by the National Platform for Sports Integrity (E.Π.ΑΘ.Λ.Α.). Two related case files (ΔI2026/123 and ΔI2026/200) were also merged due to relevance.

• Core Allegations Against E. Liolios: Evangelos Liolios, President of the Hellenic Basketball Federation (EOK), is accused of acting as the de facto manager/president of Promitheas Patras BC. It is alleged that he makes financial and competitive decisions for Promitheas and uses his EOK presidency to unfairly promote the club at the expense of other teams, attempting to influence positive match results.

• Evidence (Text Messages): A series of text messages between Evangelos Liolios and the former head coach of Promitheas Patras, Ilias Papatheodorou, were submitted as evidence.

• Leaking Confidential Referee Appointments: The document highlights a specific incident ahead of the Promitheas vs. PAOK match on March 8, 2025 (Round 20 of the Stoiximan Greek Basket League). On March 5, 2025—two days before the referee designations were publicly announced on March 7—Liolios confidentially revealed to coach Papatheodorou the designated refereeing trio (Vaso Tsaroucha, Stefanos Magklogiannis, and Nontas Christinakis).

• Quoted Text Message: The document quotes a message from March 5, 2025: "I don't know if it plays a role or not. But the trio on Saturday is: Vaso, Stefanos, Christinakis. I just asked and found out. But careful. It is strictly confidential. I don't know if even the referees know yet."

1. Allegations of 50,000 euros and the background of referee appointments

One of the most intriguing points is located on pages 23 and 24. In his testimony, the witness describes incidents from the 2019–2020 season and communications that, according to his claims, related to the progression of the playoff process. Reference is made to an alleged financial facilitation of 50,000 euros toward Giorgos Mavraganis, within the framework of relationships and arrangements described in the deposition.

English summary of the case file page below:

• Acquaintance & Casino Meetings: The witness states he met Georgios Mavraganis as a basketball athlete in 2009, and by 2011 they began hanging out. Mavraganis frequently visited the VIP area of the Parnitha Casino—where the witness worked as a waiter/barman—to gamble.

• Prediction of HBF Presidency: About two years before Evangelos Liolios was elected President of the Hellenic Basketball Federation (HBF), Mavraganis told the witness: "Bet your house that he will be the next President of HBF," even urging him to place a bet at 2.25 odds.

• Promises of Career Advancement: Mavraganis claimed that through Liolios, he himself would become part of the HBF administration and promised the witness that his officiating career would "skyrocket" with frequent appointments in top-tier A1 division games.

• Unfulfilled Promises & Lower-Tier Officiating: The witness notes that this promise was never kept. Under the Liolios administration (elected September 2021), he only officiated one single A1 game.

• Leverage & Financial Strain: The witness states that Mavraganis kept him "tied down" with unkept promises of A1 games while the witness was facing financial difficulties due to a divorce. Instead, Mavraganis gave him A2 division games as a consolation prize ("to sugarcoat the pill").

• Institutional Context: The witness concludes by pointing out that the Central Refereeing Committee (KED) is the body responsible for appointing referees for all national championships and friendly matches.

2. The 5,000 euro case: From acquaintances to alleged financial transactions

Pages 18–20 record the second witness's narrative regarding figures operating within Greek basketball and transactions that, according to him, were linked to specific contacts and accommodations. The testimony references an amount of 5,000 euros, alongside meetings allegedly held in hotel and dining venues. Furthermore, relationships between Giorgos Mavraganis and other executives are detailed, with descriptions pointing toward an environment of personal favors and financial obligations.

3. The eye-watering sum of 300,000 euros

Pages 16 and 22 present one of the largest sums mentioned in the referral: 300,000 euros. The amount is linked to descriptions of financial accommodations, loans, or financial relationships between individuals active in basketball circles. Page 22 specifically describes the pursuit of financial arrangements through interpersonal relationships, while referencing the officiating environment.

4. Referee designations and the Promitheas vs Lavrio case

Substantial weight attaches to references involving matches of Promitheas Patras and Lavrio. The referral document details contacts, discussions, and incidents that, according to complainants, were connected to the selection of referees and the competitive treatment of specific teams. Page 9 references the Promitheas vs Lavrio game on December 7, 2019, with a final score of 77–66, as well as claims regarding favorable refereeing treatment.

English summary of the case file page below:

• May 22, 2018 | Ionikos Neas Filadelfias vs. Hlysiakos (A' ESKA Men's Promotion Finals, Game 5 | Final Score 55-51): Referee Vaso Tsaroucha was designated to officiate following an intervention by G. Mavraganis ("Vaso took care of it"). Mavraganis, a former player for Ionikos Neas Filadelfias (according to the testimony of Sp. Gkontas), had a personal vision to promote Ionikos Neas Filadelfias to the A1 Division.

• January 19, 2019 | Promitheas Patras vs. Kolossos Rodou (Basket League | Final Score 101-95): Officiated by referee Ilias Koromilas. After the match, Koromilas was scheduled to have a meal/dine with E. Liolios and G. Mavraganis.

• January 20, 2019 | Aigaleo vs. Ionikos N. Filadelfias (C' National Division | Final Score 73-71, defeat for Ionikos): The referee was asked by G. Mavraganis to help Ionikos.

• February 17, 2019 | Atalanti vs. OFI: OFI head coach Vasilis Rallis agreed with G. Mavraganis to receive assistance.

5. References to Ilias Koromilas and relationships with Giorgos Mavraganis

Another core point concerns relationships and communications described between Ilias Koromilas and Giorgos Mavraganis. On pages 6–8, as well as later sections of the document, descriptions appear regarding meetings, discussions, and events related to referee appointments and the management of officiating. Who actually decided who would whistle a game? Was it always competent institutional bodies, or did unofficial centers of influence exist?

6. Pre-game communications and allegations of collusion

A recurring pattern in depositions is the reference to telephone communications, meetings in cafes, restaurants, and hotels, alongside message exchanges. Pages 19–21, 23–24, and 27–28 describe incidents in which various individuals allegedly made contact prior to key matchups.

English summary of the case file page below:

• April 30, 2023 | Kyparissia, Dion Kyparissias vs. Promitheas Patras 2014 (C' National Division, crucial match): Officiated by referee Kalogeropoulos. G. Mavraganis asked him to ensure Promitheas won at all costs. Despite Kalogeropoulos's efforts, Promitheas lost by 14 points (final score 87-59 based on the preceding text).

• October 26, 2024 | Hlysiakos vs. Promitheas Patras 2014 (National League 1, B' National): Officiated by referee Kalogeropoulos. G. Mavraganis asked him to ensure Promitheas won. Mavraganis had made the same request to referee Spyropoulos (whom Ilias Koromilas was also going to speak with). Promitheas lost the game in overtime by 1 point (final score 122-121), though the referees blatantly whistled in their favor. Afterward, fearing punishment for poor officiating, referee Spyropoulos spoke with Hl. Koromilas, while referee Kalogeropoulos spoke with Mavraganis to avoid being penalized (pages 89-90).

• February 17, 2025 | Patras, Apollon Patras vs. Promitheas 2014 (National League 1): Officiated by referee Kalogeropoulos. G. Mavraganis asked him to have Promitheas win and to speak with referee Spyropoulos regarding the match—noting that Spyropoulos was not "enthusiastic" because they would "get suspicious" since the two teams had a rivalry. Final score 97-80.

• March 22, 2025 | Patras, Promitheas 2014 vs. Aiolos Agias (National League 1): Officiated by referee Kalogeropoulos (along with the other two referees, Spyropoulos and Argyroudis). G. Mavraganis asked him to ensure Promitheas won. Final score 86-68, with Kalogeropoulos noting that "we helped Promitheas win" (pages 92-93).

• March 23, 2025 | Women's A1 Finals Game 1, Athinaikos vs. PAO: Officiated by referee Kalogeropoulos. G. Mavraganis asked him to make sure Athinaikos won at all costs. He made the same request to referee Spyropoulos (via Kalogeropoulos). Furthermore, Mavraganis and Ilias Koromilas had promised the latter that they would try to ensure he was not penalized for an erroneous refereeing decision he had made in a previous match (Psychiko...).

The question needing an answer is whether these were routine social and professional contacts or communications aimed at exercising undue influence.

7. The case of XK and the 10,000 euros

One of the document's most explicit points appears on pages 29–30. XK describes an incident involving referee Ilias Koromilas and the Monaco vs Unics Kazan match on April 30, 2021. According to the deposition, reference is made to an alleged attempt to offer 10,000 euros to influence the outcome.

English summary of the case file page below:

• Discussion on terms for promotion: One party asks whether the previously discussed agreement to "step back" still holds. The response confirms it does, with the condition that if Promitheas fails to gain promotion, 300,000 euros must be provided to buy another BC with a different seat and tax ID (AFM). In return, if they secure the spot, they will step down from promotion, provided 100,000 euros are given to cover all of Faros's financial obligations.

• Mr. Liolios's counterproposal: Mr. Liolios responds that he can offer 150,000 euros, but requests that the series go 3-2 (meaning Faros should lose three games) so that Promitheas's promotion is clean—without Faros promoting first and then resigning—thereby saving on player bonuses for promotion.

• Rejection of the match-fixing proposal: The speaker replies that they are 100% against telling their players to lose, stating that whatever they achieve will be earned by winning the promotion. When Mr. Liolios asks how he can be guaranteed that the speaker will keep their word and step down, the reply is: "You are not guaranteed, but I am not asking you for anything until it happens."

• Conclusion and post-match message: The meeting ends calmly without complete satisfaction. On June 11, 2016, Faros defeats Promitheas and advances to the A1 division. That evening after the game, Mr. Liolios sends a congratulatory text message stating, "I hope you keep your word," to which the speaker replies that they are going to celebrate.

8. Women's games, youth championships, and lower divisions

Particularly striking is that the document does not limit itself to major professional matches. Pages 11–14 and 30–32 contain references to women's games, youth competitions, and lower divisions, including Promitheas games. If complaints hold merit, the problem does not concern merely the top of the pyramid, but potentially the very foundations of Greek basketball.

9. The referee and Promitheas case from 2024 to 2026

The final pages of the referral present allegations concerning matches of AEK, PAOK, Promitheas, and other teams. Among others, references include Promitheas vs AEK on November 16, 2024, Promitheas vs PAOK on March 8, 2025, and Promitheas vs Aris on January 24, 2026.

10. The big question for HBF, KED, and oversight mechanisms

Beyond specific individuals and matches, the case touches upon the institutional functioning of officiating itself. Who oversees referee selection and evaluation procedures? HBF, Central Refereeing Committee (KED), and every competent institutional body hold a critical role in ensuring transparency, regardless of the final judicial evaluation of these specific complaints.

English summary of the case file page below:

• Control of KED: The witness states that whenever they were left off the A2 division refereeing assignments for three to four matchdays, Mavraganis would call and assign them to a game, noting that Mavraganis "controlled the entire KED".

• Centralized Communication & Interceptions: When asked about matches with altered outcomes due to illicit actions, the witness confirms there were many. During the first year of Liolios's administration, the primary policy was to prevent any national category team from contacting referees directly; instead, any team wanting something had to go through the Liolios–Mavraganis administration. The witness adds that all their communication was with Mavraganis, always with Liolios's knowledge.

• Secure Messaging Channels: During the second season of Liolios's administration, referee appointments were made every Monday or Tuesday, and by Wednesday or Thursday, referees learned their matches. If Mavraganis needed something, he would call via WhatsApp or Viber for greater communication security, and would only reach out if he needed something.

• Meaning of Intervention & Player Stats: Asked what "if he needed something" meant, the witness explains it involved either ensuring a team wins or helping a player boost their statistics (e.g., calling many fouls in their favor, especially for young athletes).

• The High School Championship Fix (March 2026): The witness details an instance involving a high school team from Patras, Anagennisi (Psathopyrgos)—where most players from Promitheas Patras B attend—participating in the final phase of the school championship held from March 26–29, 2026. Mavraganis called the witness beforehand to ask if they wanted to go to Cyprus. After agreeing, the witness called Mavraganis back to ask if he needed anything for the matches. Mavraganis called back the next day stating, "dust and pieces," meaning Anagennisi had to win.

Costa Navarino

English summary of the case file pages below:

• Costa Navarino Trip & Ionikos Strategy: In summer 2018, referee Vaso Tsaroucha messaged the witness asking to arrange a stay at Costa Navarino. The witness consulted G. Mavraganis, and they agreed to split the 351.70-euro nightly cost for a September 6–9 stay, viewing it as a "gift" because the witness was managing Ionikos Nikaia at the time, and both Liolios and Mavraganis wanted Ionikos promoted to integrate another team into "the system".

• Match-Fixing & 5000-Euro Bribe (December 2018): Ahead of a crucial game against Diagoras Dryopideon on December 15, 2018 (officiated by Tsaroucha), the witness asked Tsaroucha for help. Ionikos won 78–89 with blatant referee favor. On December 18, 2018, the witness met Tsaroucha near the Dafni metro station and handed her an envelope containing 5,000 euros.

• Liolios's Promotion Plan & Meeting at Acropolis: Ahead of the 2016 play-offs, Liolios invited the witness to a Coffee Island near the Acropolis. Liolios wanted Promitheas to be promoted to the A1 division and transition into a professional club (KAE) so that player payments and expenses could be officially tracked through banking channels rather than amateur cash.

• The "System" and Elimination of Rivals: The witness told Liolios that Faros would step down from promotion, but warned that Promitheas first needed to eliminate Ethnikos Piraeus. Liolios then asked, "Can you help Promitheas get past Ethnikos?" due to the severely strained relations between the two clubs.

www.bankingnews.gr