Ivan Toney

[Andy_W]

I can't believe some people think footballers should be allowed to bet on football matches. If it was allowed, match fixing would surely follow. Maybe not by manipulating the overall result, but things like corners and throw in, etc.

I agree it's unlikely to happen in the Premier League where players earn an absolute fortune, but it would be a temptation in the lower leagues and you only need a few players to succumb to that temptation for the integrity of the league to be in tatters.

By way of example, take a couple of late-20's footballers who have fallen down the pyramid. They started off living the high life as Premier League academy graduates, before moving to the Championship, then down to League 1. They used to earn £10k a week but now they're on £2k a week and fearful of what will happen at the end of their contracts. So they collude and start placing bets on each others matches, on markets they can influence such as bookings and corners. Gradually, to get more money down, they get their mates to open accounts and place the bets. Then they involve former teammates at other clubs and the conceit escalates, before you end up with full blown match fixing. And all of this ignores the potential for malevolent influences to play a part, i.e. dodgy betting syndicates approaching players, especially those that have got themselves into gambling related debts.

Is the above scenario far-fetched? Probably, but then every potential scandal is far-fetched until it happens. Anyway the point is, a total ban on football betting should prevent 99.99% of players even considering getting involved in such shenanigans whereas if footballers were allowed to bet on games they are not involved in, it would inevitably end up in a betting related scandal and very probably match fixing at some point.

I think this is ignoring what is already going on, whether footballers are physically placing the bets or not. At least if the footballers are doing it, then it could be easily tracked and be out in the open. They could make it an open book and with much stricter punishments.

Betting has far too much influence over football and pretending the footballers, managers and agents are the only ones with information is disingenuous. The gambling blocks are just a sham, to pretend they are doing something, whilst they open their hands to receive the effective bungs from the betting companies and teams taking money from them as sponsors etc.

They need to ban the daft markets like corners, bookings etc, as nobody betting on these markets has much of a clue, it's far too random, and these markets are asking to be abused/ fixed.

Nobody is daft enough to risk missing open goals, giving away penalties etc, it would be too simple to spot, nowadays anyway.

 

[ForssAwakens]

I presume that even though it is banned there is still a big culture of it happening. Mostly harmless, just betting while watching matches like any of us might but because Toney had gone from PL to L1 maybe he thought his top-level career might be over so there wasn't a risk of being caught. I'm guessing there is some sort of more rigorous investigations when players are in line for an England call-up and that exposure is what has prompted the investigation.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that it is way more widespread (and 99% harmless) than has been uncovered. 232 bets over 5 years is hardly like he's a prolific gambler. That's about 1 a week. Maybe he just puts a £1 on an accumulator.

If anyone has played Fantasy Football and has seen things like the footballers own teams then it is easy to see how this information gets out because there are people tracking their teams and quite reliably you can see which players might have picked up an injury or have been rotated for a fixture when you see that their teammates have dropped them from their teams or benched/not captained them etc. If it's enough to give you an edge in a free to play game then it's definitely enough to give you an edge in the betting markets.

Not sure why people are trying to defend these players who are in clear breach of the rules

 

[Nano]

It’s not harmless, it’s damaging the integrity of the game so increases the possibility of collusion and also opens players up to extortion.

It’s pretty simple imo. Break the rules, banned for life.

Oh, I agree with you. I'm using the word harmless in the context that there was no ill-intent from the player, no collusion or match fixing. I.e. they are at home watching a match on TV and they fancy Liverpool to win or Haaland to score the next goal etc.

Obviously, the rules are there, they shouldn't be doing it and they deserve to be punished.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

I can't believe some people think footballers should be allowed to bet on football matches. If it was allowed, match fixing would surely follow. Maybe not by manipulating the overall result, but things like corners and throw in, etc.

I agree it's unlikely to happen in the Premier League where players earn an absolute fortune, but it would be a temptation in the lower leagues and you only need a few players to succumb to that temptation for the integrity of the league to be in tatters.

By way of example, take a couple of late-20's footballers who have fallen down the pyramid. They started off living the high life as Premier League academy graduates, before moving to the Championship, then down to League 1. They used to earn £10k a week but now they're on £2k a week and fearful of what will happen at the end of their contracts. So they collude and start placing bets on each others matches, on markets they can influence such as bookings and corners. Gradually, to get more money down, they get their mates to open accounts and place the bets. Then they involve former teammates at other clubs and the conceit escalates, before you end up with full blown match fixing. And all of this ignores the potential for malevolent influences to play a part, i.e. dodgy betting syndicates approaching players, especially those that have got themselves into gambling related debts.

Is the above scenario far-fetched? Probably, but then every potential scandal is far-fetched until it happens. Anyway the point is, a total ban on football betting should prevent 99.99% of players even considering getting involved in such shenanigans whereas if footballers were allowed to bet on games they are not involved in, it would inevitably end up in a betting related scandal and very probably match fixing at some point.

I’ve said this before on here but you used to see lots of teams doing the same kick-off; one player rolls it back to a team-mate, who rolls it back to the player behind, who then absolutely launches a diagonal ball towards one of the opposition corners and straight out for a throw. Even Wilko and Hendrie used to do it. We always said at the games that it seemed weird thing to do.

It was Le Tiss who said, years later, that players had been betting on who’d win the first throw in. I think he said he’d maybe done it or knew teammates who done it but bottled out of it eventually. Reading that, it made all those times teams had been booting it straight out for a throw make much more sense. They’d had bets and things were arranged.

 

[Andy_W]

Not sure why people are trying to defend these players who are in clear breach of the rules

It's not so much the defence of the players for breaking the rules, it's more that the rules are daft, and football's approach to gambling is extremely contradictory, to the point where it's ludicrous.

If he's been making a killing, above the norm or has close ties to where any of the successful bets are, then yeah, throw the book at him, as those rules were in place.

If he's just been thick, not really knowing he could not make any bet on any football and has lost money, then maybe be more lenient, and use it as a warning.

Be interesting to know why the investigation happened, and whether he stopped of his own accord previously, and why he stopped.

 

[ForssAwakens]

It's not so much the defence of the players for breaking the rules, it's more that the rules are daft, and football's approach to gambling is extremely contradictory, to the point where it's ludicrous.

If he's been making a killing, above the norm or has close ties to where any of the successful bets are, then yeah, throw the book at him, as those rules were in place.

If he's just been thick, not really knowing he could not make any bet on any football and has lost money, then maybe be more lenient, and use it as a warning.

Be interesting to know why the investigation happened, and whether he stopped of his own accord previously, and why he stopped.

It’s been pointed out several times how the rules are not daft and they are there for the integrity of the game

 

[Andy_W]

The rules aren’t daft, they are clear.

Or is it okay to make a hundred quid but not ok to make two hundred? Or don’t bet on games in your league, but the one above or below is fine?

Every single person involved should know the rules.

If someone wants to gamble there are plenty of other activities or sports to do so on.

I didn't even realise this was a rule (betting on any games), so it can't be that clear? I'm no pro, but have been semi-pro, and probably know more than the average "fan" on most things football related.
Obviously I knew they're not allowed to get involved in match-fixing, and can't bet on their own games.
But even if the rules were clear, it doesn't make them right, and doesn't in any way give football any credibility when it comes to gambling. In the eyes of the law, anyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty, so not sure why football has to assume that all players are crooks? Or they know the industry is full of crooks, but still let it dominate sponsorship of the league, shirts, stadiums, TV?

Either allow it all, or don't allow any of it.

I'd be more looking at it as % earned/ lost from number of bets and the same % +/- against capital risked.

I'd allow any bet where it's done with honest intentions, regardless of the league or games, but not games they're directly involved in.

Ok, so a footballer can bet on any other sport, other than their specialist subject, seems a bit unfair, and the only reason to disallow it seems to be that they're assuming they're all criminals? They might have knowledge above others, which has not come from insider information.

The same way some market trader might invest 1% of his investments in one stock over another, and some random guy off the street goes and risks his life savings on something stupid, which he knows nothing about, following some dodgy advice or TV advert.

The only legitimate reason I can think for a ban is that tons of footballers lose loads of money gambling, and end up bankrupt or in a hole, but the same applies to the public who have it pushed down their throats.

 

[TeaCider]

Given the report of the investigation in to Toney is apparently 2,800 pages long, I think it's likely there are some serious issues relating to the bets, beyond just breaching the blanket ban.

 

[ForssAwakens]

I didn't even realise this was a rule (betting on any games), so it can't be that clear? I'm no pro, but have been semi-pro, and probably know more than the average "fan" on most things football related.
Obviously I knew they're not allowed to get involved in match-fixing, and can't bet on their own games.
But even if the rules were clear, it doesn't make them right, and doesn't in any way give football any credibility when it comes to gambling. In the eyes of the law, anyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty, so not sure why football has to assume that all players are crooks? Or they know the industry is full of crooks, but still let it dominate sponsorship of the league, shirts, stadiums, TV?

Either allow it all, or don't allow any of it.

I'd be more looking at it as % earned/ lost from number of bets and the same % +/- against capital risked.

I'd allow any bet where it's done with honest intentions, regardless of the league or games, but not games they're directly involved in.

Ok, so a footballer can bet on any other sport, other than their specialist subject, seems a bit unfair, and the only reason to disallow it seems to be that they're assuming they're all criminals? They might have knowledge above others, which has not come from insider information.

The same way some market trader might invest 1% of his investments in one stock over another, and some random guy off the street goes and risks his life savings on something stupid, which he knows nothing about, following some dodgy advice or TV advert.

The only legitimate reason I can think for a ban is that tons of footballers lose loads of money gambling, and end up bankrupt or in a hole, but the same applies to the public who have it pushed down their throats.

Just because you have ignorance doesn’t mean it isn’t that clear, or it isn’t clear for footballers.

 

[Andy_W]

It’s been pointed out several times how the rules are not daft and they are there for the integrity of the game

Only if you're making wide assumptions that players and others have no access to making these same bets unofficially (which is not possible).

Is having TV, shirts, stadiums, and whole leagues good for the integrity of the game, when it comes to gambling? No, it's not, and all it does is provide liquidity, which enables dodgy practices to be hidden much easier.

Is it good for the public, having gambling rammed down their throats (even to kids), which the FA assumes is a crooked industry? Is it good for the public's health/ bank balance?

 

[Quicksilvera]

Reading the Brentford forum is interesting. A lot think he is going to get half of what Joey Barton got. I suppose it depends on what he was actually betting on.

 

[Andy_W]

Just because you have ignorance doesn’t mean it isn’t that clear, or it isn’t clear for footballers.

I expect a lot of people would be ignorant of it, which would include a lot of footballers. I expect it may be written in their contract, but <20% read their employment contracts, and footballers aren't exactly known for being the sharpest tools in the box.

 

[ForssAwakens]

Is having TV, shirts, stadiums, and whole leagues good for the integrity of the game, when it comes to gambling? No, it's not, and all it does is provide liquidity, which enables dodgy practices to be hidden much easier.

Is it good for the public, having gambling rammed down their throats (even to kids), which the FA assumes is a crooked industry? Is it good for the public's health/ bank balance?

that’s a different conversation, both are not inclusive of each other.

 

[ForssAwakens]

I expect a lot of people would be ignorant of it, which would include a lot of footballers. I expect it may be written in their contract, but <20% read their employment contracts, and footballers aren't exactly known for being the sharpest tools in the box.

I wouldn’t expect professional footballers to be ignorant if the rules that govern them, the same as I wouldn’t expect a cashier at the bank to ignore anti money laundering laws

I would also be surprised if clubs even have to role out mandatory training

 

[Zoophonic]

The clue was in the initials of his name.

 

[ForssAwakens]

I expect a lot of people would be ignorant of it, which would include a lot of footballers. I expect it may be written in their contract, but <20% read their employment contracts, and footballers aren't exactly known for being the sharpest tools in the box.

ignorance is not an excuse to not follow the rules

 

[B_G]

What are the rules on betting in football?​

Betting on football is banned worldwide for all players, managers, coaches, club staff, directors and licensed agents involved in the game within the Premier League, EFL, National League, Women's Super League, Women's Championship and the Northern, Southern and Isthmian leagues.

I have a few mates who play Northern League who all bet on football openly. I didn't even know they couldn't and I doubt they know. They have absolutely zero inside knowledge or influence of League football and overseas football. Seems daft that they wouldn't be able to have a bet on it.

 

[TeaCider]

I have a few mates who play Northern League who all bet on football openly. I didn't even know they couldn't and I doubt they know. They have absolutely zero inside knowledge or influence of League football and overseas football. Seems daft that they wouldn't be able to have a bet on it.

They're allowed to bet on matches in divisions and competitions that they're not involved in because it's such a low level.

Players and officials in the National League, EFL and Premier League aren't allowed to bet on football full stop.

 

[TeaCider]

Above is Rule E8 from the FA, that covers it all.

 

[Andy_W]

that’s a different conversation, both are not inclusive of each other.

I don't think they are, the industry is either crooked or it isn't.