By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The suspicion may be that he was betting after receiving inside information from mates who were at those clubs? In his position he may have been privy to info that the normal punter wouldn’t have access to. Would be interesting to know if he lost or gained money on all his bets. It’s still sad though, a genuine problem for many people these days.
Unless there's been "previous" (and i've not read that far into this) then a suspended sentence would seem more appropriate where his betting hasn't been linked to games involving his own team
They are sending out a message as they did with Toney. The game just can't have any situation in which the outcome of matches could be influenced for personal financial gain.
They are sending out a message as they did with Toney. The game just can't have any situation in which the outcome of matches could be influenced for personal financial gain.
The diff with Toney is that he bet13 times on his team to lose
Jockeys have been banned from betting for years and are fully aware of the consequences, so have footballs. Sorry I just see players gambling as a blatant disregard for the rules. My relative drives for the post office and knows that being caught using a phone while driving means instant dismissal, so he would never do it. If players have an addiction they need to consider changing occupation. Not easy for lower league players but for those in the Premiership they should have sufficient monies put away to shield them from hardship. Plus although I despise a lot of on line bookmaker practices they have put in place safeguards if gamblers are brave enough to use them.
Jockeys have been banned from betting for years and are fully aware of the consequences, so have footballs. Sorry I just see players gambling as a blatant disregard for the rules. My relative drives for the post office and knows that being caught using a phone while driving means instant dismissal, so he would never do it. If players have an addiction they need to consider changing occupation. Not easy for lower league players but for those in the Premiership they should have sufficient monies put away to shield them from hardship. Plus although I despise a lot of on line bookmaker practices they have put in place safeguards if gamblers are brave enough to use them.
i can understand the post office scenario as that activity clearly puts at risk the lives of other road users.
Would a footballer be banned from playing if he gambled only on racehorses ,,greyhounds etc?
The fact that prem footballers are wealthy doesn't protect them from addictions such as gambling...gamblers gamble to gamble..its not about the winning..its the thrill of the chase.
If a gambler won 100 million quid he'd still carry on gambling.
Be interesting to know if the rules are only inclusive of football related gambling activities?
i can understand the post office scenario as that activity clearly puts at risk the lives of other road users.
Would a footballer be banned from playing if he gambled only on racehorses ,,greyhounds etc?
The fact that prem footballers are wealthy doesn't protect them from addictions such as gambling...gamblers gamble to gamble..its not about the winning..its the thrill of the chase.
If a gambler won 100 million quid he'd still carry on gambling.
Be interesting to know if the rules are only inclusive of football related gambling activities?
In addition, using a phone whilst driving is illegal, and if found guilty a driving ban may come into force which means the employee can't carry out his job
Betting on football matches (obviously) isn't illegal. There has to be rules for pro footballers but the debate is whether the punishment for Tonali is over the top for his infringement of the rules, or perhaps whether the rules should be adjusted depending on the nature of the infringement, e.g. gambling on matches not associated with the player
I don't buy the argument that players can take advantage of tip-offs from fellow pros concerning other matches. All players have family/friends outside football who'd go unpunished in the same situation; therefore, the punishment is unfair in Tonali's case
i can understand the post office scenario as that activity clearly puts at risk the lives of other road users.
Would a footballer be banned from playing if he gambled only on racehorses ,,greyhounds etc?
The fact that prem footballers are wealthy doesn't protect them from addictions such as gambling...gamblers gamble to gamble..its not about the winning..its the thrill of the chase.
If a gambler won 100 million quid he'd still carry on gambling.
Be interesting to know if the rules are only inclusive of football related gambling activities?
Over 90% of gamblers do so for the enjoyment of trying to profit from their assessment of the likely outcome of an event. On line casinos excluded of course. They are not addicted I think you where trying to say the addicts gamble to gamble and yes they have to do so to satisfy their compulsion. I would suggest the professional footballers are more susceptible to gambling addiction than many other professions. A decent disposal income and lots of time on your hands is not an easy alliance. But of course the vast majority are not addicted. For instance dropping an average of 10k a week in your local betting shop if you are an England international is not an addiction, provided you don’t crave the opportunity to go to a betting shop when it isn’t possible. I know of no change to the governing body’s rules that prevent footballers having a bet on other sports / games of chance. Brian Clough once said that Kenny Burns lived at Perry Barr dog track before he signed him.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
