Yeah personally I think perpetrators of violent crimes against women should be treated the exact same as gowls who put a few bets on.
In fact we should just have one penalty for every single crime to make it really, really even and fair.
Ivan Toney | Banned until 16th January 2024 Stay on Topic!
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) look forward to a new life under Ruben Amorim. What system will we be playing? What players will impress? and how will it all go? We also say goodbye to Ruud Van Nistelrooy and review United's 3-0 win at home against Leicester City.
Yeah personally I think perpetrators of violent crimes against women should be treated the exact same as gowls who put a few bets on.
In fact we should just have one penalty for every single crime to make it really, really even and fair.
Give the newbie a thumbs up, this is spot on
Toney was guilty. Greenwood's case got thrown out.
Luckily we don't have to base our opinions or pick our football teams based on whether charges do or don't get dropped, because "innocent until proven guilty" isn't a concept that applies outside a very defined legal context.
Most of us also have the capacity to understand that being accused of an extremely serious crime is quite often more damaging than being found guilty of a relatively harmless infringement of FA rules. And therefore requires very different treatment.
Anyone seriously arguing that Southgate should have treated Greenwood with more leniency than Toney, even while claiming to just be playing devil's advocate, is severely lacking in both emotional and actual intelligence. These are not comparable situations and it's insulting to try and do so.
He should sue Jeff Stelling. He's too convincing to go onto Sky Bet, even if he says to gamble responsibly
I was gonna defend this post thinking it was about the Foden/Greenwood incident but I see it's about the other incident. No.
Is he allowed to gamble while he's banned?
pretty sure he was just betting for fun
if it was match-fixing it would be a criminal case
Only Thuram/Dembele on free would suffice
Would happily pay around £80m plus addons for Kane because has proven himself over seasons
Watch us buy him and pay wages while he’s not playing
No he wouldn't. Utd bought a player like him in the 80s Gary Birtles, came with similar attributes as Tony, he couldn't hit a barn door for Utd. So no he's never good enough for any top 4 side imo leave Gunners buy him..
Few things
- I understand banning him from playing but if he's banned from training too it's a bit nonsensical.
- The PL and football needs to step up with it's ban on gambling sponsorships etc. In a world where it almost consumes football at times it's ridiculous to not know that some footballers will be influenced and get sucked into doing it, despite it being banned. There are probably far more that do it and there are far more that do other things like illegal drugs that get hushed up.
- I understand banning him from playing but if he's banned from training too it's a bit nonsensical.
- The PL and football needs to step up with it's ban on gambling sponsorships etc. In a world where it almost consumes football at times it's ridiculous to not know that some footballers will be influenced and get sucked into doing it, despite it being banned. There are probably far more that do it and there are far more that do other things like illegal drugs that get hushed up.
If we want to get down to legal technicalities, Toney was never even accused of a crime.
He could also be compared to Dwight Yorke who came here from a lesser PL club and played a major role in us landing the treble. It's a crap shoot, but if he could be signed for 40-50 million then it may be worth a try.
I am arguing that Southgate stating that Greenwood would never play for England again before the legal process had run its course was stupid - suspend him yes, if you must, but jumping to such a conclusion served no useful purpose.
Hopefully you never get accused of anything serious or you'll see what being on the other end of your opinion is like - it's not pretty.
Nonsense decision. Could have used this as an opportunity to clamp down on betting sits sponsorships and give him the equivalent of community service (related to sports betting and it's evils) with a month or two ban from active football starting August.
God forbid someone at the FA actually grows a brain.
God forbid someone at the FA actually grows a brain.
That was painful, he tried so hard to score at OT and it just wouldn't happen for him, away from OT he wasn't so bad
I feel like the Toney punishment is fair.
1) Joey Barton initially got 18 months, then 13 months on appeal, for over 1000+ infringements. So there's a precedent for the FA.
2) Toney's betting is essentially like insider trading. If he was working in another industry, people would be up in arms about his infringements. People go to prison for this type of stuff. I get the whole, football is surrounded by betting argument, but that doesn't excuse the fact he abused a position of privilege.
1) Joey Barton initially got 18 months, then 13 months on appeal, for over 1000+ infringements. So there's a precedent for the FA.
2) Toney's betting is essentially like insider trading. If he was working in another industry, people would be up in arms about his infringements. People go to prison for this type of stuff. I get the whole, football is surrounded by betting argument, but that doesn't excuse the fact he abused a position of privilege.
That's a very slippery slope, not specifically for football but society in general, you end up with a mob mentality, we seen that happen before and in this day and age of social media and AI it'll only get worse
30-35M
Agreed. Which is why Southgate's stance is unhelpful.
Football's position on betting does not make sense. Players are not allowed to be bet every third advertisement is a betting ad.
I seem to have missed his stance position, when did he make it?
It's not even just that it's inside trading, the rule is to protect the integrity of the game, not so much the bookies. Manipulating match results and events harms the game not just the bookies pockets.
As far as I'm aware, there aren't any direct quotes. Just reports from around March that state 'Greenwood will never play for England while Southgate is in charge'. Think they originate from The Sun, so not the most reliable.
If he said it off the record, I could understand the sentiment, those pics video and audio are on the Internet forever now, anyone who picked him would be hounded out by the media.
Wasn't Che Adams innocent, but got dropped by his club anyway? Or some club changed their minds about signing him because the fans were outraged.
We're talking about a (ex) Man Utd wonder kid, stick that in a headline along with the accusations and you've got one hell of a headline, people would hate read!
Surely it's only akin to insider trading if he bet on himself, which would have left himself open to a criminal case as would have raised questions around match fixing. As there is no criminal case and no evidence in the public domain that he bet on himself not sure this is anything like insider training at all.
On a side note the idiots at the Express newspaper released a story online saying Toney was found guilty and would be banned for match fixing - probably a nice little libel suit to cover his fine there!
!!!!
DON'T POST SPECULATION ABOUT GREENWOOD.
Yorke was different altogether SAF had followed him a while before signing him would have had him sooner had he not signed a new deal with Villa, then SAF couldn't get shot of him as well .. its a tough business transfers.
The fact that Toney works within the football industry will expose him to nonpublic knowledge, of which he could fully take advantage of and this does not necessarily have to be information related to himself or Brentford. It's could be former colleagues, acquaintances or friends also working in football at other clubs. That's why I've compared it to insider trading.
The express are disgraceful for putting out a story like that. Throwing match fixing allegations out there would end Toney's career. Fair enough he's in the wrong but they shouldn't be able to get slander like that. I do hope he sues them for the equivalent of the FA fine
BBC saying the FA will apply for his ban to be worldwide so he can't be loaned abroad.
Meanwhile, L'Equipe are reporting that Toulouse's squad has been divided over Rasmus Nicolaisen's gambling debts. He apparently borrowed large amounts of money off teammates, others refused to help and in the end the captain went to the club president because some were refusing to play until it was resolved. The club ended up paying his salary in advance so he could reimburse everyone. He'd previously been fined by the FA for betting when on loan at Portsmouth.
Makes you wonder how big an issue this is amongst players. Generally we hear about the odd occasion someone is caught betting on football, but how many are quietly racking up debts on other sports?
Meanwhile, L'Equipe are reporting that Toulouse's squad has been divided over Rasmus Nicolaisen's gambling debts. He apparently borrowed large amounts of money off teammates, others refused to help and in the end the captain went to the club president because some were refusing to play until it was resolved. The club ended up paying his salary in advance so he could reimburse everyone. He'd previously been fined by the FA for betting when on loan at Portsmouth.
Makes you wonder how big an issue this is amongst players. Generally we hear about the odd occasion someone is caught betting on football, but how many are quietly racking up debts on other sports?
The equivalent of insider trading in football terms would be if he was betting on Brentford games, in which case, more serious match fixing related charges would be brought against Toney. Whereas betting on non-Brentford games constitutes betting breaches. He's been given an 8 month ban for the latter. The punishment doesn't fit the crime.
Edit: Just seen your subsequent post which clarifies your stance a little more. However, I'm not sure what sort of non-public information he would have access to that he could bet on. Maybe another footballer picking up an injury? But I'm pretty sure you can't bet on injuries.
Last edited:
Outside of him betting I don't have further information, but as a player he can affect things like, first throw-in, first booking and things like that, this is one of the reasons players are banned from betting on football
Had he bet on games that he was involved in then I think he would have been in far more trouble.
8 months for betting on non-related matches is ridiculous.
Happy to take betting money for advertisements, but god forbid someone actually places a bet?
If they actually did something regarding City's financial doping then I'd be more understanding of harsh punishments for things like betting, but they've done nothing on that and then hand out punishments like this. Even a 2 month ban would be harsh.
Happy to take betting money for advertisements, but god forbid someone actually places a bet?
If they actually did something regarding City's financial doping then I'd be more understanding of harsh punishments for things like betting, but they've done nothing on that and then hand out punishments like this. Even a 2 month ban would be harsh.
Bit of a stretch - Yorke had nearly a full decade of top division football under his belt. Maybe Saha would be a better comparison.
No doubt he would have been, but he could ring up an ex-teammate and say, kick the ball out in first min and I'll give you 10K, I'm not saying he did any of that, but that's an example of why players aren't allowed to bet because it'd be nigh on impossible to prove or stop
Can he appeal? Based on Bartons ban, of he does and is successful I'd assume they'll knock about 30% off, so 5.5 months, back late October, early November time.