NHC: Ivan Toney

[Alex Trager]

Are they allowed to bet on anything?

[Iain G]

Be interesting to see if this can and will be appealed? For Brentford having him banned now and over the pre-season will take in a good chunk of his ban period.

[Dmas]

It’s the size of the ban that I think is harsh, there’s no doubt allowing player to gamble has the potential to lead to fixing and things like that but Rio Ferdinand got a ban of that size for refusing a drugs test, is it a comparable crime? He’s not been performance enhancing, he’s got longer than mitrovic and di canio have done for assaulting a referee is it worse an offence than that?

I do think it should be punished but it’s a bit much a full 8month ban, betting companies all over the game, the owner of brentford made his money being a pro gambler and creating gambling IT alongside Brighton’s owner Tony bloom, if those guys are accepted as fit and proper owners and are privy to same insider knowledge as Toney why is the punishment so harsh

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s the size of the ban that I think is harsh, there’s no doubt allowing player to gamble has the potential to lead to fixing and things like that but Rio Ferdinand got a ban of that size for refusing a drugs test, is it a comparable crime? He’s not been performance enhancing, he’s got longer than mitrovic and di canio have done for assaulting a referee is it worse an offence than that?

I do think it should be punished but it’s a bit much a full 8month ban, betting companies all over the game, the owner of brentford made his money being a pro gambler and creating gambling IT alongside Brighton’s owner Tony bloom, if those guys are accepted as fit and proper owners and are privy to same insider knowledge as Toney why is the punishment so harsh

A lot will depend on the detail, which as far as I know isn't readily available.

You could argue that betting on games that have nothing to do with him, especially if he has some sort of addiction, is fairly harmless and the punishment is harsh.

If he's been involved in something that might affect the outcome of games then that's a totally different story and deserves the harshest of punishments.

I get though that if the authorities are serious about stamping out players betting and the potential ramifications of that then they must be seen to be tough.

They didn't hold back on Joey Barton either iirc.

Different story if you're a Rangers player though, funnily enough.

[Dmas]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A lot will depend on the detail, which as far as I know isn't readily available.

You could argue that betting on games that have nothing to do with him, especially if he has some sort of addiction, is fairly harmless and the punishment is harsh.

If he's been involved in something that might affect the outcome of games then that's a totally different story and deserves the harshest of punishments.

I get though that if the authorities are serious about stamping out players betting and the potential ramifications of that then they must be seen to be tough.

They didn't hold back on Joey Barton either iirc.

Different story if you're a Rangers player though, funnily enough.

I actually had a look at Ian Blacks punishment this morning as ally mccoist mention a player he used to manage on radio this morning and I could mind who it was 3 games with 7 suspended, 7.5k fine quite a difference, ally did say he was privy to info and it was only 50p bets and not a money making exercise with insider knowledge

[Diclonius]

Surprised the ban isn't sponsored by Bet365.

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This sanction is so he cannot train with Brentford and his teammates. He can still go to the gym every day and train just not around other pro footballers. Unfortunately for Toney he knew the punishments available to him before committing the offence so a lawyer would find it difficult to argue against this sanction.

I understand that but I still contend that stopping him training with his team mates is absurd - what does that actually achieve and what is the point of that?

[Oscar T Grouch]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I understand that but I still contend that stopping him training with his team mates is absurd - what does that actually achieve and what is the point of that?

I assume it is purely punitive, you can't say it is to keep the influence of gambling away from his team mates because the influence of gambling is everywhere especially in the EPL. So it has to be to just punish the guy, in all honesty I don't know the point of it, it does seem silly.

[cameronw-hfc]

Seen a tweet about how Toney made his name playing in the SkyBET Champ, playing for Newcastle with a Fun88 sponsor, then playing for Brentford with a Hollywood bets sponsor, yet gets 8 months for betting.

Help should be the answer, not an 8 month ban.

8 months for betting but barely 8 games for racism, disgrace.

Also pretty odd timing considering there's only 2 games left, could have waited 2 weeks and given him the ban.

[Stubbsy90+2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No FIFA and UEFA both take heed of governing body bans. He’s essentially banned from all football.

It appears as it stands it’s English football only. The FA are asking FIFA to make it worldwide though.

[Lancs Harp]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It appears as it stands it’s English football only. The FA are asking FIFA to make it worldwide though.

FIFA will approve no doubt

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

FIFA will approve no doubt

You're probably right but I genuinely hope that FIFA say no to the FA.

[overdrive]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I understand that but I still contend that stopping him training with his team mates is absurd - what does that actually achieve and what is the point of that?

I could understand it if it was for the full length of the ban so he isn't up to speed with things when his ban ends but it is a bit weird he can train for the final 4 months.

[NAE NOOKIE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not for me. Until the authorities stop taking sponsor money from betting companies they have no moral high ground and no right to ban anyone for using a service they are promoting. Not that I think betting is correct, I don't, but the FA action smacks of hypocrisy.

Except he wasn't. Nobody was telling Ivan Tony he wasn't allowed to gamble, the only thing he had to do was avoid betting on football. There's literally a thousand things you can gamble on if that's your pleasure / addiction, I have absolutely no sympathy for him.

Even if he wasn't betting on games his club he was playing in players have mates at other clubs and it could possibly lead to accusations of collusion if a player he knows personally gave away a penalty, or a throw in, or got sent off at exactly the time Mr Tony predicted it would happen.

Football players, especially players on the kind of wages he will be on, who get involved in match fixing are the lowest of the bloody low. There are folk who pay to watch them who scrimp and save to afford the football, folk who can only dream of making in a year what some of these folk make in a week. To cheat these folk out of a fair and uncorrupted product in an attempt to make even more money is beneath contempt.

There's no evidence Ivan Tony did that. But the last thing football needs is even a hint that such stuff is going on, so well done the FA in my opinion.

I can only imagine what Brentford's reaction will be. Apart from being a major cog in their machine he was also one of the hottest properties in the game and probably worth a minimum of 30 million, probably more like 60 million, on the transfer market and now he can't even kick a ball in anger until next January .... I would guess they are apoplectic.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I could understand it if it was for the full length of the ban so he isn't up to speed with things when his ban ends but it is a bit weird he can train for the final 4 months.

It will be to give him the equivalent of a pre-season, otherwise he'd be unavailable to play for even longer.

In a way his punishment is less severe than it looks as the first three months cover the close season anyway.

[cabbageandribs1875]

this will follow him around for the rest of his career, every near miss, every foul committed, every senseless foul committed, every time a shot is on but doesn't take it, every booking


i think he will just be more clever with his betting, e.g get someone else to put them on


i'll bet he will be a lot wiser in future

[1875Sean]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Except he wasn't. Nobody was telling Ivan Tony he wasn't allowed to gamble, the only thing he had to do was avoid betting on football. There's literally a thousand things you can gamble on if that's your pleasure / addiction, I have absolutely no sympathy for him.

Even if he wasn't betting on games his club he was playing in players have mates at other clubs and it could possibly lead to accusations of collusion if a player he knows personally gave away a penalty, or a throw in, or got sent off at exactly the time Mr Tony predicted it would happen.

Football players, especially players on the kind of wages he will be on, who get involved in match fixing are the lowest of the bloody low. There are folk who pay to watch them who scrimp and save to afford the football, folk who can only dream of making in a year what some of these folk make in a week. To cheat these folk out of a fair and uncorrupted product in an attempt to make even more money is beneath contempt.

There's no evidence Ivan Tony did that. But the last thing football needs is even a hint that such stuff is going on, so well done the FA in my opinion.

I can only imagine what Brentford's reaction will be. Apart from being a major cog in their machine he was also one of the hottest properties in the game and probably worth a minimum of 30 million, probably more like 60 million, on the transfer market and now he can't even kick a ball in anger until next January .... I would guess they are apoplectic.

Players are well aware they can’t bet on football and he did it over 200 times, prob a lot more since 2014

[Pretty Boy]

Now been confirmed that Toney bet on his own team to lose.

That changes the narrative considerably.

[Since452]

Idiot

[danhibees1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Now been confirmed that Toney bet on his own team to lose.

That changes the narrative considerably.

It does, but the devil's in the detail still. From what I've read, he wasn't playing in that game. I think it would also be interesting to know if it was just part of an acca.

By no means am I saying what he done wasn't wrong, I just think there are degrees of wrong and having no influence over the outcome notches it down a degree.

[Callum_62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It does, but the devil's in the detail still. From what I've read, he wasn't playing in that game. I think it would also be interesting to know if it was just part of an acca.

By no means am I saying what he done wasn't wrong, I just think there are degrees of wrong and having no influence over the outcome notches it down a degree.

It doesn't matter if he not playing - all his mates are

thats all the "detail" needed

[AugustaHibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Now been confirmed that Toney bet on his own team to lose.

That changes the narrative considerably.

He bet against newcastle who owned him but he was out on loan at the time.

Not as bad as the headlines will have you believe.

[CapitalGreen]

He’s lucky he only got an 8 month ban.

[CapitalGreen]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He bet against newcastle who owned him but he was out on loan at the time.

Not as bad as the headlines will have you believe.

Of those 232 breaches:

126 bets were in respect of matches in competitions in which Toney's club at that time participated in.

Of those 126, 29 were in respect of the club Toney was playing for at the time.

Of those 29, 16 were on his own team to win 15 different matches. Toney played in 11 of those matches.

Of those 29, the remaining 13 were on Toney's team to lose. Toney did not play in any of those matches.

Of the 126 bets, 15 were placed on Toney to score. They were initiated at a time when it was not public knowledge that he was starting or playing in the relevant fixtures.

[overdrive]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He bet against newcastle who owned him but he was out on loan at the time.

Not as bad as the headlines will have you believe.

The thing I read said 13 bets on his own team to lose, 11 bets on Newcastle to lose while he was out on loan. It wasn’t clear from what I read if the 11 Newcastle games were included in the 13 bets on his own team but even if they are that means at least two games he bet on his own team to lose were when he was there. Yes, he didn’t play in those games but he’ll have been aware of team selection, injuries, tactics, etc.

He was also handing out team information to friends in advance of games.

[Lendo]

Suspect this is the tip of the iceberg for football in general. I imagine there there are plenty of other players having sleepless nights right now waiting on being named and shamed.

[danhibees1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It doesn't matter if he not playing - all his mates are

thats all the "detail" needed

Doesn't necessarily make a difference.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Doesn't necessarily make a difference.

It's hard to say for sure without further detail but I can also see why this should be an area of zero tolerance.

It might just be a harmless punt for small change as part of an acca.

Or you might know the goalkeeper and be aware he's just been dumped by his girlfriend and his head is all over the place. Or that the star striker had a scrap with the manager in the dressing room after training and won't be playing.

Because of those reasons, it needs to be zero tolerance and I think he's quite lucky to get the punishment he did.

[Jones28]

His team should rip his contract up. There’s no coming back from that.

[Shrekko]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

His team should rip his contract up. There’s no coming back from that.

He's probably a £60-£70 million quid asset to them. Think they'll find a different way!