Ian Black BBC....

[RG04]

"It's a buzz for Joe public" hahahhaha

[SirDavidsNapper]

"It's a buzz for Joe public" hahahhaha

Not anyone elses fault but his own that he can't control his gambling urges. Wee welt.

[Jim44]

Blaming the Bookies and the SFA for his weakness and misdemeanours. If he must gamble, he could bet on umpteen things outwith football.

[007]

Saying he was on the verge of coming to us but got a call to go to Hearts.

[bigwheel]

Black saying he was due to sign for Hibs and Mixu. Then Hearts came in for him. Wasn’t a story that I knew

[Golden Bear]

Blaming the Bookies and the SFA for his weakness and misdemeanours. If he must gamble, he could bet on umpteen things outwith football.

Well said Jim. No sympathy from me.

[HoboHarry]

Blaming the Bookies and the SFA for his weakness and misdemeanours. If he must gamble, he could bet on umpteen things outwith football.
His point is still valid and I said so on here at the time he was banned - it's rank hypocrisy for the SFA to take their money and then punish those who bet. Not to mention the ethical arguments regarding promoting what are for some people gambling addictions.......

[Thecat23]

Black saying he was due to sign for Hibs and Mixu. Then Hearts came in for him. Wasn’t a story that I knew

Yep, was shown around EM I believe.

[WeeRussell]

His point is still valid and I said so on here at the time he was banned - it's rank hypocrisy for the SFA to take their money and then punish those who bet. Not to mention the ethical arguments regarding promoting what are for some people gambling addictions.......

It’s not hypocrisy at all. He broke the rules - someone who was guilty of betting against his own team has no place to comment on the authorities being in the wrong because they are sponsored by bookmakers.

What alcohol sponsors are we associated with now? Maybe it’s their fault that our players had too many pints last week.

[21.05.2016]

Horrible wee rat

[mjhibby]

His point is still valid and I said so on here at the time he was banned - it's rank hypocrisy for the SFA to take their money and then punish those who bet. Not to mention the ethical arguments regarding promoting what are for some people gambling addictions.......

As much as he is a welt of the highest order he is totally correct in what he's saying. It's rank hypocrisy to stop players betting on games outwith their leagues yet be sponsored by bookies. He was made an example of and players being players will always gamble. The rules need to be changed to allow gambling on games not affecting your league. It's a nonsense a player in Scotland can't bet on a man u game.

[Souter96Mac]

I knew we were interested in him when he was at Caley

[hibsbollah]

As much as he is a welt of the highest order he is totally correct in what he's saying. It's rank hypocrisy to stop players betting on games outwith their leagues yet be sponsored by bookies. He was made an example of and players being players will always gamble. The rules need to be changed to allow gambling on games not affecting your league. It's a nonsense a player in Scotland can't bet on a man u game.

:agree:

[Not In The Know]

Claiming refs had it in for him. Oh aye right ya fud! What about the forearm smash into the back of sparky's head in the Cup final?

[HoboHarry]

It’s not hypocrisy at all. He broke the rules - someone who was guilty of betting against his own team has no place to comment on the authorities being in the wrong because they are sponsored by bookmakers.

What alcohol sponsors are we associated with now? Maybe it’s their fault that our players had too many pints last week.
Trying to be a smarta**e really doesn't help your argument. Also, where did I say he hadn't broken the rules? I didn't defend him - my issue is with the hypocrisy of the SFA and next time you might try reading the post properly before going on a childish rant.

[WeeRussell]

I actually agree in general that it’s a nonsense rule that bets can’t be placed on games not related to players. However I don’t accept the hypocrisy argument - rules are there and if they are broken you should expect punishment. I also don’t accept the argument from that horrible wee cretin who chose to bet against his team.

[WeeRussell]

Trying to be a smarta**e really doesn't help your argument. Also, where did I say he hadn't broken the rules? I didn't defend him - my issue is with the hypocrisy of the SFA and next time you might try reading the post properly before going on a childish rant.

I was going to edit my post to point out that my “smart arse” comment was more at the scenario (and Ian black’s comments) than your post which I quoted to kick-off my reply. (My point is that we’ve a number of sponsors which put money into our game, a number of these are related to activities that you wouldn’t want players over indulging in and certainly not breaking rules to take part in). Black did break the rules - it’s not hypocrisy for the SFA to punish him for that.

However seeing as I didn’t, I’ll take the lecture and reflect on what a child I’ve been.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Yep, was shown around EM I believe.

There was a lot of debate on here from those that claimed to know him about whether he was a Hibs, Hearts or Man U fan.

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

There was a lot of debate on here from those that claimed to know him about whether he was a Hibs, Hearts or Man U fan.

Strong yam connection I think, didn't his Dad play for the cheats?

[CMurdoch]

There is no hypocrisy.

Betting firms sponsor Scottish football to advertise their company.

Football players, directors, managers etc are not allowed to bet on football due to their possible inside knowledge either directly or indirectly and importantly to avoid any perception of corruption.

The football authorities don't make a judgement as to whether betting is right or wrong hence no hypocrisy.

This is why Mr Black is a painter and decorator rather than a policy maker.

[Hibbyradge]

Betting scams are rife in sport. Organised criminal gangs are involved.

The rule that stops players betting on football is there to help combat it.

Players know each other regardless of which teams they play for.

For example, Dwight Yorke was at Man U when his very good friend Russell Latapy played for Hibs and Falkirk.

Would you have raised an eyebrow if Hibs had lost a game they were supposed to have won and you found out that DW had a big bet on it on the Asian markets?

Or that RL would miss a penalty, get booked, sent off etc etc.

I'm not suggesting that these things happened. Just trying to make my point.

People in football should not be allowed to bet on football. For the sake of the integrity of the sport, and to protect the players themselves.

That's my view anyway.

Whether betting companies are acceptable as sponsors is another issue.

[renato]

Yep, was shown around EM I believe.

We were completely “gazumped” by Hertz, in terms of wages. Similar story to a few others around that time, too. Vlad’s Monopoly money.

[Firestarter]

He looks like a rat and he acts like a rat. Can't stand him and not because he was good. He's a prick.

[1648]

He actually said that Hearts are one of the top teams in Britain. What a numpty.

[Firestarter]

We were completely “gazumped” by Hertz, in terms of wages. Similar story to a few others around that time, too. Vlad’s Monopoly money.

Him and Darren Barr. Barr was going to be made captain to come to us.

[SRHibs]

Not anyone elses fault but his own that he can't control his gambling urges. Wee welt.

Coming from someone with a ridicuously addictive personality it’s easier said than done.

[mca]

The thread title is misleading.. i always thought he was a Wee one tho.. :wink:

[Aldo]

****ing little yam roaster Hun fud rat!

My fab moment involving him was when he was subbed after 35 mins at ER and lost the plot.

We went into thump them!

[givescotlandfreedom]

Who's he gonna blame for snorting ***** up his nose then?

[SquashedFrogg]

Betting scams are rife in sport. Organised criminal gangs are involved.

The rule that stops players betting on football is there to help combat it.

Players know each other regardless of which teams they play for.

For example, Dwight Yorke was at Man U when his very good friend Russell Latapy played for Hibs and Falkirk.

Would you have raised an eyebrow if Hibs had lost a game they were supposed to have won and you found out that DW had a big bet on it on the Asian markets?

Or that RL would miss a penalty, get booked, sent off etc etc.

I'm not suggesting that these things happened. Just trying to make my point.

People in football should not be allowed to bet on football. For the sake of the integrity of the sport, and to protect the players themselves.

That's my view anyway.

Whether betting companies are acceptable as sponsors is another issue.

Great post. This 100%

[WeeRussell]

There is no hypocrisy.

Betting firms sponsor Scottish football to advertise their company.

Football players, directors, managers etc are not allowed to bet on football due to their possible inside knowledge either directly or indirectly and importantly to avoid any perception of corruption.

The football authorities don't make a judgement as to whether betting is right or wrong hence no hypocrisy.

This is why Mr Black is a painter and decorator rather than a policy maker.

Essentially what I was saying but better put!

[hibbyfraelibby]

Roaster of the first order. Hope his painting skills are still in demand to supplement hiz mega bucks contract at Tranent

[Jonnyboy]

We were completely “gazumped” by Hertz, in terms of wages. Similar story to a few others around that time, too. Vlad’s Monopoly money.

Pretty sure we had Stephane Adam lined up too.

[lord bunberry]

I remember at the time when we were trying to sign him, he was in the papers denying he was a hearts fan. That all changed when he signed for them.

[Thecat23]

There was a lot of debate on here from those that claimed to know him about whether he was a Hibs, Hearts or Man U fan.

I’m glad he is a jambo, couldn’t imagine him in a hibs strip now!

[Thecat23]

We were completely “gazumped” by Hertz, in terms of wages. Similar story to a few others around that time, too. Vlad’s Monopoly money.

Yep, when Hearts were bringing in players they simply couldn’t afford.

[Firestarter]

The worst case of gambling I know of came from a former Hibs player who got no help from the club or the pfa and was in massive massive debts to all different kind of bams. He left Easter Road, it broke his heart but eventually got sorted out away from this country. Shameful at the time there was no help out there.

[ekhibee]

His point is still valid and I said so on here at the time he was banned - it's rank hypocrisy for the SFA to take their money and then punish those who bet. Not to mention the ethical arguments regarding promoting what are for some people gambling addictions.......
Yep, totally agree. Even though I have very little time indeed for Black, or his motives, the SFA are being totally hypocritical. Bad enough 1 major bookmakers being sponsors, but 3? Hardly an effort to move towards addressing the problems of gambling addiction, something I had personal experience of.

[Firestarter]

Yep, totally agree. Even though I have very little time indeed for Black, or his motives, the SFA are being totally hypocritical. Bad enough 1 major bookmakers being sponsors, but 3? Hardly an effort to move towards addressing the problems of gambling addiction, something I had personal experience of.

Unless they are giving free bets on the side to every player that plays in a competition I can't see how a gambling company being a sponsor effects a footballer with gambling issues to be honest. I don't think one person wants to bet with *****y betfred because they sponsor the league cup.

[Danderhall Hibs]

We were completely “gazumped” by Hertz, in terms of wages. Similar story to a few others around that time, too. Vlad’s Monopoly money.

And Andy Webster as well. Chris Hackett - was that another one?

And I’ve had a couple of comments recently talking about our scouting network being based on who they’re interested in. Cos we signed one player they were linked with!

[Greentinted]

Strong yam connection I think, didn't his Dad play for the cheats?

Ian Black senior played for both Hearts and Hibs...only a handful of times for us mind. And a decent bloke tbh.

[Stantons Angel]

why are we bothering to give this moron the page space to comment on him?

I for one do not care what happens to him. He is a typical yobo and deserves everything thats happened to him.

He wont have much to bet with now so che sara sara!

[WeeRussell]

The worst case of gambling I know of came from a former Hibs player who got no help from the club or the pfa and was in massive massive debts to all different kind of bams. He left Easter Road, it broke his heart but eventually got sorted out away from this country. Shameful at the time there was no help out there.

Did his name begin with G, out of interest?

[Lago]

Blaming the Bookies and the SFA for his weakness and misdemeanours. If he must gamble, he could bet on umpteen things outwith football.

Caim across as thick as a brick.

[eastmainsmsh]

Pretty sure we had Stephane Adam lined up too.

played in a trial Paulo sergio was linked with us too

[Hibbyradge]

Caim across as thick as a brick.

I see what you did there.

[renato]

Yep - Webster, Barr and Hackett were the others I knew of. We were completely blown out the water.

Webster in particular would have been a great signing at the time.

[majorhibs]

why are we bothering to give this moron the page space to comment on him?

I for one do not care what happens to him. He is a typical yobo and deserves everything thats happened to him.

He wont have much to bet with now so che sara sara!

Wee hertz halfwit failure. Wee wannabe. Wee never was. Surprised such a wee nonentity got such time & column inches!

[Coco Bryce]

Came across as a thick twat. No wonder his missus has thrown him out and is now playing for Tranent for digs in one of the directors flats.

[The_Sauz]

Yep, was shown around EM I believe.
Hibs could have been trying to get an estimate for a paint job :confused:

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

Him and Darren Barr. Barr was going to be made captain to come to us.

First goal scorer and motm in that cup final yet their financial cheating had no influence on proceedings they claim [emoji849]

[Sammy7nil]

Did his name begin with G, out of interest?

GB perhaps

[Johnny_Leith]

GB perhaps

Don't see why he wouldn't name him, common knowledge Grant Brebner had a problem and had to leave Scotland because of it.

[Crazyhorse]

There is no hypocrisy.

Betting firms sponsor Scottish football to advertise their company.

Football players, directors, managers etc are not allowed to bet on football due to their possible inside knowledge either directly or indirectly and importantly to avoid any perception of corruption.

The football authorities don't make a judgement as to whether betting is right or wrong hence no hypocrisy.

This is why Mr Black is a painter and decorator rather than a policy maker.

This is not an attack on you.
But if the SFA wish to avoid any perception of corruption there is a whole list of things they can get started on - number one being stripping the trophies which the dead Rangers broke SFA rules to attain.

The SFA are full of ***** ...and I haven't moved on.

[crewetollhibee]

What I can never understand is why pro footballers (or Directors for that matter) think they are above the rules that their colleagues are also subject to. It’s the same with taking their strip off when they’ve scored. They all knew it was against the rules. We all have standards and restrictions we have to follow in our jobs, what makes (some) pro footballers think that this is applicable to their peers and not them ?

[NAE NOOKIE]

His point is still valid and I said so on here at the time he was banned - it's rank hypocrisy for the SFA to take their money and then punish those who bet. Not to mention the ethical arguments regarding promoting what are for some people gambling addictions.......

Its not hypocrisy at all. The rule regards gambling on football, not gambling in general, and the reasons for that rule are glaringly obvious. It would only be hypocritical if football players and administrators were barred from gambling at all, which they clearly are not. Horse racing only exists as a major sport because of gambling and has done so far longer than football. Since time immemorial jockeys have been banned from betting on the sport for exactly the same reasons as players are banned from betting on football, a state of affairs which existed decades before the gambling industry came anywhere near professional football.

Players caught betting on football who then go crying to the press about hypocrisy get absolutely no sympathy from me .... its pure deflection, there are a million things you can bet on, including other sports with the afore mentioned horse racing being the obvious one. If you are stupid enough to place bets on the one activity on the whole planet you are not allowed to that's not a gambling problem, which I have sympathy for, that's an intelligence problem which I have very little sympathy for.

[Jones28]

I worked in a shop called the Discovery Store in ocean terminal after I'd left school. Ian Black came in on one day with his bird and looked round the whole shop before opting for a wee bell that said "please ring for sex".

I had a hard time keeping myself from s******ing as I asked if he wanted a bag for it

[O'Rourke3]

It’s not hypocrisy at all. He broke the rules - someone who was guilty of betting against his own team has no place to comment on the authorities being in the wrong because they are sponsored by bookmakers.

What alcohol sponsors are we associated with now? Maybe it’s their fault that our players had too many pints last week.Eden Mill. Gin. I agree with the point though.

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

[Firestarter]

Did his name begin with G, out of interest?

Yes 👍

[Firestarter]

Don't see why he wouldn't name him, common knowledge Grant Brebner had a problem and had to leave Scotland because of it.

Perhaps because he done brilliantly to turn his life around and prolong his career down under and I didn't want to name and shame a good hibby.

[hibbysam]

Its not hypocrisy at all. The rule regards gambling on football, not gambling in general, and the reasons for that rule are glaringly obvious. It would only be hypocritical if football players and administrators were barred from gambling at all, which they clearly are not. Horse racing only exists as a major sport because of gambling and has done so far longer than football. Since time immemorial jockeys have been banned from betting on the sport for exactly the same reasons as players are banned from betting on football, a state of affairs which existed decades before the gambling industry came anywhere near professional football.

Players caught betting on football who then go crying to the press about hypocrisy get absolutely no sympathy from me .... its pure deflection, there are a million things you can bet on, including other sports with the afore mentioned horse racing being the obvious one. If you are stupid enough to place bets on the one activity on the whole planet you are not allowed to that's not a gambling problem, which I have sympathy for, that's an intelligence problem which I have very little sympathy for.

You say the reasons are glaringly obvious, but I don’t see what is obvious with a laddie who plays for Preston Athletic not being allowed to stick a coupon on on a Saturday which doesn’t include his game/league. Players definitely shouldn’t be betting on their own games/leagues but to stop a young Scottish guy betting on South American 3rd division stuff because he may know someone who can influence it is absolutely absurd.

[chinaman]

The worst case of gambling I know of came from a former Hibs player who got no help from the club or the pfa and was in massive massive debts to all different kind of bams. He left Easter Road, it broke his heart but eventually got sorted out away from this country. Shameful at the time there was no help out there.
You're talking about grant bremner aye ?
His problems were a drop in the ocean when compared with kenny sansom who ended up destitute.

[Hibbyradge]

You say the reasons are glaringly obvious, but I don’t see what is obvious with a laddie who plays for Preston Athletic not being allowed to stick a coupon on on a Saturday which doesn’t include his game/league. Players definitely shouldn’t be betting on their own games/leagues but to stop a young Scottish guy betting on South American 3rd division stuff because he may know someone who can influence it is absolutely absurd.

I disagree, but where should the line be drawn?

[hibbysam]

I disagree, but where should the line be drawn?

I’d say it’s fairly obvious you can’t bet on your own team/competition. Other than that is fair game as far as I’m concerned. Semi professional players not being allowed to stick a coupon on is outrageous.

[Geo_1875]

I’d say it’s fairly obvious you can’t bet on your own team/competition. Other than that is fair game as far as I’m concerned. Semi professional players not being allowed to stick a coupon on is outrageous.

The easy solution to that is don't become a footballer if you can't follow the rules.

[hibbysam]

The easy solution to that is don't become a footballer if you can't follow the rules.

Yeah great suggestion. Players in the lowland league don’t ‘become footballers’ they do it as a hobby. But just because the rules are there doesn’t make them right.

[Hibbyradge]

I’d say it’s fairly obvious you can’t bet on your own team/competition. Other than that is fair game as far as I’m concerned. Semi professional players not being allowed to stick a coupon on is outrageous.

It's hardly outrageous. How important is it to have a bet on football?

As far as drawing the line being obvious, why wouldn't a bent player use his bent contacts in other teams to make money?

Criminal gangs will exploit any weakness, any connection in order to profit.


If Stephen Whittaker had a wad on Norwich to concede more than say 10 corners, and they did, would that ring any alarm bells?

If Lionel Messi, with all his millions, can allegedly fiddle his tax returns, what lengths might less wealthy players go to in order to supplement their income?

When there's money at stake, there is corruption. Asking players not to bet on football until they've stopped playing seems like a simple, harmless step to help counter that threat.

[JimBHibees]

Yeah great suggestion. Players in the lowland league don’t ‘become footballers’ they do it as a hobby. But just because the rules are there doesn’t make them right.

Do you not see the risk that they may know and get information from players in the professional leagues? Pretty sure there have been rumours of games in the scottish league being a little suspicious.

[where'stheslope]

The easy solution to that is don't become a footballer if you can't follow the rules.

That's a very wide statement, if players all followed the rules there would be no need for referees or linesmen!!!!!!!

[WeeRussell]

Do you not see the risk that they may know and get information from players in the professional leagues? Pretty sure there have been rumours of games in the scottish league being a little suspicious.

I get this and the fact it's all about minimising risk. But the same risk applies once players have retired, or for each family member or friend of any players who may be involved in anything suspicious. In fact friends of players are far less likely to be found out for their betting activity.

I think I'm as likely to be friends with a professional footballer in Argentina, than any Berwick Rangers player. I appreciate the rules have to start somewhere, but I've always found them a bit over the top.

Having said that.. if I was being paid to play football, I could live without having a fitbaw coupon on at the weekend. :agree:


Regardless. Black broke rules that he was aware of, and also bet against his own team which is wrong on more levels. The fact that Ladbrokes sponsors our league doesn't give the SFA any less right to punish him for it.

[jingler1954]

Betting scams are rife in sport. Organised criminal gangs are involved.

The rule that stops players betting on football is there to help combat it.

Players know each other regardless of which teams they play for.

For example, Dwight Yorke was at Man U when his very good friend Russell Latapy played for Hibs and Falkirk.

Would you have raised an eyebrow if Hibs had lost a game they were supposed to have won and you found out that DW had a big bet on it on the Asian markets?

Or that RL would miss a penalty, get booked, sent off etc etc.

I'm not suggesting that these things happened. Just trying to make my point.

People in football should not be allowed to bet on football. For the sake of the integrity of the sport, and to protect the players themselves.

That's my view anyway.

Whether betting companies are acceptable as sponsors is another issue.

Whats to stop footballers filling in a fixed odds slip and giving it to a mate who is not involved in any way in football. He goes to the bookies puts on the bet on, collects the winnings and hands said winnings to footballer in the boozer the next day. Job done and no one is any the wiser.

[NAE NOOKIE]

You say the reasons are glaringly obvious, but I don’t see what is obvious with a laddie who plays for Preston Athletic not being allowed to stick a coupon on on a Saturday which doesn’t include his game/league. Players definitely shouldn’t be betting on their own games/leagues but to stop a young Scottish guy betting on South American 3rd division stuff because he may know someone who can influence it is absolutely absurd.

Hibbyradge has covered it pretty well. The bottom line is it removes any ambiguity, a blanked ban is the simplest and most effective way to ensure that the game and the folk running and playing it are above suspicion.

When I was a Civil servant I wouldn't have been allowed to stand as an MP or MSP unless I resigned my job. In the very very minor capacity I was employed by the state that seemed ridiculous, I was party to no state secrets and had no insider knowledge that would have given me an advantage over other candidates. But it is contradictory to the ethos of the Civil Service as a body which must be, and be seen to be, impartial from government policy or party politics for one of its employees to be directly involved in politics.

Its not just sport where restrictions are placed on its employees or participants where sacrifices are required. I was fine personally because I have never wanted to be in politics, but I would suggest that as an example of this subject having to accept that you cant participate in the political sphere apart from as a voter is a far higher demand on somebody's life choices than not being able to put £50 on the outcome of River Plate v Boca Juniors.

I therefor also suggest that fitba players suck it up :rolleyes:

[Radge70]

Betting scams are rife in sport. Organised criminal gangs are involved.

The rule that stops players betting on football is there to help combat it.

Players know each other regardless of which teams they play for.

For example, Dwight Yorke was at Man U when his very good friend Russell Latapy played for Hibs and Falkirk.

Would you have raised an eyebrow if Hibs had lost a game they were supposed to have won and you found out that DW had a big bet on it on the Asian markets?

Or that RL would miss a penalty, get booked, sent off etc etc.

I'm not suggesting that these things happened. Just trying to make my point.

People in football should not be allowed to bet on football. For the sake of the integrity of the sport, and to protect the players themselves.

That's my view anyway.

Whether betting companies are acceptable as sponsors is another issue.

Exactly! Black says "If it's a game you're playing in, that's understandable, but to bet on another team beating another team; I don't understand how we can influence that." You have answered his question perfectly, although he must be pretty thick if he doesn’t understand this and, working in an industry with these rules in place, you’d have thought someone might have explained it to him a bit better.

There are two issues here, the first being whether or not footballers should be allowed to gamble on their own sport and the second is over the general ethics of having gambling companies sponsor the game. Had Black been attacking the ethics of bookmakers sponsorship for the right reasons then I’d have strongly agreed with him, but instead I find it even more offensive that his only worry is that it prevents him and other footballers from having a punt.

Leagues like the SPL may well be dependent on unethical companies like Ladbrokes for financial backing but these organisations (with their equally unethical advertising campaigns) are ruining people’s lives and encouraging our youth into a life of addiction.

There are already a great deal of fans who would rather sit at home spending their money on a punt instead of going to the game, and this type of sponsorship is what encourages that.

[--------]

I actually agree in general that it’s a nonsense rule that bets can’t be placed on games not related to players. However I don’t accept the hypocrisy argument - rules are there and if they are broken you should expect punishment. I also don’t accept the argument from that horrible wee cretin who chose to bet against his team.


Any close relationship between sport and the gambling industry can lead to major problems - cricket has provided business for bookies (and scandals regarding players laying iffy bets) since the day the game was invented. And I don't see how the likelihood of players laying bets with dishonest intent can be prevented.

IIRC some of our players backed themselves to win the League Cup back in 1991. I think the bookies hadu Hibs at really long odds because of the troubles the club had gone through the previous season, and some of the guys thought it would be a good idea to cash in. They weren't throwing games, they didn't hire thugs to cripple the opposition before vital matches, and they didn't bribe the officials. (They'd all already been been bought up by the Huns - :devil:.)

The trouble is that if the money involved is big enough then all these things can and do happen. Teams play to lose; players are bribed, threatened, injured or killed, and referees are offered inducements to swing games towards a desired result. As I say, cricket has seen all sorts of scandals related to betting, particularly (but not exclusively by any means) in Australia and the sub-continent; even the great W G Grace was suspected of involvement in shady dealings in the betting tents of Victorian cricket grounds. Actually, everyone knew he was at it; they just either couldn't or didn't want to prove it.

Black bet against his own side on a number of occasions. This should have led to his life suspension from any involvement in the game ever again. There's no way he would be playing honestly and really trying to win a game when a defeat for his own team would win him money. He's a dirty little crook, and the fact that he's still in the game is a scandal.

TBH, I don't see how sport's relationship with the gambling industry - legal and illegal - can ever be adequately policed.

The richest teams in any sport are always going to be able to offer inducements - even the tacit inducement of entertainment in supporters' clubs with meals, drinks, "speakers' fees", travel expenses etc - and officials would need to be more than human to resist the temptations. Players as well - how often have we seen stories in the red-tops about players about to be offered, or having been offered generous terms to sign for one of the OF just at the critical point of a season - the January window, just before the start of the league run-in - or a couple of weeks before a major Cup-tie?

Professional football - all professional sport - carries the certainty of corruption and dishonesty in its dealings at some point or another. If we really want to clean it up, we have to set a very clear distance between sports organisations from the local Junior football team right up to all the governing bodies like UEFA, FIFA, the IOC and the ICC. At one time British sport (especially cricket, snooker. equestrianism) had a very close relationship with the tobacco industry. Tobacco money was considered to be vital to the UK sporting economy.

It should be possible to break the present intimacy between all sports and the gambling industry, but I don't think anyone wants to. Not just in this country, but throughout the world. We're all too comfortable with it. In football betting sponsors tournaments, teams, TV coverage, almost anything. Remember the goalie who ate a meat pie at an FA Cup tie for a betting stunt?

But as far as sports competitors betting on their sports are concerned, if the British Horseracing Authority can have the sort of rules for jockeys betting on horse races that they do, in what way should the rules relating to footballers, cricketers, or anyone else be any different?

http://www.thepja.co.uk/members-info/regulatory/integrity/

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Exactly! Black says "If it's a game you're playing in, that's understandable, but to bet on another team beating another team; I don't understand how we can influence that." You have answered his question perfectly, although he must be pretty thick if he doesn’t understand this and, working in an industry with these rules in place, you’d have thought someone might have explained it to him a bit better.

There are two issues here, the first being whether or not footballers should be allowed to gamble on their own sport and the second is over the general ethics of having gambling companies sponsor the game. Had Black been attacking the ethics of bookmakers sponsorship for the right reasons then I’d have strongly agreed with him, but instead I find it even more offensive that his only worry is that it prevents him and other footballers from having a punt.

Leagues like the SPL may well be dependent on unethical companies like Ladbrokes for financial backing but these organisations (with their equally unethical advertising campaigns) are ruining people’s lives and encouraging our youth into a life of addiction.

There are already a great deal of fans who would rather sit at home spending their money on a punt instead of going to the game, and this type of sponsorship is what encourages that.

Anything that winds up that wee runt is fine by me.

I wonder if he had a flutter in hinself to get a red card last time he was at Easter Road... unfortunately for him, he was so ***** hia manager hooked him after 30 mins. Wee scaff.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Exactly! Black says "If it's a game you're playing in, that's understandable, but to bet on another team beating another team; I don't understand how we can influence that." You have answered his question perfectly, although he must be pretty thick if he doesn’t understand this and, working in an industry with these rules in place, you’d have thought someone might have explained it to him a bit better.

There are two issues here, the first being whether or not footballers should be allowed to gamble on their own sport and the second is over the general ethics of having gambling companies sponsor the game. Had Black been attacking the ethics of bookmakers sponsorship for the right reasons then I’d have strongly agreed with him, but instead I find it even more offensive that his only worry is that it prevents him and other footballers from having a punt.

Leagues like the SPL may well be dependent on unethical companies like Ladbrokes for financial backing but these organisations (with their equally unethical advertising campaigns) are ruining people’s lives and encouraging our youth into a life of addiction.

There are already a great deal of fans who would rather sit at home spending their money on a punt instead of going to the game, and this type of sponsorship is what encourages that.

The ethics of football sponsorship or sport sponsorship in general are always open to debate. But in a world where every penny is a prisoner its a brave FA or club who would think of turning down money no matter what the source, so long as its legal of course. I guarantee if the ban on cigarette advertising was removed tomorrow 99% of British clubs commercial directors would stab their granny to get to the front of the queue.

Having said that, I don't think its outwith the bounds of possibility that eventually the nanny state will turn its beady eye on alcohol and gambling advertising and front of the queue to be used to set an example will be sport and especially football. Unfortunately when politicians think of how big a hit football will take from any of their decisions they think of how Man Utd or Liverpool will be able to absorb it, not the likes of Hibs or Dundee.

That is why I think Hibs should be planning ahead and thinking out of the box as to what sort of sponsor we should be trying to hook up with. I'm talking about products like Tampax or Durex .... even though both are products, especially the former, which historically would not think of putting their names on a football shirt as a matter of course the first time they did it would surely generate a huge amount of publicity purely as a result of the media jumping on the novelty factor. Hibs have been at the forefront of so many innovative ideas in the game, why not this :greengrin

[HoboHarry]

The ethics of football sponsorship or sport sponsorship in general are always open to debate. But in a world where every penny is a prisoner its a brave FA or club who would think of turning down money no matter what the source, so long as its legal of course. I guarantee if the ban on cigarette advertising was removed tomorrow 99% of British clubs commercial directors would stab their granny to get to the front of the queue.

Having said that, I don't think its outwith the bounds of possibility that eventually the nanny state will turn its beady eye on alcohol and gambling advertising and front of the queue to be used to set an example will be sport and especially football. Unfortunately when politicians think of how big a hit football will take from any of their decisions they think of how Man Utd or Liverpool will be able to absorb it, not the likes of Hibs or Dundee.

That is why I think Hibs should be planning ahead and thinking out of the box as to what sort of sponsor we should be trying to hook up with. I'm talking about products like Tampax or Durex .... even though both are products, especially the former, which historically would not think of putting their names on a football shirt as a matter of course the first time they did it would surely generate a huge amount of publicity purely as a result of the media jumping on the novelty factor. Hibs have been at the forefront of so many innovative ideas in the game, why not this :greengrin
Durex would be an entirely appropriate name to see on the front of Hearts jerseys. Furthermore, I think Durex should be duty bound by law to give them out for free at Tyncastle to stop the inbreds from well, errrrr, breeding......

[Walter]

Ian Black BBC

Be careful where you type that in on the internet

[Famous Fiver]

We all make choices in life. These have consequences, which are maybe not considered fully when they are made.

Mr Black made his. Grown man.

Bit rich to play the victim now.

[worcesterhibby]

Whats to stop footballers filling in a fixed odds slip and giving it to a mate who is not involved in any way in football. He goes to the bookies puts on the bet on, collects the winnings and hands said winnings to footballer in the boozer the next day. Job done and no one is any the wiser.

There is nothing to stop them doing this as far as I can see and that's why any footballer actually caught betting on football is either very very stupid or hasn't got any friends !

[WeeRussell]

There is nothing to stop them doing this as far as I can see and that's why any footballer actually caught betting on football is either very very stupid or hasn't got any friends !

That could easily apply to Mr Black, now you mention it.

[Hibbyradge]

Whats to stop footballers filling in a fixed odds slip and giving it to a mate who is not involved in any way in football. He goes to the bookies puts on the bet on, collects the winnings and hands said winnings to footballer in the boozer the next day. Job done and no one is any the wiser.

Nothing. Except the rules.

If the player is bent, his mate would have to be too or he'd be getting taken advantage of.

And the more people who know, the more chance of someone blabbing.

[stu in nottingham]

The worst case of gambling I know of came from a former Hibs player who got no help from the club or the pfa and was in massive massive debts to all different kind of bams. He left Easter Road, it broke his heart but eventually got sorted out away from this country. Shameful at the time there was no help out there.


Yep, totally agree. Even though I have very little time indeed for Black, or his motives, the SFA are being totally hypocritical. Bad enough 1 major bookmakers being sponsors, but 3? Hardly an effort to move towards addressing the problems of gambling addiction, something I had personal experience of.


Unless they are giving free bets on the side to every player that plays in a competition I can't see how a gambling company being a sponsor effects a footballer with gambling issues to be honest. I don't think one person wants to bet with *****y betfred because they sponsor the league cup.

There is some help out there if a person wants to seek it out and there was when that player was at Easter Road. Albeit, gambling problems are not easy to solve.

I am a psychologist/practitioner and have been running a charity that deals with chiefly gambling addiction for the past few years and giving people counselling. I have also seen and given treatment to a selection of professional footballers in this part of the country. Often discussed this prevalence with them and whilst the obvious contributory factors such as a healthy income and time on their hands are more obvious I have a personal view that the competitive streak which professional sportspeople need to have is highly contributory. Many have agreed with me on that subject too.

It's interesting this matter of how gambling sponsorship in it's various forms can influence people into participating which perhaps, on the face of it, can seem unlikely. I have many clients who bet on football and other sports. What they report to me, time after time, is that they are very sensitive to noticing the betting advertising around football in all its forms, including on shirts, whether live of on TV. In the latter case, some even tell me that when watching Sky Sports for instance, they even go to the lengths of turning the TV off or leaving the room during commercial breaks. I'm sure the likes of Marathonbet wouldn't pay a significant figure for shirt advertising for example if it has no effect. They know it does,

i don't have the answer to the general subjects of gambling advertising, apart from a blanket ban but the thoery that betting advertising has no effect is very inaccurate from my experience over the past few years. I'm not moralising in any way, just a wee bit of an insight.

Day in and day out I talk to people with broken lives, people who are facing prison sentences, losing their families, bankruptcy, and many who have attempted to take their own life. It's pretty hard to see a guy sitting there in floods of tears, relating that his wife has finally left home and taken the kids with her. There is help though.

http://www.gamcare.org.uk/

[Radge70]

Gambling in sport is like drugs in sport and it’s the fans who are left cheated because they no longer know whether such and such cyclist is winning because they are on drugs or whether such and such team is losing because there's some betting scam on the go.

In years gone by (before gambling sponsorship came into play) it always amazed me how bookmakers were just allowed to create markets on whatever events they chose, apparently without any objection, or need for consent, from the organisations running them (the SFA and FA etc). I can see no incentive what so ever to have our sport contaminated by gambling and have always seen it as a no brainer that its presence impacts the integrity of our game. Even when the spread-betting markets were emerging the football associations still weren’t benefiting from gambling sponsorship, yet they still allowed it to compromise our game. It’s just never made sense to me why any authority would be comfortable in the knowledge that someone could, for example, make money out of "speculating" that a player will kick the ball out for a throw-in within 10 seconds of kick-off.

The problem is just getting worse and worse and personally I’d rather sacrifice the commercial benefits in favour of a product I can trust. Unlike Ian Black, I really can’t understand how anyone who cares about the sport would want to find new ways to tarnish it even further. I also can’t understand why he would want to defend his actions at a time when some of his fellow pros have just begun raising awareness of this terrible addiction.

[The Green Goblin]

Perhaps because he done brilliantly to turn his life around and prolong his career down under and I didn't want to name and shame a good hibby.

No shame imo. It's common knowledge and iirc, GB himself has opened up about it since in at least one lengthy newspaper interview.

[guidref]

He is a sad little man who believes his own hype. I live in the same street as his parents, twin sister and brother so can talk with some authority.

His father is one of the most arrogant men I have ever had the misfortune to come across. His mother is just rude and ignorant, his brother is a convicted drug dealer.

I feel sorry for his sister as she is very sweet and so unlike the rest of the family.

Heis now staying at his parents house aftre his wife threw him out. He has apparently signed for Tranent juniors but hasn't yet made an appearance at trainaing or games.