NHC: Ivan Toney

[GreenNWhiteArmy]

BREAKING: Ivan Toney has been suspended from all football and football-related activity with immediate effect for eight months, fined £50,000, and warned as to his future conduct for breaches of The FA’s Betting Rules.

Brutal

[Tyler Durden]

Without having yet read the finer detail, seems incredibly harsh. Did Cantona not only get 9 months for attacking a fan?!

[Paulie Walnuts]

Doesn’t really seem proportionate to other punishments to the likes of Suarez.

[Iain G]

Not even allowed to train for the next 4 months!

[Smartie]

I quite like this.

It shouldn’t be happening and there needs to be a deterrent.

The light approach the authorities took to Ian Black was disgraceful.

I’m all for supporting those who admit to problems, I have less sympathy for those who end up taking part in activities that may call into question the integrity of the game.

[Billy Whizz]

Can they send him on loan to Hibs until January

[big gogs]

Without having yet read the finer detail, seems incredibly harsh. Did Cantona not only get 9 months for attacking a fan?!
Did he bet against his own team,if not ,I don’t see the problem,betting on other teams results it happens in real life.maybe in hindsight,he should have asked someone else to put the bets on for him.

[Pretty Boy]

The blanket ban on players betting on football gets a lot of stick but it makes sense to me. If players can bet on games they have the ability to influence the outcome of games for others and ask others to do the same for them. That's a potentially slippery slope. Fixed football matches happen and players acting in ways that ensure certain bets win happens. Allowing footballers to be could quite possible worsen that.

Toney knew the rules, he wilfully chose to break them. For all the pros of being a top level pro ootballer, the inability to be on one sport seems a small price to pay.

[BILLYHIBS]

Those Bet365 price boosts on The Robot :grr:

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

How would the authorities have been able to find this out? A whistle blower from an online firm? Many moons ago, I worked in the betting industry and we had football players betting decent money on football games, but giving the bet to one of the pensioners to place it, in return for a few pints.

[blackpoolhibs]

He really must be thick to get caught, surely tae god he could get someone else to place bets if he must bet? :confused:

[allezsauzee]

Without having yet read the finer detail, seems incredibly harsh. Did Cantona not only get 9 months for attacking a fan?!

I would argue that Cantona was the one treated harshly there. He shouldn't have reacted but ultimately if he'd done the same to a player who had shouted disgusting abuse at him, he'd have got a fraction of that. I think the football authorities need to come down hard on any player breaching the rules on gambling given the scope for corruption.

[HoboHarry]

I quite like this.

It shouldn’t be happening and there needs to be a deterrent.

The light approach the authorities took to Ian Black was disgraceful.

I’m all for supporting those who admit to problems, I have less sympathy for those who end up taking part in activities that may call into question the integrity of the game.
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.

[Pretty Boy]

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.

It's not a football anomaly though.

The entire racing industry is built on gambling but licensed jockeys are banned from betting on any race anywhere in the world. Rugby League players are the same. And tennis players. And so on and so on.

I really don't give a toss if Bet365 or SkyBet get done over by a dishonest pro fixing bets for either his mates or a dodgy syndicate. Ordinary punters are at risk as well though, as are us fans who may be watching a game which is being manipulated for dishonest purposes.

There's hypocrisy at play but ultimately the ban provides at least some protection for the integrity of the sport as being decided on honest sporting merits.

[Just Alf]

The blanket ban on players betting on football gets a lot of stick but it makes sense to me. If players can bet on games they have the ability to influence the outcome of games for others and ask others to do the same for them. That's a potentially slippery slope. Fixed football matches happen and players acting in ways that ensure certain bets win happens. Allowing footballers to be could quite possible worsen that.

Toney knew the rules, he wilfully chose to break them. For all the pros of being a top level pro ootballer, the inability to be on one sport seems a small price to pay.That's a good point actually.

I'd been thinking he was really hard done to.

Thinking further though , he could.bet for his mates while his mates bet for him :-/

[Scouse Hibee]

Happy to hear this, he knew the rules and broke them.

[Lago]

The blanket ban on players betting on football gets a lot of stick but it makes sense to me. If players can bet on games they have the ability to influence the outcome of games for others and ask others to do the same for them. That's a potentially slippery slope. Fixed football matches happen and players acting in ways that ensure certain bets win happens. Allowing footballers to be could quite possible worsen that.

Toney knew the rules, he wilfully chose to break them. For all the pros of being a top level pro ootballer, the inability to be on one sport seems a small price to pay.
My thoughts exactly

[HoboHarry]

As far not even allowing him to train, I just think of what the point of that sanction is? I'd love to see a top lawyer test that in court, I think the FA would get shredded.

[allezsauzee]

It's not a football anomaly though.

The entire racing industry is built on gambling but licensed jockeys are banned from betting on any race anywhere in the world. Rugby League players are the same. And tennis players. And so on and so on.

I really don't give a toss if Bet365 or SkyBet get done over by a dishonest pro fixing bets for either his mates or a dodgy syndicate. Ordinary punters are at risk as well though, as are us fans who may be watching a game which is being manipulated for dishonest purposes.

There's hypocrisy at play but ultimately the ban provides at least some protection for the integrity of the sport as being decided on honest sporting merits.

These are important points. Ultimately, the big bookies run their books conservatively and have enough people and systems all over this to make sure they don't get shafted. They have no interest in engaging with serious gamblers, they just want to consistently hoover up cash from people who don't really know what they are doing each week. It's the small punters that ultimately pay for those acting with inside information and most importantly fans who go watch games that potentially are fixed in some way. Even if it's players doing something as seemingly innocuous as getting booked , conceding corners or committing fouls, it all gets gambled on now.

[Waxy]

Should be a life ban for betting scams.

[ancient hibee]

I’m told he is suspected (without being proved)of heavy involvement in influencing spot betting.

[LunasBoots]

I quite like this.

It shouldn’t be happening and there needs to be a deterrent.

The light approach the authorities took to Ian Black was disgraceful.

I’m all for supporting those who admit to problems, I have less sympathy for those who end up taking part in activities that may call into question the integrity of the game.

If you have an addiction it's pretty hard to stop, help rather than bans for me

[DH1875]

Happy to hear this, he knew the rules and broke them.

So what did he do? Match fixing???

[Since452]

He'll be picking up a fortune for doing nothing for months. My heart isn't exactly breaking for him.

[danhibees1875]

Conflicted. It seems harsh, especially if he's not betting on anything he's involved in but some good points on this thread that he could be involved as he'll be more connected (that's a bit of a leap required there) and that it's a minor sacrifice for the life he has as a footballer.

There's the obvious hypocrisy of the whole thing too, betting sponsors and adverts are rife in and around the game and its all done with the intention of making people bet. He's exposed to that constantly.

I still think it should take into account what he has bet on though (which it might have, i dont think we know) and the likelihood he could have inside knowledge or influence on the outcome before things get as severe. Its a very hefty ban, and at a key stage for him when he's asserting himself in the premiership and just breaking through into the England team.

[CentreLine]

I quite like this.

It shouldn’t be happening and there needs to be a deterrent.

The light approach the authorities took to Ian Black was disgraceful.

I’m all for supporting those who admit to problems, I have less sympathy for those who end up taking part in activities that may call into question the integrity of the game.

Your last paragraph is absolutely correct. The problem
I have is that the integrity of the game, here is Scotland, starts with criminal bias towards two clubs by the governing body and their in field servants, the referees

[Oscar T Grouch]

As far not even allowing him to train, I just think of what the point of that sanction is? I'd love to see a top lawyer test that in court, I think the FA would get shredded.

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.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Could he go on loan to a club in another country??

[Oscar T Grouch]

Could he go on loan to a club in another country??

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

[J-C]

He'll be picking up a fortune for doing nothing for months. My heart isn't exactly breaking for him.

Will he, I'd have thought Brentford will have some sort of clause in his contract.

[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]

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]

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

[SHODAN]

Surprised the ban isn't sponsored by Bet365.

[HoboHarry]

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]

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.

[Paulie Walnuts]

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]

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]

FIFA will approve no doubt

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

[overdrive]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

thats all the "detail" needed

Doesn't necessarily make a difference.

[neil7908]

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]

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!

[AugustaHibs]

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

Incredibly daft for Brentford to even consider that

[Jones28]

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

He bet on his team mates to lose. I’m not sure.

[Steven79]

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

Were any of the offences commited while at Brentford?

[Jones28]

Were any of the offences commited while at Brentford?

I dunno. I assumed they were from the way it’s been reported.

[Oscar T Grouch]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65721139

Due to his diagnosed addiction he ban was reduced from 11 to 8 months.

[MWHIBBIES]

He bet on his team mates to lose. I’m not sure.

I am. He's a 20 goal premier league striker. No chance in hell they release him. More likely to renew his contract.

[wookie70]

I think I would like to see any player betting against his own team to be banned for a very long time. Even betting on their team to win can get messy but it is tricky when the gambling industry invests so much in football. It would be interesting to see if he is gambling only on his side to lose or if he only does that chasing other bets but I have little sympathy.

[Jones28]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65721139

Due to his diagnosed addiction he ban was reduced from 11 to 8 months.

Well I hope he gets the help he needs.

[Bristolhibby]

Surely you just get your mate to place the bet?

Or set up an account in your brothers name.

So many ways to “get away with it”.

J

[pacoluna]

Yet as part of his job he is forced to wear a gambling sponsor on his shirt, the gambling Industry is perverse just as the Quinn bet advertising is at Easter road.

Footballs relationship with gambling is pathetic yet we have Neil Doncaster basically admitting that Scottish football is dependent on it!.

[1875Sean]

Surely you just get your mate to place the bet?

Or set up an account in your brothers name.

So many ways to “get away with it”.

J


The findings came out he was caught using his friends account, over 200 offences, wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t double or treble that

[JimBHibees]

The findings came out he was caught using his friends account, over 200 offences, wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t double or treble that

Probably evidence of money transfer and what's app, text messages.