Daniel Sturridge
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Daniel Sturridge
Sky sports just tweeted that he has been charged with breaking betting rules. Details not out yet it seems but lets see if he gets punisbed the same as Joey did. Lets see if the big clubs are treated differently than the smaller clubs
-
- Posts: 6904
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
An 18 month ban for Sturridge would mean he'd miss about 4 matches
These 30 users liked this post: Cleveleys_claret FactualFrank ClaretTony NL Claret Woodleyclaret Bosscat bfcjg DCWat longsidepies GodIsADeeJay81 Braindead karatekid Buxtonclaret mdd2 whiffa BFCmaj Pearcey HiroshimaClaret gtclaret Dougall Goobs Fretters martin_p DomBFC1882 Foulthrow Holtyclaret Cirrus_Minor PaintYorkClaretnBlue Colburn_Claret expoultryboy
Re: Daniel Sturridge
It's only reasonable to expect a similar punishment to Barton if he made a similar high number of bets, including some on his own team.
-
- Posts: 21464
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
- Been Liked: 8585 times
- Has Liked: 11285 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Difference being - he probably wont have played in any games, never mind those he bet on!
On a serious note - hopefuly an even more high profile case than Barton will see football clamp down on betting in the game. Including advertising.
On a serious note - hopefuly an even more high profile case than Barton will see football clamp down on betting in the game. Including advertising.
-
- Posts: 5829
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:38 pm
- Been Liked: 2491 times
- Has Liked: 1477 times
- Location: On the high seas chasing Pirates
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Caught betting on the number of dives he would make in a match..
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Football has to clean up its act regards relationships with betting companies. I doubt we can stop them sponsoring clubs but I feel that bets such as corners in what minute, time of first throw and amount of bookings are the markets which are being abused by players and should be outlawed to clean up the game. I and a few friends always have a bet and this type of bet never crosses our minds. This is the market which is getting abused in countries like China and Singapore.
This user liked this post: GodIsADeeJay81
-
- Posts: 67865
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32526 times
- Has Liked: 5276 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
The charge is for alleged breach of betting rules during January 2018
-
- Posts: 10321
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3339 times
- Has Liked: 1959 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I reckon a very high percentage of players bet on football.
They are probably just more careful in how they do it.
They are probably just more careful in how they do it.
-
- Posts: 67865
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32526 times
- Has Liked: 5276 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Sturridge has denied the allegations and said he’s never bet on a football match
Re: Daniel Sturridge
It looks like the allegation is that he bet on transfers of players.ClaretTony wrote:Sturridge has denied the allegations and said he’s never bet on a football match
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Yeah most will have accounts in family members names. Isnt that what Ronnie Moore got done for?Bordeauxclaret wrote:I reckon a very high percentage of players bet on football.
They are probably just more careful in how they do it.
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Used to think nothing of it back in the day when Little and Weller used to walk into the bookies in their trackies before a match and have a bet with the youth team players. Those were the days when players were happy with £5 accumulators
This user liked this post: cricketfieldclarets
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
How much more money does a player on 120k a week want?Tall Paul wrote:It looks like the allegation is that he bet on transfers of players.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Perhaps he wants a Merc G-WagenCleveleys_claret wrote:How much more money does a player on 120k a week want?
This user liked this post: cricketfieldclarets
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I'm pretty sure it's nothing to do with the physical money that's won, it's more about the buzz of winning it.Cleveleys_claret wrote:How much more money does a player on 120k a week want?
-
- Posts: 21464
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
- Been Liked: 8585 times
- Has Liked: 11285 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Believe it or not, the feeling of losing and trying to win it back is apparently even more powerful than the buzz of winningFactualFrank wrote:I'm pretty sure it's nothing to do with the physical money that's won, it's more about the buzz of winning it.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I saw McCann in Coral next to the Turf one evening, he was playing roulette, his stake was around £3, and he had about £20 in "the bank" he was regularly going over to the dog meetings placing a bet then returning.cricketfieldclarets wrote:Believe it or not, the feeling of losing and trying to win it back is apparently even more powerful than the buzz of winning
I asked him why he's sat in here betting on a random x night, his reply was " I'm bored "
He wasn't even betting to win as such, his stake was pittance and was merely sat passing time, he was in there the whole half hour I was, and still had roughly the £20 in the bank. Just sat staring at a computer screen, pressing a button every 60 seconds.
A sad state of affairs
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I misread that, thought it said:-ClaretTony wrote:Sturridge has denied the allegations and said he’s never bet on a football match
Sturridge has denied the allegations and said he’s never been on a football match
-
- Posts: 1411
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:51 pm
- Been Liked: 267 times
- Has Liked: 660 times
- Location: Starbug
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Most shocking bit on the bbc site it says he has 26 England caps, he must of won them in a bet.
-
- Posts: 4916
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 9:27 pm
- Been Liked: 858 times
- Has Liked: 334 times
- Location: Halifax
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Appears whilst Sturridge himself didn't place a bet he let people know of his loan move to West Brom which people then betted on.
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I heard on the news this morning that he's out for 6 weeks after tweaking his hamstring coming out of BetFred.
This user liked this post: Bosscat
-
- Posts: 10321
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3339 times
- Has Liked: 1959 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
It does seem odd doesn’t it, when they run these transfer markets there isn’t really a way to police them.claretburns wrote:Appears whilst Sturridge himself didn't place a bet he let people know of his loan move to West Brom which people then betted on.
I always assumed you couldn’t put more than a fiver or a tenner on them anyway.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
If you place 100 bets at £10 at even money you have made a Grand profit ..... if you win....Bordeauxclaret wrote:It does seem odd doesn’t it, when they run these transfer markets there isn’t really a way to police them.
I always assumed you couldn’t put more than a fiver or a tenner on them anyway.
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
This is where football can do something. Why should Sturridge be compelled by the FA to keep the fact that he's changing job private? I can understand why the respective clubs would want to keep it quiet but there is no reason that I can think of (beyond supporting the gambling industry) that it should even be a consideration for the FA.claretburns wrote:Appears whilst Sturridge himself didn't place a bet he let people know of his loan move to West Brom which people then betted on.
I'm not sure anybody can really stop betting companies from offering any market they like in a legal sense given that many operate from outside the UK but the football authorities could certainly stop helping them by actively and intentionally creating the conditions that make those markets viable.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
He’s compelled to keep quiet about it by the rules. He’s not allowed to pass on info he’s privy to because of his position in football. Sort of insider trading.Bacchus wrote:This is where football can do something. Why should Sturridge be compelled by the FA to keep the fact that he's changing job private? I can understand why the respective clubs would want to keep it quiet but there is no reason that I can think of (beyond supporting the gambling industry) that it should even be a consideration for the FA.
I'm not sure anybody can really stop betting companies from offering any market they like in a legal sense given that many operate from outside the UK but the football authorities could certainly stop helping them by actively and intentionally creating the conditions that make those markets viable.
-
- Posts: 10321
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3339 times
- Has Liked: 1959 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
You’d need a lot off accounts under different names to be able to that.Bosscat wrote:If you place 100 bets at £10 at even money you have made a Grand profit ..... if you win....
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I might be mistaken, but don't these rules work in favour of the betting companies?
People are being charged for beating the betting companies. They bet that he would move (or corners, score, whatever) and the bookies took the bet.
The bookies lost, and then the person who won is charged.
It just doesn't make sense to me.
People are being charged for beating the betting companies. They bet that he would move (or corners, score, whatever) and the bookies took the bet.
The bookies lost, and then the person who won is charged.
It just doesn't make sense to me.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
It’s cheating!JTClaret wrote:I might be mistaken, but don't these rules work in favour of the betting companies?
People are being charged for beating the betting companies. They bet that he would move (or corners, score, whatever) and the bookies took the bet.
The bookies lost, and then the person who won is charged.
It just doesn't make sense to me.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Yeah... butmartin_p wrote:It’s cheating!
If one person knows something and another person disagrees, you may hear the term 'I bet you...'.
I just find it slightly odd how people complain about betting in football yet care if something like this happens.
I can't say I get upset about it.
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I recognise that. My point is that those rules don't seem to serve any obvious purpose beyond supporting the gambling industry.martin_p wrote:He’s compelled to keep quiet about it by the rules. He’s not allowed to pass on info he’s privy to because of his position in football. Sort of insider trading.
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Football is so far behind the times. In cricket forms of cheating get players like Butt of Pakistan 5 year bans and jail sentences for what is the same as Le Tissier did in his playing career, when he tried to beat the system by kicking the ball out after 4 second only for a player not i on it to stop the ball going out and trying to play it about
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Their purpose is to maintain the integrity of the game.Bacchus wrote:I recognise that. My point is that those rules don't seem to serve any obvious purpose beyond supporting the gambling industry.
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
How does it achieve that? What integrity is broken by a player telling his pal that he is moving club?Tall Paul wrote:Their purpose is to maintain the integrity of the game.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Nothing, it's the making money on it via betting that's the issue, or haven't you been keeping up with the story?Bacchus wrote:How does it achieve that? What integrity is broken by a player telling his pal that he is moving club?
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Yes I have - that's exactly the point I'm making. The rule exists solely because of the gambling industry. If the FA is enforcing rules purely to maintain the viability of betting markets then it's part of the problem, not the solution.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Nothing, it's the making money on it via betting that's the issue, or haven't you been keeping up with the story?
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
The rule is there to prevent match fixing primarily, because that's been a thing for years incase you'd forgotten and that's before gambling started being a major part of football like it is now.Bacchus wrote:Yes I have - that's exactly the point I'm making. The rule exists solely because of the gambling industry. If the FA is enforcing rules purely to maintain the viability of betting markets then it's part of the problem, not the solution.
As someone else has said, it's basically insider trading.
They made a rule to stop loan players playing against their parent clubs.
By your logic should they ban loans?
Re: Daniel Sturridge
First of all, it doesn't protect the gambling industry. Bookies love it when long odds bets come in and the "next club" markets usually have huge overrounds. It's the punters who have bet on the favourites that are the losers.Bacchus wrote:How does it achieve that? What integrity is broken by a player telling his pal that he is moving club?
Imagine Sturridge tells his mate that he's going to instruct his agent to negotiate with Newcastle and make noises that he's interested while intending to "change his mind" and sign for WBA at the last minute. You don't see how that damages the integrity of the game?
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Calm down and read my posts before getting all condescending. Once you've done that you can explain how a player telling his pal he's changing jobs relates to match fixing, and when you've finished with that you might want to point out where I've suggested they should ban loans.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:The rule is there to prevent match fixing primarily, because that's been a thing for years incase you'd forgotten and that's before gambling started being a major part of football like it is now.
As someone else has said, it's basically insider trading.
They made a rule to stop loan players playing against their parent clubs.
By your logic should they ban loans?
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Agents leak information about potential transfers all the time to try and strengthen their player's hand in negotiations. What do you think media speculation is based on? I genuinely don't see how it damages the integrity of the game.Tall Paul wrote:First of all, it doesn't protect the gambling industry. Bookies love it when long odds bets come in and the "next club" markets usually have huge overrounds. It's the punters who have bet on the favourites that are the losers.
Imagine Sturridge tells his mate that he's going to instruct his agent to negotiate with Newcastle and make noises that he's interested while intending to "change his mind" and sign for WBA at the last minute. You don't see how that damages the integrity of the game?
If that information is used to place bets then it damages the integrity of the betting market. That should be a concern for the bookies, not the FA.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I've read all of them and you're still not making sense no matter how many times I read them...Bacchus wrote:Calm down and read my posts before getting all condescending. Once you've done that you can explain how a player telling his pal he's changing jobs relates to match fixing, and when you've finished with that you might want to point out where I've suggested they should ban loans.
Rules banning players from gambling is mainly related to things like match fixing.
Whilst what he may have done isn't match fixing, it still falls under the same umbrella so to speak.
I used match fixing to show you that footballers & gambling has been an issue for a long time, before gambling became more heavily involved in football.
I used loans as a point to show that banning loan players from playing against parent clubs is the same principle as banning players from betting on football.
If you're still struggling to understand that then there isn't much I can do about appearing condescending.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Media speculation can be a mixture of people in the know leaking information or people just pulling any old crap out of their arse.Bacchus wrote:Agents leak information about potential transfers all the time to try and strengthen their player's hand in negotiations. What do you think media speculation is based on? I genuinely don't see how it damages the integrity of the game.
If that information is used to place bets then it damages the integrity of the betting market. That should be a concern for the bookies, not the FA.
I happen to know of a group of Burnley fans who used to see how far they could get a rumour to travel on transfer deadline day.
I think they actually made it onto SSN with one a couple of years ago.
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Has he been charged with gambling? From what I've read there is no suggestion that he has placed any bets.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I've read all of them and you're still not making sense no matter how many times I read them...
Rules banning players from gambling is mainly related to things like match fixing.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Daniel Sturridge
I'm going to wander off and smack my head off the floor, it's got to be less painful than this...Bacchus wrote:Has he been charged with gambling? From what I've read there is no suggestion that he has placed any bets.
He's broken the rules, allegedly, if you don't understand that fact then it's fairly pointless carrying on with this chat.
If you don't like the fact that he's broken the rules write to the FA or your local MP, I'm sure you'll have much joy and success with it.
He didn't gamble, he gave out information to others so they could benefit from it, information that wouldn't normally be available as per the screenshot.
If anyone wants me I'll be smacking my head off the floor ..
-
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
- Been Liked: 599 times
- Has Liked: 171 times
- Contact:
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Smack away, my friend. I'm not disputing whether he's in breach of the rules. I'm questioning the logic and intention of the rules - specifically the ones that deem that a player has to keep his job prospects a sworn secret. If you can't understand that then you're probably right, this is a waste of both of our time.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I'm going to wander off and smack my head off the floor, it's got to be less painful than this...
He's broken the rules, allegedly, if you don't understand that fact then it's fairly pointless carrying on with this chat.
If you don't like the fact that he's broken the rules write to the FA or your local MP, I'm sure you'll have much joy and success with it.
He didn't gamble, he gave out information to others so they could benefit from it, information that wouldn't normally be available as per the screenshot.
If anyone wants me I'll be smacking my head off the floor ..
In what way does a player telling someone that he is changing job bring football into disrepute? To my mind it doesn't unless you assume that players are changing clubs purely to fleece the bookies. Match fixing / spot bets on corners / anything affecting how a player performs on the pitch could bring the game into disrepute. A player changing clubs does not.
-
- Posts: 13259
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5101 times
- Has Liked: 5168 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Would this constitute fraud and be a matter for the policeclaretburns wrote:Appears whilst Sturridge himself didn't place a bet he let people know of his loan move to West Brom which people then betted on.
Re: Daniel Sturridge
Yes, but media speculation is in the public domain. The betting markets will react accordingly and odds will shorten. This case is about using info not in the public domain.Bacchus wrote:Agents leak information about potential transfers all the time to try and strengthen their player's hand in negotiations. What do you think media speculation is based on? I genuinely don't see how it damages the integrity of the game.
If that information is used to place bets then it damages the integrity of the betting market. That should be a concern for the bookies, not the FA.