Pundits View On Tonali Ban

[warksclaret]

A lot of pundits have come out today in support of helping the professional footballers who have a gambling addict.I remember Ivan Toney saying he was not fully aware of the gambling rules and did not appreciate the repurcusions of doing it FFS. These guys have a fantastic career and today earn an absolute fortune. Peter Swann got an 8 year ban for gambling in 1964, and all the other bans in the last 60 years have been well publicised. A friend of my son works for the Brighton FC owner and he employs three full time staff to absolutely be on this subject like a rash and to ensure the players and staff are not involved in any way . Paul Merson claims we should be investing more to help these players rather than ban them. Tonali earns I suspect more than £150k a week, and paying for a specialist counsellor will be small change to him, if he still has a problem. There are a huge amount of people (not footballers) who have major problems in gambling. Its these guys that need support, and the gambling industry should be contributing a per centage of their UK turnovers to help fund this project

[ecc]

I was going to write about Tonali to be honest.

I am very pro-Italian and have absolute nothing against Tonali. On the contrary, he's one of the few beacons in the seas of darkness his national team have been crossing for years.

Betting on football was banned for pros to avoid match-fixing. Italy, sadly, has a long history of match-fixing and that's also why the FIGC, the Italian FA, has banned him. I'm sorry but if he doesn't know he can't bet on his own team (he did at Brescia and Milan) then he's either stupid or stoned.

Can we take it as read he's not been betting on Newcastle's matches?

Ok, so it's an addiction. In that case, get him away from pitches and get cured.

If they don't ban him how long will it be before he stops betting?

Joey Barton was addicted. Apparently he never actually placed bets on matches he played in. He got banned and, I'm sorry, in my opinion it was justified.

Watching the Newcastle soul-sellers applauding him made me feel sick.

[Rileybobs]

I have sympathy for anyone with an addiction, but that doesn’t mean the person shouldn’t be punished if their addiction causes them to break rules or the law. Serial killers are addicted to killing people, should their addiction mean a lesser sentence?

Of course I’m not comparing murder with gambling before anyone suggests so. But it’s imperative that professional footballers who place bets on football are punished with a ban. The risks of bringing the integrity of the game into disrepute is huge hence the blanket ban.

And I don’t buy into the argument that they have too much time and money - they’re adults and should be able to think of legitimate ways to spend their time and money.

[KRBFC]

Footballers are normal people, I find the narrative that rich successful people can’t suffer from normal people issues because they’re rich very odd.

[KRBFC]

Watching the Newcastle soul-sellers applauding him made me feel sick.

I’d like to think Burnley fans would support one of our own players if they were suffering with severe addiction and mental health problems.

[bumba]

I’d like to think Burnley fans would support one of our own players if they were suffering with severe addiction and mental health problems.

IF being the keyword. I've no idea if it's a genuine addiction or if it's his excuse to soften the blow but the one thing I don't understand is why if he does have an addiction did he bet on his own games?

[ecc]

I’d like to think Burnley fans would support one of our own players if they were suffering with severe addiction and mental health problems.

I presume you supported Keith Treacy on a regular basis and gave him a standing ovation after every match.

[Vegas Claret]

Footballers are normal people, I find the narrative that rich successful people can’t suffer from normal people issues because they’re rich very odd.

Footballers, especially at the top level get an incredible amount of support in every single thing they do. Meals prepared for them, travel booked for them etc etc - I find it a bit unusual given how much care the clubs give to players that they wouldn't be aware of or offer help to individuals. Of course the person needs to recognize the issue and want help but these top level footballers are so far removed from 'normal people'. They get immediate care, they aren't on a 'waiting list' etc etc.

[daveisaclaret]

I think in England we need to have a serious review and overhaul of how we punish these offences.

Example one - the panel accepted Ivan Toney's defence that he suffers gambling addiction and yet included in his punishment a long suspension from training. How can you accept an addiction as mitigation and decide that taking someone's access to their friends and colleagues, and to world class fitness facilities, is proportional or helpful?

Example two - since the Toney case, Harry Toffolo admitted to similar offences yet clearly considerably worse. He admitted that he'd bet against his team in several matches he'd played in. And yet he was given a suspended sentence and most tellingly football fans were so much less interested in this despite it being such a contrast to what happened to Toney. I can only conclude it's because Toffolo isn't very famous and hasn't really succeeded in the Premier League but how can that make a difference to decisions and to fans' reactions?

Those two examples alone, alongside the punishments given to Trippier and Sturridge (who really did nothing wrong other than risk other people getting quite small wins from the bookies) show that there is absolutely no consistency in how players are being punished and that isn't right.

To me it's time to legalise and regulate gambling for footballers and put in places better services to support them if they need it. If you accept that some of them are going to gamble you steer them away from gambling on their own matches. You can't realistically stop footballers from doing it, so let them do it in a way which gives the FA control and oversight.

Reluctant to comment on the Italian players as I've not read too much about it. But it looks a clear example of my point above that you can't stop them gambling.

[daveisaclaret]

Footballers are normal people, I find the narrative that rich successful people can’t suffer from normal people issues because they’re rich very odd.

This is also a really important point that should be at the forefront of all considerations. They do have more money and better access to services than us but that doesn't mean their mental health is taken care of, doesn't mean they don't feel stigma about asking for help and doesn't mean they should be treated as lesser than a normal person when they have a problem.

[Vegas Claret]

more importantly, these guys aren't being banned for gambling - they are being banned because they were stupid enough to do it on the one thing they were told they couldn't gamble on.

[evensteadiereddie]

Excellent point, Vegas.

[KRBFC]

I presume you supported Keith Treacy on a regular basis and gave him a standing ovation after every match.

I absolutely supported Keith Treacy in his battle with addiction

[warksclaret]

Smart bit of business by AC Milan, selling him for £53m. You can't tell me they did not have an inkling. This had been going on since his time at Brescia. At the same time Newcastle may need to fork out considerably for cover in midfield

[Big Vinny K]

You have to wonder from the last few cases whether the “gambling addiction” description is being used as some kind of mitigating circumstance to reduce the punishment.
Do these players gamble elsewhere ? If they were gambling addicts then there are many other avenues for them to pursue without doing it in the one activity they know they will get their livelihood taken away…..and more importantly if they are addicts putting at risk the income they use to fuel that addiction.

When these cases come to light like Toney, Barton and others does it also come to light that they are spending hundreds and thousands of pounds in casinos, online gaming etc? I thought when I read the details of Barton’s case he talked about many bets but of a relatively low value - that is not the characteristic of a gambling addict.

I think the reason that some of these cases are coming to light is more about greed and the temptation to get “easy money”. They may be approached by outsiders for information too. Look what Trippier did - providing inside information to his mates. The temptation and lure of winning is increased because they are insiders in the sport. They know about injuries, dressing room revolts, players not playing for their manager, underlying contract issues and many many other things that potentially give them an advantage in football betting. That’s all information on top of any expertise they believe they have.

Whereas if you look at the cases of say Keith Gillespie, Matthew Eherington, and Keith Tracey they were genuine gambling addicts and when they talk about their addictions it relates to horse racing, casinos etc.

I may be wrong here and if they are genuine gambling addicts then they do need support and help and I hope they receive it.
But 100% betting in the sport you are professionally participating in needs to be punished and I don’t really see a better alternative than suspending or banning them from the game. Without it there is no integrity in the game and it’s the same for any sport.

[ecc]

I absolutely supported Keith Treacy in his battle with addiction

Well done.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

If he didn’t know he couldn’t bet on football then why the secrecy around his activities?

He’s only sorry because he’s been caught

Addictions can be treated, stupidity can’t

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Smart bit of business by AC Milan, selling him for £53m. You can't tell me they did not have an inkling. This had been going on since his time at Brescia. At the same time Newcastle may need to fork out considerably for cover in midfield

I’ve read Newcastle may sue AC Milan over this

[warksclaret]

I’ve read Newcastle may sue AC Milan over this

Probably-I am certain they will have suitably qualified and experienced lawyers

[ecc]

Enough lawyers to fill the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Is there a reason he didn't come out as an addict until he caught ? During his time at Milan he could have asked for help same as when in discussions with Newcastle prior to signing. He could have stated he was addicted to betting on horse racing rather than football in the hope of avoiding a ban.

Does he need help - yes / Is coming out as an addict the moment you are caught a decent enough reason - no

[bobinho]

From Daveisaclaret….

“To me it's time to legalise and regulate gambling for footballers and put in places better services to support them if they need it. If you accept that some of them are going to gamble you steer them away from gambling on their own matches. You can't realistically stop footballers from doing it, so let them do it in a way which gives the FA control and oversight.”

So they gamble on other matches…. Matches that their friends may be playing in Doesn’t sound like a solution to me Dave… sounds like a loophole that even spectacularly numb footballers could and would exploit.

Blanket ban for players betting on games I’m afraid. Easy to apply, easy to monitor, and when caught, ignore the “sorry, I’m an addict” bullshit, and give them seriously long bans from playing.

If a player approaches the FA before he’s caught, and acknowledges he has a problem, and is opening up and asking for help BEFORE his addiction moves into football, then he gets all the help he needs. (whilst using some of his vast fortune to help pay for the counselling)


Is that not fair enough? Or shall we keep digging until we find enough mitigating circumstances to turn these muppets into victims?

[daveisaclaret]

My view bobinho is that a player is involved in match fixing, he won't be betting on the game himself. If he knows his friend who plays for another team is feeling really good, I don't see why the bookies should be protected from him betting on his buddy.

If you believe in a blanket ban for players betting on games, you must be fuming that Harry Toffolo's ban was suspended even though he bet on his team to lose in games he played in? And given that his suspended ban was given 6 years after his last bet you can't really claim it's easy to monitor?

[Sleeping Cat]

Football is too tightly interwoven with gambling at the moment. No surprise that a footballer, surrounded by gambling sponsors, logo's and adverts who cannot drink, smoke, eat what they want or even do certain other activities for risk of injury and have lots of spare time on their hands find a pass time in gambling.

He should be banned because it is wrong, but he should also be supported too, and measure should be implemented to really educate the players on the rules and more importantly the risks. Football itself should look itself in the mirror and work out if it should be facilitating the gambling companies influence on people.

[jdrobbo]

Get gambling on endorsements away from football clubs and football stadia….’We Want You to Stay Safe!!’….utter rubbish. It’s a toxic culture that affects so many people and will continue to do so. I’ll keep banging the drum as at long last, there does appear to be a turning of the tides and more people appear to be waking up to the realities of it.

[bobinho]

My view bobinho is that a player is involved in match fixing, he won't be betting on the game himself. If he knows his friend who plays for another team is feeling really good, I don't see why the bookies should be protected from him betting on his buddy.

If you believe in a blanket ban for players betting on games, you must be fuming that Harry Toffolo's ban was suspended even though he bet on his team to lose in games he played in? And given that his suspended ban was given 6 years after his last bet you can't really claim it's easy to monitor?

Not fuming at all Dave, just enjoying the debate about something which I have no control over. Most certainly any ban given to Toffolo should NOT have been suspended tho…

It’s easy enough to monitor if the authorities are serious about stopping it. As with everything else in the game, lip service is paid by the governing bodies…

I think you are giving these players far too much credence regarding what they will be thinking about, and how they will manage it. Most of em are numb (every now and then one shows up with a modicum of intelligence and common sense) and aren’t really capable of making consistently good decisions. They are so used to getting their own way from a very early age they ignore rules and regulation. This doesn’t just manifest itself with players getting caught gambling, lots of other high profile incidents to prove this point.

Not all gamblers are into match fixing - I’d like to think it’s the extreme minority, but some will inevitably stray into that realm in search of a higher “buzz”. Those instances should carry a lifetime ban, sport should be kept pure and honest.

If you are a professional sportsperson, you should be banned from betting on the sport you participate in. If they like gambling, or they are addicted in some way, there’s plenty of other events to get their fix. I realise that some footballers may be friends with golfers or boxers, but the vast majority will tend to have their friendships within their own sport. I think this blanket ban takes care of the iceberg below the surface, leaving only the tip to manage.

Seems like I’ve used a lot of words to basically say the same as Vegas….

[daveisaclaret]

snipped

I'm not really taking your points on board. When players aren't fixing matches, there's no reason it should be a problem for them to bet on football matches they aren't playing in.

There is impropriety on betting in games you play in even if it doesn't affect performance, but otherwise the existing rules pretty much just serve to protect the bookies.

I agree with jdrobbo's point that all ties with gambling should be severed by the football authorities but I think that should also include rules which are pro-bookie and anti-footballer.

I understand why people say it's stupid to bet on football when you know it's against the rules but Harry Toffolo probably doesn't feel particularly stupid for doing it when he broke every rule you can think of and didn't face any actual consequences.

[Big Vinny K]

I'm not really taking your points on board. When players aren't fixing matches, there's no reason it should be a problem for them to bet on football matches they aren't playing in.

There is impropriety on betting in games you play in even if it doesn't affect performance, but otherwise the existing rules pretty much just serve to protect the bookies.

I agree with jdrobbo's point that all ties with gambling should be severed by the football authorities but I think that should also include rules which are pro-bookie and anti-footballer.

I understand why people say it's stupid to bet on football when you know it's against the rules but Harry Toffolo probably doesn't feel particularly stupid for doing it when he broke every rule you can think of and didn't face any actual consequences.

They will potentially have access to inside knowledge around players injured, line ups before they are announced, unhappy players or dressing rooms etc. Most players have friends and contacts at other clubs so I imagine it’s pretty easy to seek out information that would help you if you wanted to.
As said a lot of footballers are not the brightest and even though things have moved on from the past they still do have a lot of times on their hand and if they are still single and away from families they must get bored. Put that together with greed, the thought of easy money and also the buzz that winning on betting (especially if you think you have done it with some insider knowledge) and it’s pretty obvious to me at least why betting in your own sport is not allowed.
As for match fixing this in our country at least will be a very rare occurrence - but if it did happen then there would undoubtedly be more people from outside of the specific game that was fixed who would be involved in the betting.

There was a well known case with spread betting when it was in its early days and before it was a lot more regulated when West Ham (under Harry) kicked the ball out of play deliberately from the kick off. It’s well know that there were some very large bets placed on the time of the first throw in.

[daveisaclaret]

They will potentially have access to inside knowledge around players injured, line ups before they are announced, unhappy players or dressing rooms etc. Most players have friends and contacts at other clubs so I imagine it’s pretty easy to seek out information that would help you if you wanted to.

Why is this bad?

If the bookies don't want to accept bets from footballers for these reasons, fine. But why is it the FA's concern?

[Woodleyclaret]

Lane,Swan and Kay all got banned and their professional careers finished
Yet Toney and Tonali have a slight hitch and it's back to earning thousands

[mikeS]

A lot of pundits have come out today in support of helping the professional footballers who have a gambling addict.I remember Ivan Toney saying he was not fully aware of the gambling rules and did not appreciate the repurcusions of doing it FFS. These guys have a fantastic career and today earn an absolute fortune. Peter Swann got an 8 year ban for gambling in 1964, and all the other bans in the last 60 years have been well publicised. A friend of my son works for the Brighton FC owner and he employs three full time staff to absolutely be on this subject like a rash and to ensure the players and staff are not involved in any way . Paul Merson claims we should be investing more to help these players rather than ban them. Tonali earns I suspect more than £150k a week, and paying for a specialist counsellor will be small change to him, if he still has a problem. There are a huge amount of people (not footballers) who have major problems in gambling. Its these guys that need support, and the gambling industry should be contributing a per centage of their UK turnovers to help fund this project

Peter Swan along with several others were jailed for match fixing, not gambling, in the 1960s.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Br ... ng_scandal

[Big Vinny K]

Why is this bad?

If the bookies don't want to accept bets from footballers for these reasons, fine. But why is it the FA's concern?

Because they are breaking betting rules and breaking the FA rules
It’s not a matter of wanting to accept bets from footballers - if a footballer wants to get round this he will. Just like Trippier did. They end up being caught (some times) because unusual betting patterns are found.
They are cheating - I have no sympathy for bookies but they make their odds up based on certain information. If a player then finds out information that only an insider would know bad bets on that it’s the same as insider trading. It’s fraud. And it can be a criminal offence which carries a custodial sentence if a bookmaker chose to go down that route if they lost a lot of money.

If (as I did) worked for a company where I knew there was a big announcement to the stock market at 7am and I knew the content of that announcement before it went into the public domain and I used that to buy or sell shares (or told my friends about this) then if found out I would be sacked (not suspended) and criminally prosecuted. Football betting is no different - a market is made based on effectively buying and selling.

[daveisaclaret]

Because they are breaking betting rules and breaking the FA rules
It’s not a matter of wanting to accept bets from footballers - if a footballer wants to get round this he will. Just like Trippier did. They end up being caught (some times) because unusual betting patterns are found.
They are cheating - I have no sympathy for bookies but they make their odds up based on certain information. If a player then finds out information that only an insider would know bad bets on that it’s the same as insider trading. It’s fraud. And it can be a criminal offence which carries a custodial sentence if a bookmaker chose to go down that route if they lost a lot of money.

If (as I did) worked for a company where I knew there was a big announcement to the stock market at 7am and I knew the content of that announcement before it went into the public domain and I used that to buy or sell shares (or told my friends about this) then if found out I would be sacked (not suspended) and criminally prosecuted. Football betting is no different - a market is made based on effectively buying and selling.

Ignoring "it's bad because it's against the rules" which I don't think makes sense because it is in reply to me saying the rules should be changed I think it's outright wrong to compare it to insider trading.

Insider trading is wrong because the inside information gives one party an advantage that the party with no insider information doesn't have. This is not the same as bookies setting odds and then someone with insight trading because the bookies are using inside information to begin with. Trading is a deal between two even parties, placing a bet on football isn't.

When Kieran Trippier text his mate saying he could have a bet on KT going to Atletico Madrid, the bookies the mates used were already offering Atletico as his next club odds on. They were using inside information to know that.

I don't really see how you can consider it fraud either. There is no deceit.

I think it's pertinent to add that Ivan Toney, as England's most prominent recent example, was not accused or found guilty of having or using any inside information when he was betting.

[Big Vinny K]

Ignoring "it's bad because it's against the rules" which I don't think makes sense because it is in reply to me saying the rules should be changed I think it's outright wrong to compare it to insider trading.

Insider trading is wrong because the inside information gives one party an advantage that the party with no insider information doesn't have. This is not the same as bookies setting odds and then someone with insight trading because the bookies are using inside information to begin with. Trading is a deal between two even parties, placing a bet on football isn't.

When Kieran Trippier text his mate saying he could have a bet on KT going to Atletico Madrid, the bookies the mates used were already offering Atletico as his next club odds on. They were using inside information to know that.

I don't really see how you can consider it fraud either. There is no deceit.

I think it's pertinent to add that Ivan Toney, as England's most prominent recent example, was not accused or found guilty of having or using any inside information when he was betting.

How would a bookie know the team sheet before a player for example ? There are many more examples of how a footballer can have access to information that a bookmaker does not have when compiling the odds.
You know very little about how betting markets work if you do not think there is a comparison to how trading markets work.

I have no idea how you come to a conclusion that the Trippier case is not insider trading. I find it staggering that you do not know the difference between something that might happen and something that is definite. Which bookmaker in the world would still offer odds on Trippier going to Athletico Madrid if they knew he was definitely going?
Even if they thought Trippier was 99% certain to join AM and offered odds of say 1/100 to reflect this view because Trippier presumably knew 100% he was going if he then told someone to have a bet on this then how can you possibly say this is not fraud or insider knowledge or trading?
The bookies are not using insider knowledge to offer those offs - they are using their knowledge, contacts, reports, etc. But there was only Trippier who knew this 100%. Odds rare compiled firstly based on a bookmakers view of the outcome and secondly based on the amount of money placed on an outcome. If that outcome is a known fact there will never be any odds offered. It’s that simple.

[daveisaclaret]

How would a bookie know the team sheet before a player for example ? There are many more examples of how a footballer can have access to information that a bookmaker does not have when compiling the odds.
You know very little about how betting markets work if you do not think there is a comparison to how trading markets work.

I have no idea how you come to a conclusion that the Trippier case is not insider trading. I find it staggering that you do not know the difference between something that might happen and something that is definite. Which bookmaker in the world would still offer odds on Trippier going to Athletico Madrid if they knew he was definitely going?
Even if they thought Trippier was 99% certain to join AM and offered odds of say 1/100 to reflect this view because Trippier presumably knew 100% he was going if he then told someone to have a bet on this then how can you possibly say this is not fraud or insider knowledge or trading?
The bookies are not using insider knowledge to offer those offs - they are using their knowledge, contacts, reports, etc. But there was only Trippier who knew this 100%. Odds rare compiled firstly based on a bookmakers view of the outcome and secondly based on the amount of money placed on an outcome. If that outcome is a known fact there will never be any odds offered. It’s that simple.

I'm not saying bookies have access to all the knowledge a footballer might, I'm saying they have some inside knowledge. Compiling odds based on the amount of money placed on an outcome, which you rightly state, is another example of this.

I am not sure you are aware of the details of the Trippier case because he did tell his mates and they were betting before the outcome was 100%. They were betting before it was odds on (and before he did anything wrong in the FA's eyes) but at the time he committed his offence of telling them to bet, he hadn't completed his medical. Don't think this is massively relevant but important to note the details accuracy.

I don't think it's fraud. I do think it's probably fair to call this kind of betting cheating, and I would expect the bookies to rightfully ban the accounts of those betting. But it's not fraudulent to bet on something because you know (or think you know) it's going to happen. I think this is borne out in none of Trippier's friends being charged with fraud. I think this is a natural consequence of offering bets on someone transferring their employment and I don't see why the FA should regulate it.

[Big Vinny K]

I'm not saying bookies have access to all the knowledge a footballer might, I'm saying they have some inside knowledge. Compiling odds based on the amount of money placed on an outcome, which you rightly state, is another example of this.

I am not sure you are aware of the details of the Trippier case because he did tell his mates and they were betting before the outcome was 100%. They were betting before it was odds on (and before he did anything wrong in the FA's eyes) but at the time he committed his offence of telling them to bet, he hadn't completed his medical. Don't think this is massively relevant but important to note the details accuracy.

I don't think it's fraud. I do think it's probably fair to call this kind of betting cheating, and I would expect the bookies to rightfully ban the accounts of those betting. But it's not fraudulent to bet on something because you know (or think you know) it's going to happen. I think this is borne out in none of Trippier's friends being charged with fraud. I think this is a natural consequence of offering bets on someone transferring their employment and I don't see why the FA should regulate it.

The stuff you are saying on Trippier is getting a bit daft now. Whatever way you cut it he was telling his friends information that the bookmaker did not know and that only he could know. He may have even told them about the risk that he could potentially fail the medical so they were aware of this but even here nobody knew better than Trippier (and therefore his mates) as to whether he was going to be fit enough to pass a medical.

Ok we are clearly never going to agree on this.

Why do you believe it’s against the rules for footballers to bet on football then ? Why would the FA and many other sports have this within their rules ? Why would the different unions representing their members be not lobbying to get these changed if they thought it was unfair for their members ?

I have never heard anybody (up until you) object against this rule. Why do you think that’s the case ?

[daveisaclaret]

The stuff you are saying on Trippier is getting a bit daft now. Whatever way you cut it he was telling his friends information that the bookmaker did not know and that only he could know. He may have even told them about the risk that he could potentially fail the medical so they were aware of this but even here nobody knew better than Trippier (and therefore his mates) as to whether he was going to be fit enough to pass a medical.

Ok we are clearly never going to agree on this.

Why do you believe it’s against the rules for footballers to bet on football then ? Why would the FA and many other sports have this within their rules ? Why would the different unions representing their members be not lobbying to get these changed if they thought it was unfair for their members ?

I have never heard anybody (up until you) object against this rule. Why do you think that’s the case ?

Trippier didn't tell them about the risk of failing the medical, he said lump on and it was 100% happening. The full findings of the tribunal are public domain if you want to read them instead of speculating about it.

To answer your questions:
I think gambling on football is against the rules mostly as a bulwark against fixing matches. It's a noble cause but I'm not sure it's necessary or serves much of a purpose in that regard.

I think the ban on passing on insider information is likely coming from the same place as you are, that people shouldn't be able to place bets if they have better information than the bookies. I just don't agree with that. The bookies' business is their own.

Presumably if the PFA came out in favour of changing the rules they'd be lampooned and someone who worked there/was a union representative would be abused and accused of wanting to cheat. I think on that basis it's probably better for them to focus their resources on supporting footballers with gambling addiction/undergoing punishments.

I think probably you've never heard of anyone disagree with the rule before because it doesn't matter much and not many people care. All of us are in agreement that breaking the rules is stupid and it's much easier to just think "footballers shouldn't bet on football" (a statement nobody can disagree with given the rules in place) than critically engage with the issue.

[dsr]

Football depends on betting for a large chunk of its income (it shouldn't, but that's another story) and it's in the interests of the game to keep the betting market honest. Hence the ban on footballers betting on any match because it not only has to be honest, it has to be seen to be honest.

There is no practical way of introducing a rule that says that football betting is legal as long as you don't do it for match fixing.

Racing has the same rule for jockeys (though not for trainers). Strictly no bets on horse racing.

[dsr]

I'm not really taking your points on board. When players aren't fixing matches, there's no reason it should be a problem for them to bet on football matches they aren't playing in.

There is impropriety on betting in games you play in even if it doesn't affect performance, but otherwise the existing rules pretty much just serve to protect the bookies.

I agree with jdrobbo's point that all ties with gambling should be severed by the football authorities but I think that should also include rules which are pro-bookie and anti-footballer.

I understand why people say it's stupid to bet on football when you know it's against the rules but Harry Toffolo probably doesn't feel particularly stupid for doing it when he broke every rule you can think of and didn't face any actual consequences.

You're totally discounting the possibility of two footballers for different clubs swapping information in a sort of syndicate?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

He now has a global ban on playing football

[daveisaclaret]

You're totally discounting the possibility of two footballers for different clubs swapping information in a sort of syndicate?

Yes sir

[Burnley Ace]

If they are all addicted to gambling why not gamble on horses, dogs, tennis, rugby etc. why bet on football which they know they shouldn’t?

[dsr]

If they are all addicted to gambling why not gamble on horses, dogs, tennis, rugby etc. why bet on football which they know they shouldn’t?

Exactly. Addicted to gambling, I can understand. Addicted to gambling on football, I cannot.

[KRBFC]

They will potentially have access to inside knowledge around players injured, line ups before they are announced, unhappy players or dressing rooms etc. Most players have friends and contacts at other clubs so I imagine it’s pretty easy to seek out information that would help you if you wanted to.

Sounds like horse racing to me, definitely isn’t insider trading or fraud. You’re perfectly fine to use insider information clearly unless you’re naive enough to believe the horse owners know less than the bookies about their own horse.

I do think you’re confusing things though with your Trippier argument, it’s completely different placing a bet on a horse to win a race with insider knowledge it has a good chance to win than it is to bet on Trippier joining Madrid knowing 100% it will happen.

[willsclarets]

Is there a reason he didn't come out as an addict until he caught ? During his time at Milan he could have asked for help same as when in discussions with Newcastle prior to signing. He could have stated he was addicted to betting on horse racing rather than football in the hope of avoiding a ban.

Does he need help - yes / Is coming out as an addict the moment you are caught a decent enough reason - no

This is such a misunderstanding of the addiction. As a gambling addict myself, I can tell you that you that secrecy is a massive part of the stranglehold of compulsive gambling. You feel shame, you lie to hide it. It becomes nothing to do with money or winning and everything to do with feeding a dopamine cycle. Tonali will not have been thinking rationally at all. It is a mental disease, and unlike alcohol addiction there's a huge stigma attached because you don't 'look' addicted. There's no outward signs like alcohol or drug addiction, but it's equally destructive. So many suicides occur every year because of gambling. Families torn apart, lives ruined. Its very easy to blame the gamblers, and they do have to take responsibility for their actions. But they also need help, support and understanding. Once you're in an addictive cycle, it's incredibly hard to break whether you're a millionaire footballer or not. It's a societal problem that needs addressing as a health problem. I hope he gets the help he needs rather than just an assumption his ban will serve as a deterrent. It won't.

[willsclarets]

Exactly. Addicted to gambling, I can understand. Addicted to gambling on football, I cannot.

I was addicted to slot machines. If there were rules against me betting in slot machines it would not have mattered to me once addicted. The only thing that mattered was feeding the addiction and doing whatever I could to facilitate it. Tonali was wrong to ever bet on football, but I doubt he foresaw being addicted. Who does. Your brain is so brilliantly clever at justifying the next bet, and at a certain point he will have thought "well I'm in a mess now whatever happens, might as well carry on" You know at a certain point, it's all going to come crashing down. He will have too. And you know its stupid and ridiculous, compulsive gamblers aren't idiots they're ill. I have a fairly highly paid job and wouldn't be considered daft academically at all, but I got sucked in. I don't know about tonali but I have adhd which doesn't help, it basically means I have a shortage of dopamine release. So compulsive behaviour is always a danger. If I had loads of time on my hands and money, without the right support network I'd be screwed.

[Big Vinny K]

Sounds like horse racing to me, definitely isn’t insider trading or fraud. You’re perfectly fine to use insider information clearly unless you’re naive enough to believe the horse owners know less than the bookies about their own horse.

I do think you’re confusing things though with your Trippier argument, it’s completely different placing a bet on a horse to win a race with insider knowledge it has a good chance to win than it is to bet on Trippier joining Madrid knowing 100% it will happen.

Not confused at all.
I’m saying insider knowledge is insider knowledge. Whether you are 100% sure like in the Trippier case (because he has told you) or whether you are 100% sure a horse is not going to win for example because you know the trainer and owners are deliberately holding a horse back to improve its handicap.

I’m not taking about tips or 3rd hand rumours that a horse is going to bolt up because you have heard a whisper - that’s all part of betting on horses and when this happens the odds adjust accordingly (and bookies here the same whispers and rumours).

I’m talking about cases down the years in horse racing where there has been deliberate fixing for horses to win or lose and there has been people in the know who have had made a lot of money. A few owners / trainers back in the day (like Barney Curly) had a notorious reputation for this.
It’s a lot harder now because of technology as unusual betting patterns are spotted earlier, rules around cash and anti money laundering etc plus bookmakers who suspect foul play being able to withhold winnings whilst cases are investigated.

I am not championing the cause of bookmakers btw - they have caused massive problems in society in the last decade or so with what has happened with online gambling.

If insider knowledge is information that there is no way the bookmaker could know that (at the time you are placing a bet) then that’s against the rules / laws and it should be. If it was the other way round and you had a corrupt bookie who had insider knowledge that the favourite in a horse race was going to be deliberately held back and lose and he won a shed load of money on the back of this (because for example he was offering slightly better odds than other bookies) then the public would quite rightly expect him to lose his license, face prosecution etc.

I don’t see any difference in these scenarios whether you are a punter or a bookmaker.

[Big Vinny K]

I was addicted to slot machines. If there were rules against me betting in slot machines it would not have mattered to me once addicted. The only thing that mattered was feeding the addiction and doing whatever I could to facilitate it. Tonali was wrong to ever bet on football, but I doubt he foresaw being addicted. Who does. Your brain is so brilliantly clever at justifying the next bet, and at a certain point he will have thought "well I'm in a mess now whatever happens, might as well carry on" You know at a certain point, it's all going to come crashing down. He will have too. And you know its stupid and ridiculous, compulsive gamblers aren't idiots they're ill. I have a fairly highly paid job and wouldn't be considered daft academically at all, but I got sucked in. I don't know about tonali but I have adhd which doesn't help, it basically means I have a shortage of dopamine release. So compulsive behaviour is always a danger. If I had loads of time on my hands and money, without the right support network I'd be screwed.

Great posts you have made here.
You are spot on about the addiction and illness side of it.
Sounds like from the way you are happy to share this for others and also your ADHD diagnosis that you have sought support yourself. Hope it’s helping and once again thanks for sharing.

[ecc]

Let's be clear.

Addiction is totally unhealthy. I teach in a college with kids who are apprentices. Virtually all of them don't like coming to the college. Whatever.

What frightens me the most is their mobile addiction and nomophobia. They are lost without their mobile. As a teacher, it drives me crazy but it's not their fault. Their generation has been tarnished by the scourge of mobiles.

But if professional players cannot stop gambling then they quite simply cannot continue to play.

I sincerely hope Tonali can beat it. He's only 23. He's a very good player. I first saw him playing for Italy in 2018 during the U19 Euro final phase. I'd never heard of him before. As soon as he touched the ball, I thought "this is Andrea Pirlo". The way he runs, the way he walks. His style of play and, at that time, his hair made me think he must have been Pirlo's son. The fact he played for Brescia, Pirlo's first club just added to the uncanny similarity. He doesn't look like Pirlo facially but he does from a distance. Whether he'll ever reach the same level as Pirlo is unlikely IMHO as Pirlo is one of the best playmakers of all time.

[mikeS]

Lane,Swan and Kay all got banned and their professional careers finished
Yet Toney and Tonali have a slight hitch and it's back to earning thousands

Peter Swan, Bronco Lane and co were banned for conspiring to fix matches, not betting.