www.bbc.co.uk
The same way you knew Forest were getting relegated this season.
Hilarious swerve but the point still stands.
Should have been diagnosed with too much money and not enough brain
Omar Richards passed a medical with a broken leg.
3 bets a week is what we're aware of...
The less said about our medical department the better.
Equally you'd think he'd have been invested fully by the FA with full disclosure of all his betting activities.... the gambling companies would be fully compliant with this as they will want to claw back any cash lost if possible.
Best money can buy and a witness for the defence.
I know I am not very good on the technical side, but can you advise how I put someone on ignore Erik. Many thanks M and M.
Exactly. The extent of his problem appears to go much further than a few football bets a week, despite what the experts on here say.
It's actually quite simple on the new forum software.
Sorry, only just seen this. Flaggers has shown you how and I see you've been able to do it anyway
People trying to equate betting sponsorship and footballers betting in football are doing my head in. Morally they are equatable at all. I understand people may not want betting sponsors but Footballers not being allowed to bet on football is because of spot fixing and match fixing. Not because the FA find betting morally wrong. Toney could have bet on everything else without a problem. People think it’s a smart opinion to have to equate the 2 when in fact it’s not relevant and just whataboutery.'Football and gambling's relationship needs a review'
Brentford boss Thomas Frank joins England manager Gareth Southgate in criticising the terms of striker Ivan Toney's eight-month ban from football.
Frank talking the usual bollocks. Sat there pontificating about the relationship between betting and football sat in front of a hoarding with the clubs main sponsor which is a betting company. Talking that he eat he would be better visiting schools and doing worthwhile things (he could do that anyway).
If he’d got a suspended sentence there would be no change, they don’t lose their star asset and they’d all be happy.
I don’t think you can argue it deserves a ban. As others have said actions have consequences. You can help and support people, rehabilitate them and help them move forward but there has to be punishment dished out to deter others.
If football was the only thing you could bet on then you could maybe make more of an argument that he was trapped in the addiction, it isn’t, if he was really compulsive gambler but also a footballer he’d bet on other things and he’d now be getting the support he apparently needs but wouldn’t be banned. The football bets were his decision.
Just like an alcoholic. If a guy is sat in his living room drinking himself in to a stupor every day he needs help. If he drinks himself silly everyday and decides after two bottles of vodka he’s gonna get in his car and pick up a takeaway then he needs the rehabilitation and support but also will face the consequences of his decisions while drinking.
I think they’ve got off lightly to be honest and I’m guessing if it was a lesser player he’d be on his way.
