Joey Barton (now retired)

[Guest neesy111]

'A bet'

times by 1260

[Guest firetotheworks]

I just find it mental that Rio get 8 months for the Drugs ban and Barton gets 18 months for this.

 

 

 

Rio got 8 months for missing a drugs test, he didn't get a drugs ban.

 

Same thing imo.

 

Mental.

 

That's the idea behind it isn't it? You treat the missed drugs test as harsh as a failed one, otherwise you'd just skip the drugs test.

 

Nah I know. I think 8 months is fine. The original point was that 18 months for Barton compared to 8 months for a 'drug ban' is crazy, when it's not. The ban was for missing a drugs test, not failing one. Had he failed one he'd have been banned for a lot longer.

Missing a drugs test should be treated the same as failing one IMO.

 

Luckily the legal system doesn't.

[Guest firetotheworks]

8 weeks for MDMA use - https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/2775356/saido-berahino-mdma-ecstasy-drugs-test-fa-ban/

 

18 months for having a bet.

 

Or to spin it the other way -

 

8 weeks for taking illegal, non-performance enhancing drug.

 

18 months for betting illegally 1,260 times, including for and against the team that he plays for.

[Andymc1]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

[Guest firetotheworks]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

[Andymc1]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

 

Yes, and it's clear that he broke the rules due to an addiction. Absolutely ludicrous to not take that into account. 

[Guest neesy111]

Sorry but imo betting against your own team for me isn't acceptable even if you have an addiction.  You just don't do it at all.

[Andymc1]

They should be helping footballers with a gambling addiction, not shutting them out. That is what I'm trying to get at here.

 

The main point of a punishment is to stop the same action being carried out again - until they get to the crux of the problem they will never achieve that, no matter how long the suspension.

[Guest firetotheworks]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

 

Yes, and it's clear that he broke the rules due to an addiction. Absolutely ludicrous to not take that into account. 

 

I'm not sure how addiction comes into him specifically betting on his own team or football in general tbh. He hasn't been banned just simply for gambling, it's because he's done it outside of the rules. How does an addiction to gambling excuse that when he could have simply bet elsewhere?

[samptime29]

They should be helping footballers with a gambling addiction, not shutting them out. That is what I'm trying to get at here.

 

The main point of a punishment is to stop the same action being carried out again - until they get to the crux of the problem they will never achieve that, no matter how long the suspension.

 

Totally agree.

[Andymc1]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

 

Yes, and it's clear that he broke the rules due to an addiction. Absolutely ludicrous to not take that into account. 

 

I'm not sure how addiction comes into him specifically betting on his own team or football in general tbh. He hasn't been banned just simply for gambling, it's because he's done it outside of the rules. How does an addiction to gambling excuse that when he could have simply bet elsewhere?

 

It's clear to me that he was gambling on these events as he has an addiction. Looks at the varied events and varied stakes he places - it reeks of gambling addiction. Since when have rules mattered to those who are addicted to something? He did bet elsewhere, there were 15,000 bets on his account with 1260 on football.

 

I agree there should have been some sort of repercussion but an 18 month ban achieves absolutely nothing. 

[wyn davies]

That's him done, bankruptcy will be next.

[Guest firetotheworks]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

 

Yes, and it's clear that he broke the rules due to an addiction. Absolutely ludicrous to not take that into account. 

 

I'm not sure how addiction comes into him specifically betting on his own team or football in general tbh. He hasn't been banned just simply for gambling, it's because he's done it outside of the rules. How does an addiction to gambling excuse that when he could have simply bet elsewhere?

 

It's clear to me that he was gambling on these events as he has an addiction. Looks at the varied events and varied stakes he places - it reeks of gambling addiction. Since when have rules mattered to those who are addicted to something? He did bet elsewhere, there were 15,000 bets on his account with 1260 on football.

 

I agree there should have been some sort of repercussion but an 18 month ban achieves absolutely nothing. 

 

Nah, I don't buy it tbh. I'm not saying he doesn't have a gambling addiction, but he knew what he was doing like. Addiction or not, gambling on your own team and placing bets on yourself is obviously against the rules and proper stupid. I don't buy this shit about it being harsher because of who he is either, that's always his excuse because he's always fucking up in some way.

[Andymc1]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

 

Yes, and it's clear that he broke the rules due to an addiction. Absolutely ludicrous to not take that into account. 

 

I'm not sure how addiction comes into him specifically betting on his own team or football in general tbh. He hasn't been banned just simply for gambling, it's because he's done it outside of the rules. How does an addiction to gambling excuse that when he could have simply bet elsewhere?

 

It's clear to me that he was gambling on these events as he has an addiction. Looks at the varied events and varied stakes he places - it reeks of gambling addiction. Since when have rules mattered to those who are addicted to something? He did bet elsewhere, there were 15,000 bets on his account with 1260 on football.

 

I agree there should have been some sort of repercussion but an 18 month ban achieves absolutely nothing. 

 

Nah, I don't buy it tbh. I'm not saying he doesn't have a gambling addiction, but he knew what he was doing like. Addiction or not, gambling on your own team and placing bets on yourself is obviously against the rules and proper stupid. I don't buy this s*** about it being harsher because of who he is either, that's always his excuse because he's always f***ing up in some way.

 

I don't care who it is, it could be fucking Jack Colback. My point that the punishment achieves nothing still stands.

 

If he was solely betting on his own team/himself, then it would be different but I do think it's a case of him just betting on absolutely anything available.

[Guest firetotheworks]

'A bet'

times by 1260

 

Over 10 years = 2.42 per week. So let me phrase that again, the odd bet.

 

Add in the fact the bloke has an addiction as well. For some reason, people don't seem to take gambling addiction seriously. It looks like the FA are in the same boat as those imbeciles. The sheer lack of help provided for pro footballers with a gambling problem is outrageous given we're in 2017.

 

He didn't bet 2.42 times a week, he broke the rules of his profession 2.42 times a week. With that in mind, that's a canny bit.

 

Yes, and it's clear that he broke the rules due to an addiction. Absolutely ludicrous to not take that into account. 

 

I'm not sure how addiction comes into him specifically betting on his own team or football in general tbh. He hasn't been banned just simply for gambling, it's because he's done it outside of the rules. How does an addiction to gambling excuse that when he could have simply bet elsewhere?

 

It's clear to me that he was gambling on these events as he has an addiction. Looks at the varied events and varied stakes he places - it reeks of gambling addiction. Since when have rules mattered to those who are addicted to something? He did bet elsewhere, there were 15,000 bets on his account with 1260 on football.

 

I agree there should have been some sort of repercussion but an 18 month ban achieves absolutely nothing. 

 

Nah, I don't buy it tbh. I'm not saying he doesn't have a gambling addiction, but he knew what he was doing like. Addiction or not, gambling on your own team and placing bets on yourself is obviously against the rules and proper stupid. I don't buy this s*** about it being harsher because of who he is either, that's always his excuse because he's always f***ing up in some way.

 

I don't care who it is, it could be fucking Jack Colback. My point that the punishment achieves nothing still stands.

 

If he was solely betting on his own team/himself, then it would be different but I do think it's a case of him just betting on absolutely anything available.

 

That's a fair point, and probably expands beyond gambling. I find it hard to have any sympathy in this one this particular case, though.

[Nobody]

I just find it mental that Rio get 8 months for the Drugs ban and Barton gets 18 months for this.

 

 

 

Rio got 8 months for missing a drugs test, he didn't get a drugs ban.

 

Same thing imo.

 

Mental.

 

That's the idea behind it isn't it? You treat the missed drugs test as harsh as a failed one, otherwise you'd just skip the drugs test.

 

Nah I know. I think 8 months is fine. The original point was that 18 months for Barton compared to 8 months for a 'drug ban' is crazy, when it's not. The ban was for missing a drugs test, not failing one. Had he failed one he'd have been banned for a lot longer.

Missing a drugs test should be treated the same as failing one IMO.

 

Luckily the legal system doesn't.

Pretty sure it does in athletics and cross country skiing etc. Could be wrong, mind.

[BlueStar]

Opportunity to recycle this again I guess

 

[number9shirt]

Opportunity to recycle this again I guess

 

Joey Barton banned for 18 months because he will come in your face

[Bimpy474]

No sympathy whatsoever, he knew the rules and frankly, fuck him. He's his own worst enemy, as always.

[Kaizero]

I just find it mental that Rio get 8 months for the Drugs ban and Barton gets 18 months for this.

 

 

 

Rio got 8 months for missing a drugs test, he didn't get a drugs ban.

 

Same thing imo.

 

Mental.

 

That's the idea behind it isn't it? You treat the missed drugs test as harsh as a failed one, otherwise you'd just skip the drugs test.

 

Nah I know. I think 8 months is fine. The original point was that 18 months for Barton compared to 8 months for a 'drug ban' is crazy, when it's not. The ban was for missing a drugs test, not failing one. Had he failed one he'd have been banned for a lot longer.

Missing a drugs test should be treated the same as failing one IMO.

 

Luckily the legal system doesn't.

Pretty sure it does in athletics and cross country skiing etc. Could be wrong, mind.

 

 

Missing a drug test equals an admission of guilt within the context of professional sports, IMO.

[triggs]

 

 

I just find it mental that Rio get 8 months for the Drugs ban and Barton gets 18 months for this.

 

 

 

Rio got 8 months for missing a drugs test, he didn't get a drugs ban.

 

Same thing imo.

 

Mental.

 

That's the idea behind it isn't it? You treat the missed drugs test as harsh as a failed one, otherwise you'd just skip the drugs test.

 

Nah I know. I think 8 months is fine. The original point was that 18 months for Barton compared to 8 months for a 'drug ban' is crazy, when it's not. The ban was for missing a drugs test, not failing one. Had he failed one he'd have been banned for a lot longer.

Missing a drugs test should be treated the same as failing one IMO.

 

Luckily the legal system doesn't.

Pretty sure it does in athletics and cross country skiing etc. Could be wrong, mind.

 

 

Missing a drug test equals an admission of guilt within the context of professional sports, IMO.

Think you're allowed miss three in athletics. Think Mo Farah had missed two before the Olympics

[Figures 1-0 Football]

I have sympathy for Barton in the fact that I agree that having a gambling addiction is incredibly tough when combined with a love for football. The footballing authorities and clubs are more than happy to sell their soul to gambling companies in order to make money. Gambling companies exploit vulnerable addicts with constant adverts and opportunities to place bets. I mean fgs, usually before every TV kick off and at HT we have an advert giving us the latest odds on goalscorers and correct scores. Grounds are surrounded by bookmakers, odds and adverts.

 

However, he shouldn't have ever bet on a game that he is involved in. The fact that he did is the reason his ban is so lengthy. The amounts that he placed are irrelevant, they also need to set a clear precedent moving forward that players caught doing it will be harshly dealt with.

 

It's sad that the FA didn't give Barton the option of reducing his ban if he went through some sort of rehabilitation process. That would not only encourage him to get the help he quite clearly needs but also set a good example that the FA aren't just the bent, backstabbing bunch of 60 year old white men that we know they are.

[Collage]

Hope he's suspended from tweeting as well

[Foluwashola]

Can't help but feel slightly sorry for him reading his statement like. He's a thick bastard but 18 months is devoid of any common sense.

[Andymc1]

I have sympathy for Barton in the fact that I agree that having a gambling addiction is incredibly tough when combined with a love for football. The footballing authorities and clubs are more than happy to sell their soul to gambling companies in order to make money. Gambling companies exploit vulnerable addicts with constant adverts and opportunities to place bets. I mean fgs, usually before every TV kick off and at HT we have an advert giving us the latest odds on goalscorers and correct scores. Grounds are surrounded by bookmakers, odds and adverts.

 

However, he shouldn't have ever bet on a game that he is involved in. The fact that he did is the reason his ban is so lengthy. The amounts that he placed are irrelevant, they also need to set a clear precedent moving forward that players caught doing it will be harshly dealt with.

 

It's sad that the FA didn't give Barton the option of reducing his ban if he went through some sort of rehabilitation process. That would not only encourage him to get the help he quite clearly needs but also set a good example that the FA aren't just the bent, backstabbing bunch of 60 year old white men that we know they are.

 

I'm must be addicted given I read the "fgs" as first goalscorer when reading this post