Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
number9shirt Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Incredibly harsh on Joey pretty much ending his playing career for him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/24060801 SFA clearly more lenient than their English counterparts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 The rules are wrong. There should be nothing wrong with backing yourself to win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
healthyaddiction Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
healthyaddiction Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 The rules are wrong. There should be nothing wrong with backing yourself to win. But he backed us to lose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samptime29 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. How's it mental? To miss a drugs test 3 times, you've either on drugs and trying to evade, or you're so incredibly stupid, that you deserve to punished like you've been taking drugs. Absolutely no excuse for missing 3 drugs tests. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 The rules are wrong. There should be nothing wrong with backing yourself to win. What about backing yourself as FGS? Or if your manager wants to play for a draw in the dying minutes but you've got a bet that you want to win? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Imagine earning 30-40k a week and sticking 3 quid on yourself to score to win like thirty quid. The guy clearly has an addiction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Imagine earning 30-40k a week and sticking 3 quid on yourself to score to win like thirty quid. The guy clearly has an addiction. Yep, and this is the reason why the FA have handled the situation horrendously. Hardly surprising like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. How's it mental? To miss a drugs test 3 times, you've either on drugs and trying to evade, or you're so incredibly stupid, that you deserve to punished like you've been taking drugs. Absolutely no excuse for missing 3 drugs tests. 3 times The punishment isn't what I was referring to, it's the bit where you equate missing a drugs test as being the same thing as a drugs ban, when it obviously isn't. Had he been given a drugs ban, it would have been a lot longer than 8 months. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest palnese Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 'A bet' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Deserves a ban but 18 months is ridiculously harsh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 'A bet' times by 1260 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 '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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 '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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 '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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 '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? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now