Ivan Toney (now playing for Brentford)

[The Bonk]

Surprised it's not treated with the same scrutiny tobacco companies are. 

[Wullie]

3 hours ago, Mazzy said:

Looking at what Tripper did and what he got given as punishment then you'd hope Toney gets a longer ban. If anything I'd say, ban him from playing for the rest of the current season,  whack a fine on him and call it done.

 

Have I missed something? Are there details about what Toney has supposedly been betting on that I'm not aware of that would warrant a season ban? We know that Trippier gave inside information and encouraged his friends to profit from it - I share the view that if the bookies are going to use their own inside information to price bets like transfers, then fuck them if someone takes advantage the other way, but that's not the rules.

 

It's impossible to speculate on Toney without knowing exactly what he's done. The spectrum of wrongdoing for a footballer gambling on football is extremely broad and the number of bets he placed tells you absolutely nothing in isolation.

 

If he's been putting a hundred quid on an 1000/1 acca every weekend or having a punt on Spanish yellow cards, how on Earth would that warrant a longer ban than Trippier? 

[hakka]

7 minutes ago, Wullie said:

It's impossible to speculate on Toney without knowing exactly what he's done.

 

[swebat]

Yeah... no... see, that's the only time you can speculate. If you know exactly, then it's just facts... </pedantic>

[joeyt]

 

He's been pictured today in the tabloids partying with Rolando Aarons. Nice to see our former players still being mates

[Manxst]

39 minutes ago, Wullie said:

If he's been putting a hundred quid on an 1000/1 acca every weekend or having a punt on Spanish yellow cards, how on Earth would that warrant a longer ban than Trippier? 

Because at a base level, Trippier breached the regulations 4 times, and Toney has (potentially) breached 232 times? I’d presume that alone would warrant a higher punishment? Maybe? 

[gazza ladra]

7 hours ago, OCOCOL said:

why if I may ask? It’s a legitimate leisure pursuit and as the US have proved in the past prohibiting stuff that has a public demand rarely minimises the societal harm. Far better to regulate imho.

 

fwiw I’ll declare I have skin in the game as I work in the online gambling industry. 

RE: Prohibiting stuff rarely minimizes societal harm. I disagree. We don’t allow usury, Ponzi schemes, or heroin  There’s a lot of practices that we rightly ban. I don’t agree that such laws rarely benefit society. Prohibition is an obvious and egregious counter example. 

 

There is no public demand for online sports betting in California. The ballot initiative went down hard. We do have horse racing, card rooms, state lotteries, and gaming on American Indian casinos. Also we’re close enough to Nevada for Reno or Vegas to be cheap weekend trips.   I have never lived in a culture where online betting is a thing. I don’t see any benefits. 

[Wullie]

1 hour ago, Manxst said:

Because at a base level, Trippier breached the regulations 4 times, and Toney has (potentially) breached 232 times? I’d presume that alone would warrant a higher punishment? Maybe? 

 

Something like this though, punishment should be about how serious an individual breach of the rules is, not how many times a rule is breached. 

 

Does anybody really care if he's, for example, put 232 accumulators on over a number of years? Anything more than a couple of games and a fine would be ludicrously disproportionate in that instance. He could be putting a quid on at a time for all we know.

[Manxst]

4 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

Something like this though, punishment should be about how serious an individual breach of the rules is, not how many times a rule is breached. 

 

Does anybody really care if he's, for example, put 232 accumulators on over a number of years? Anything more than a couple of games and a fine would be ludicrously disproportionate in that instance. He could be putting a quid on at a time for all we know.

I personally don’t care what he’s done, unless he’s bet specifically on games that he’s had an influence on. However, I also think that even a quid at a time, that’s still worse than what Trippier did- it’s a more serious offence imo to gain personally from a breach of the rules that govern you, even though it could well be minuscule amounts. It’s been well publicised over the years that footballers aren’t allowed to bet, and he would know that. 

[James]

Didn’t someone on here make enough for a Florida holiday because someone at Spurs told him that Roeder was the new NUFC manager. Or have I recalled incorrectly?

[midds]

232 is a very specific number of bets to charge him with like

 

I'm thinking if they have charged him with placing exactly 232 bets then they know exactly what bets he's placed. It's way too precise to make me think they know 100% of what's gone on. The 50/1 red card thing is dynamite  

[James]

Worth noting that Toney started doing this while playing for us.

 

Many factors might have led to him doing this but the club needs to investigate and consider:

 

a) Are there any malign influences within NUFC that encouraged this behaviour at the time in whatever way, be it a first teamer or a youth coach who is still at the club?

 

b) is there a gap in the support that we give young players that still remains, which may have contributed to his alleged destructive behaviour?

 

c) did we send him to a club on loan without properly vetting their dressing room? What vetting processes do we now have in place?

[James]

Conversely we also sent Elliott Anderson on loan to play under a manager with a known gambling addiction/behavioural control issue. Was this appropriate?

[Joey Linton]

8 minutes ago, James said:

Worth noting that Toney started doing this while playing for us.

 

Many factors might have led to him doing this but the club needs to investigate and consider:

 

a) Are there any malign influences within NUFC that encouraged this behaviour at the time in whatever way, be it a first teamer or a youth coach who is still at the club?

 

b) is there a gap in the support that we give young players that still remains, which may have contributed to his alleged destructive behaviour?

 

c) did we send him to a club on loan without properly vetting their dressing room? What vetting processes do we now have in place?

No he's just been a complete dick.

[Wullie]

12 minutes ago, midds said:

The 50/1 red card thing is dynamite  

 

What's this?

[Manxst]

11 minutes ago, James said:

Worth noting that Toney started doing this while playing for us.

 

Many factors might have led to him doing this but the club needs to investigate and consider:

 

a) Are there any malign influences within NUFC that encouraged this behaviour at the time in whatever way, be it a first teamer or a youth coach who is still at the club?

 

b) is there a gap in the support that we give young players that still remains, which may have contributed to his alleged destructive behaviour?

 

c) did we send him to a club on loan without properly vetting their dressing room? What vetting processes do we now have in place?

He wasn’t technically playing for us at the time of the alleged first offence- he was at Scunthorpe, so I can’t see how much points a or possibly b can apply? 

[huss9]

23 minutes ago, James said:

Didn’t someone on here make enough for a Florida holiday because someone at Spurs told him that Roeder was the new NUFC manager. Or have I recalled incorrectly?

pardew

[midds]

14 hours ago, The Butcher said:

 

@Wullie

 

Unless this was all bullshit I've stupidly fallen for

[James]

3 minutes ago, Manxst said:

He wasn’t technically playing for us at the time of the alleged first offence- he was at Scunthorpe, so I can’t see how much points a or possibly b can apply? 

he still had interactions with people at our club however and we still had responsibility to look after him, he was our player. Was there cash betting at our club amongst players before his loan that he enjoyed too much?

 

were players swapping tips via WhatsApp?

 

were we not running suitable awareness courses?

 

we may well have had nothing to do with it, but we are doing our young players in particular a disservice if when now presented with information that there might have been a problem at the club in 2016/17 we don’t investigate to ensure that this problem has now been eradicated.

[Wullie]

Seems extremely tenuous to me @midds. I just looked up that red card, it was for a second yellow in the 95th minute that the referee (and the camera) didn't even see. The linesman gave it after Toney clashed off the ball with a Luton player who got a straight red for shoving Toney in the face. I reckon I'd make it a bit more obvious if I'd bet the farm on it.

 

 

The thing I always think whenever there's an accusation of a player taking a deliberate card for money (Xhaka was accused of it at Leeds last season) is that loads of people look back on it and go "omg how did we not realise it, that was so deliberate" without taking into account that almost every card looks deliberate if you want it to. Look at the last 5 minutes of Newcastle vs Chelsea and you could easily construct a case that half our squad was on the take, including the subs.

[midds]

5 minutes ago, Wullie said:

Seems extremely tenuous to me @midds. I just looked up that red card, it was for a second yellow in the 95th minute that the referee (and the camera) didn't even see. The linesman gave it after Toney clashed off the ball with a Luton player who got a straight red for shoving Toney in the face. I reckon I'd make it a bit more obvious if I'd bet the farm on it.

 

 

The thing I always think whenever there's an accusation of a player taking a deliberate card for money (Xhaka was accused of it at Leeds last season) is that loads of people look back on it and go "omg how did we not realise it, that was so deliberate" without taking into account that almost every card looks deliberate if you want it to. Look at the last 5 minutes of Newcastle vs Chelsea and you could easily construct a case that half our squad was on the take, including the subs.

 

 

 

Can't disagree with any of that, I was just taking it at face value and the red he got followed by an immediate cessation of his bets as a huge red flag. I've obviously got no proof or evidence of anything but if he's been charged then he's obviously in a big bit of bother but I'd like to hear more details of exactly what bets he's placed and I'm pretty sure it'll all come out in the wash  

[jonny1403]

On 16/11/2022 at 21:32, Dokko said:

 

Reading tge fa charges website, there is 2 a month for an E8. Owners, directors, players and managers. All sorts getting charged yet you don't hear 24 cases of long term suspensions a year. 

 

Last noticeable one was Barton and that was ares ago...plus I think the fa had had enough of him by then. Easy excuse to finish off his career.

The last noticeable one was our own right back less than 3 years ago 

[Dokko]

4 minutes ago, jonny1403 said:

The last noticeable one was our own right back less than 3 years ago 

 

Multiple cases a month, and last one which caught the headlines is 3 years ago. Point proven really. Unless match fixing or betting on his own team is involved, it won't be a ban.

 

Do think trippier was hard down by. He should be able to tell people he is moving, and betting companies shouldn't run bets on next club. Imagine not being able to tell your family your about to move countries and the 1st they here of it is on sky sports news, just to pacify gambling companies?

 

 

Edited November 18, 2022 by Dokko

[jonny1403]

Just now, Dokko said:

 

Multiple cases a month, and last one which caught the headlines is 3 years ago. Point proven really. Unless match fixing or betting on his own team is involved, it won't be a ban.

 

Do think trippier was hard down by. He should be able to tell people he is moving, and betting companies should run bets on next club. 

What do you mean multiple cases a month? Of Premier league - league one footballers?

 

Completely agree on Trippier. Like any of us telling a mate we've got a new job.

[Groundhog63]

1 minute ago, jonny1403 said:

Completely agree on Trippier. Like any of us telling a mate we've got a new job.

I get the "insider dealing" aspect of that particular type of bet but it's canny ridiculous in reality. 

I mean you can't NOT tell your family, friends, window cleaner, school, Royal Mail, neighbours, marching powder dealer etc etc that you're moving. Surely ?