Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It's obviously not great because it's a 55m investment and another option in the middle of park, one who you would like to think would come good, but the news hasn't bothered me as much as I thought. He hasn't been here long enough to get an emotional connection like say if it was Joelinton, and bar Villa, he hasn't really had that much of an impact and not as disastrous as if it was a Bruno, Botman, or maybe even Gordon. Not ideal of course, but I'm not as concerned as I thought I would be.

 

Hopefully he can get the help needed, become the best English speaker of all time in his spare time, and repays the club for sticking by him when he finally does return.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, leffe186 said:


The issue with that is what other pressure do you put on? If you stand to win £500K do you offer a ref or an opposing player £250K to throw the game?

 

I agree in principle but see why they would just ban it full stop.

 

Also what does it mean when he doesn't bet on them? 

 

And when he's a couple million in the hole what happens then? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ohmelads said:

 

I'd be very surprised if the club don't escalate this using whatever avenues they can. The bets took place while he was at Milan. The investigation surely started before the sale, and that would mean the Italian authorities have watched Milan secure an enormous fee in a sale that stunned their own fans. It's all massively suspicious and there's a clear motive. Of course Milan knew what they were doing, and the Italian authorities will be in the spotlight as well. Proving it is another matter, but presumably we owe Milan in instalments and I would expect we will try to make it as slow and as difficult as possible for them to get their money.

 

I sincerely hope you're right. We've done nothing wrong here, if there's any chance we can get some compensation then we must pursue it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

It's plausible that Milan did know, nobody knows. My point is that every transfer of a top player away from a club could be subject to 'why would they sell him', but they do time and time again. 

My point is we need to be smarter about it in future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s hard to imagine any sort of commercial contract where one party’s non-disclosure of an ongoing criminal investigation would not be grounds for some sort of remedy, but the sports world is nuts so who knows.

 

Most likely outcome is that we raise a stink with Milan and it gets settled out of court imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, leffe186 said:


The issue with that is what other pressure do you put on? If you stand to win £500K do you offer a ref or an opposing player £250K to throw the game?

 

I agree in principle but see why they would just ban it full stop.

Of course, I’m not saying it should be allowed, far from it. To allow it would be asking for trouble, exactly like you describe.

 

But, if we’re ranking degrees of offence, clearly betting on your own team to win, would appear to be a lesser offence than on them to lose, which there would probably be no coming back from at any club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, ohmelads said:

Investigations like this don't just come about overnight. The Italian authorities have allowed Milan to sell him for a huge fee right before going ahead with this. The timing stinks and Milan will be laughing all the way to the bank, as well as whoever's getting the kickbacks. We've been had.

 

Not sure what the club can do about it.

Italian authorities may well be open to being sued if the investigation was ongoing prior to the sale of the player, and they were aware he was one of the components, where does leave Italian soccer bearing in mind upto 40 were mentioned by the plea bargainer I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, GeordieDazzler said:

If he has been betting on his own team even if it’s to win then 12 months is a ridiculously short ban. 

 

Why is it? What's he actually done that's so despicably wrong? If it's proven that he's actually unlawfully intervened in the natural course of sporting competition then yes, of course, that would be deplorable; you could argue that anyone doing that should be banned for life, let alone a year, two years, three years. I presume that the law exists to prevent precisely that type of maleficence... but I don't see how chucking Milan on his acca, as you or I would, is jeopardising the sport's integrity. Match fixing is one thing, gambling on your own team's result is another. 

 

I'm not saying he shouldn't get a ban, just that the level of punishment is incredibly severe given the 'crime'. Particularly with the addition of not being allowed to train.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Deuce said:

”okay, I did bet on Milan games while I played for the club, but I ONLY bet on us to win” does seem a bit convenient.

 

Considering the story has changed multiple times in the past two days, probably best to wait and see before casting judgment.

 

 

Does seem escalate with every iteration. Tomorrow it will be "Yes, I threw some matches but no important ones" culminating in "OK OK I threw Champions League matches too".

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Memphis said:

 

I see people saying this but it's simply not the case. Any athlete betting on themselves or their team to win sends a message to the rest of the gambling world - and an even bigger message when they don't bet on their team to win. It becomes clear within bookmaking circles how Tonali feels about his team's chances based on how much - or if - he bets. 

 

And obviously he has access to all sorts of proprietary information, it's inexcusably daft to do. I sympathise with his addiction issues and I hope he gets help. But he will be and should be punished severely. 


Good points. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TRon said:

That's all we need, Paul Merson chucking his hat in the ring.

 

"Ooh! It's an illness!"

 

Ok fine, don't prosecute him then, get him some treatment instead.

 

Don't see much wrong with what's he's said tbh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, MrRaspberryJam said:


hard not to read any of this post in David Brent’s voice mind. 

 

 

:lol:

 

The point was, it might be an "illness" but what he's done is illegal. Otherwise we could just get him help and leave it at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...