18 month ban for Barton

[EIM]

Joey Barton's career essentially over as he receives an 18 month ban for gambling offences. Meanwhile the FA still has an official gambling partner in Ladbrokes.

Can't have it both ways, lads.

[Ray de Galles]

18 month ban for Barton

Very valid point in his statement :

"If the FA is truly serious about tackling the culture of gambling in football, it needs to look at its own dependence on the gambling companies, their role in football and in sports broadcasting, rather than just blaming the players who place a bet."

[Guy Profumo]

18 month ban for Barton

EIM wrote: Joey Barton's career essentially over as he receives an 18 month ban for gambling offences. Meanwhile the FA still has an official gambling partner in Ladbrokes.

Can't have it both ways, lads.

Something not lost on Mr Barton himself -

http://www.joeybarton.com/betting-statement/

That all means this is not an easy environment in which to try to stop gambling, or even to encourage people within the sport that betting is wrong. It is like asking a recovering alcoholic to spend all his time in a pub or a brewery. If the FA is serious about tackling gambling I would urge it to reconsider its own dependence on the gambling industry. I say that knowing that every time I pull on my team’s shirt, I am advertising a betting company.

[Crusoe]

18 month ban for Barton

I hadn't realised we'd implemented an 'Ignore Joey Barton betting statement' filter...

[kiwicherry]

18 month ban for Barton

Outspoken? Controversial character? Recent media interest?
Oh fuck, the BBC are signing himup as a pundit as I type, aren't they?

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

18 month ban for Barton

That statement on Barton's website seems impressive and persuasive to me. Very well written indeed.

I wish somebody would ban Ray sodding Winstone from telly for 18 months, or preferably 18 years, for his role in the Bet 365 adverts.

[Satchmo Distel]

18 month ban for Barton

WSC has contained betting advertising in the past.

[Snake Plissken]

18 month ban for Barton

Satchmo Distel wrote: WSC has contained betting advertising in the past.

I think it is virtually impossible not to in this day and age. Gambling companies are throwing money at football teams, IIRC, Fun88 sponsored Burnley almost double what they get from firms outside the Premier League and Dafabet are chucking in £1m for this year. They also had a noticeable increase on the pitchside advertising for the United match this weekend, promoting their foray into Kenya, and Watford sponsoers (Bet138?) also made an appearance.

As for the man himself, obviously the ban is disappointing in length but I have no idea what the "right" length is. 18 months for 1,200 offences seems reasonable in itself, though I don't know how it compares. I guess that someone such as Barton had to see his career end this way due to the power of Narrative, he was never going to be able to hang his boots up at the end of a season.

As a Burnley fan, I think he has been nothing but completely exemplary on and off the pitch. Scored goals, kept his cool under severe provocation, was a wise head driving the team to promotion and probable Premier League safety. Didn't bet while with us, no red cards, no "incidents", just commitment and professionalism and success and representing my club well. An anomaly in his career, probably, but I'll always have fond memories of the guy and thank him for what he did for my club. Fans from his other clubs or the wider world in general will undoubtedly be less charitable but it is the way of things.

[Incandenza]

18 month ban for Barton

He explains that he placed bets on his own team to lose at a time when "when the FA were not nearly as hard on gambling as they are now" and that he only did so when he was not in the squad. But was placing bets on your own team against the rules back then, as it is now? Because if so, then what the fuck was he doing?

I also liked this: "The average bet was just over £150, many were for only a few pounds"

Well, if many were only for a few pounds, but the average was just over £150, then there must have been many that were for quite a few pounds more than that if there were many at a small amount. Not sure what he's trying to argue about there.

He's right to point out hypocrisy, but it's not like this is hypocrisy that was just discovered and that he didn't know that he was doing anything wrong. Is it a stupid rule if the league is profiting from gambling advertising? Maybe. But it is a rule that he knew about. If less than 10% of his bets were on football, then it seems it would have been even easier to avoid being in this mess.

[Guy Profumo]

18 month ban for Barton

Crusoe wrote: I hadn't realised we'd implemented an 'Ignore Joey Barton betting statement' filter...

Oh I do so apologise for offending your sensibilities by cross-posting with RdG.

[Kevin S]

18 month ban for Barton

Incandenza wrote: He explains that he placed bets on his own team to lose at a time when "when the FA were not nearly as hard on gambling as they are now" and that he only did so when he was not in the squad. But was placing bets on your own team against the rules back then, as it is now? Because if so, then what the fuck was he doing?

I also liked this: "The average bet was just over £150, many were for only a few pounds"

Well, if many were only for a few pounds, but the average was just over £150, then there must have been many that were for quite a few pounds more than that if there were many at a small amount. Not sure what he's trying to argue about there.

He's right to point out hypocrisy, but it's not like this is hypocrisy that was just discovered and that he didn't know that he was doing anything wrong. Is it a stupid rule if the league is profiting from gambling advertising? Maybe. But it is a rule that he knew about. If less than 10% of his bets were on football, then it seems it would have been even easier to avoid being in this mess.

I don't think he's trying to dispute the charge, but the length of the ban. He points out that the only other players to have been banned for more than 12 months are those who were found to be betting on matches that they were taking part in.

[caja-dglh]

18 month ban for Barton

Barton has been trying to worm his way around established rules his whole career. It is about time he got himself in water too deep for him to escape.

[Incandenza]

18 month ban for Barton

Kevin S wrote: I don't think he's trying to dispute the charge, but the length of the ban. He points out that the only other players to have been banned for more than 12 months are those who were found to be betting on matches that they were taking part in.

Does the statute say that you can't place a bet on a game that you are playing in, or on your team?

But honestly, it shouldn't be that hard to follow: don't place a bet on your team to lose, no matter what.

[cantagalo]

18 month ban for Barton

This shows that Barton bet on matches that he was playing in, both at Man City and Newcastle. He didn't bet on his team to lose but bets on the first goalscorer could conceivably have influenced the game.

And it shows he's a really shit gambler.

[Wouter D]

18 month ban for Barton

Incandenza wrote: I also liked this: "The average bet was just over £150, many were for only a few pounds"

Well, if many were only for a few pounds, but the average was just over £150, then there must have been many that were for quite a few pounds more than that if there were many at a small amount.

Actually, no. One outrageously large bet can offset many bets of only a few pounds to end up with an average of 150.

[Guy Profumo]

18 month ban for Barton

Wouter D wrote:

I also liked this: "The average bet was just over £150, many were for only a few pounds"

Well, if many were only for a few pounds, but the average was just over £150, then there must have been many that were for quite a few pounds more than that if there were many at a small amount.

Actually, no. One outrageously large bet can offset many bets of only a few pounds to end up with an average of 150.

And what does he mean by "average"? Does he mean, er, "mean", or "median"?

[Crusoe]

18 month ban for Barton

Guy Profumo wrote:

I hadn't realised we'd implemented an 'Ignore Joey Barton betting statement' filter...

Oh I do so apologise for offending your sensibilities by cross-posting with RdG.

Relax, it was just a silly little tease. If it bothered you then I apologise.

[Guy Profumo]

18 month ban for Barton

Crusoe wrote:

I hadn't realised we'd implemented an 'Ignore Joey Barton betting statement' filter...

Oh I do so apologise for offending your sensibilities by cross-posting with RdG.

Relax, it was just a silly little tease. If it bothered you then I apologise.

What do you think?

[Crusoe]

18 month ban for Barton

Guy Profumo wrote:

I hadn't realised we'd implemented an 'Ignore Joey Barton betting statement' filter...

Oh I do so apologise for offending your sensibilities by cross-posting with RdG.

Relax, it was just a silly little tease. If it bothered you then I apologise.

What do you think?

I've no idea. The downside of message board communication, I guess.

[Guy Profumo]

18 month ban for Barton

I thought the high handed tone and faux umbrage enough to convey my meaning.

[anton pulisov]

18 month ban for Barton

Guy Profumo wrote:

I also liked this: "The average bet was just over £150, many were for only a few pounds"

Well, if many were only for a few pounds, but the average was just over £150, then there must have been many that were for quite a few pounds more than that if there were many at a small amount.

Actually, no. One outrageously large bet can offset many bets of only a few pounds to end up with an average of 150.

And what does he mean by "average"? Does he mean, er, "mean", or "median"?

I think he reckoned he had a 95.4% chance of not being caught.

However, Joey Barton is not normal.

[Patrick Thistle]

18 month ban for Barton

He had an account in his own name, using his own credit card. Not exactly trying to hide it.

Matthew Etherington on Five Live yesterday said that bookies deliberately targeted young players at training grounds offering them accounts.

[Nefertiti2]

18 month ban for Barton

10 of the sponsors in the Premeier League are gambling firms

7 WEST HAM Betway (Malta) £6m 3.5 year deal (2015-18)
10 SUNDERLAND Dafabet (Philippines) £6m 2 Year deal (2015-2017)
11 SWANSEA CITY BetEest £5m 1 year contract (2016-17)
12 CRYSTAL PALCE Mansion (Gibraltar) £5m 1 Years (2016-17)
13 STOKE CITY Bet365 (UK) £3.5m 3 Year deal (2015-18)
14 Hull City SportPesa (Kenya) 3m 3 year deal (2016-19)
15 WEST BROM UK-K8.com (Asia) £2.8m 2 years (2016-18)
1
17 Burnley FC Dafabet £2m 2 year deal (2016-18)
18 WATFORD 138.com (China) £1m 1 Year (2016-17)
19 AFC BOURNMOUTH Mansion (Gibraltar

Ramsdens who sponsor Middlesborough are a pawnbroker - whose services can be enlisted once one of the other sponsors have taken all your money

In the championship -or rather the Skybet championship 7 are sponsored by betting companies (3 BY 888BET) and additional two are sponsored by loan shark companies

[Guy Profumo]

18 month ban for Barton

Nefertiti2 wrote: 10 of the sponsors in the Premeier League are gambling firms

7 WEST HAM Betway (Malta) £6m 3.5 year deal (2015-18)
10 SUNDERLAND Dafabet (Philippines) £6m 2 Year deal (2015-2017)
11 SWANSEA CITY BetEest £5m 1 year contract (2016-17)
12 CRYSTAL PALCE Mansion (Gibraltar) £5m 1 Years (2016-17)
13 STOKE CITY Bet365 (UK) £3.5m 3 Year deal (2015-18)
14 Hull City SportPesa (Kenya) 3m 3 year deal (2016-19)
15 WEST BROM UK-K8.com (Asia) £2.8m 2 years (2016-18)
1
17 Burnley FC Dafabet £2m 2 year deal (2016-18)
18 WATFORD 138.com (China) £1m 1 Year (2016-17)
19 AFC BOURNMOUTH Mansion (Gibraltar

Ramsdens who sponsor Middlesborough are a pawnbroker - whose services can be enlisted once one of the other sponsors have taken all your money

In the championship -or rather the Skybet championship 7 are sponsored by betting companies (3 BY 888BET) and additional two are sponsored by loan shark companies

Oo! Oo! Miss! Miss!

[Levin]

18 month ban for Barton

They aren't the fish and chip people?

I wonder if I was more aware of what sponsors did in the past? I guess there must be a sweet spot between knowing exactly what a company sells and just seeing a name without any context.