Does seem strange these absolute rules re gambling and football, if say jurgen klopp put £1,000 on liverpool to win the league with the intention of donating the money to charity, whats it to do with the FA? its not match fixing.
Seems like del boy barry put a bet on the striker being the leading goal scorer to partly fund any bonus payments the player would have received for doing so, its not healthy I guess because it might have meant the player being picked for every game regardless of form, being never substituted etc.. so it could be against the player's and peterborough utd's interest. I can see that so the wrap on the knuckles is justified.
I quite like old barry, brings a lot of colour to a game that at the top level is getting very dry and corporate.
In your specific example there would be no harm, but there are thousands more when it could easily be fixed, especially with the advent of Betfair and being able to lay bets. For example, the manager of Spurs could lay Kane to be an anytime scorer in some low FA cup game. Kane would obviously be 1/2 or so to score at anytime, then keep him on the bench till the 92nd minute and they are 5-0 up. Bets stand as he went on the pitch, manager cleans up. A keeper backs both teams to score in the same sort of game, where the odds are quite high as no one expects the non league team to score. Keeper fumbles at a shot, keeper cleans up. Impossible to prove he did it on purpose.
It would be impossible for the FA to check every single bet put on by people who have decision making roles/players, so best option is to ban them from betting completely.
It still goes on as it's impossible to police. Get a friend of a friend to put the bet on etc.
Thanks Col, I've heard about laying bets through betfair etc... but never fully understood how it works, is it basically turning yourself into a 'mini' bookmaker in the market and you win if the bet loses So in the above example with kane, poch has control over the likelihood of kane scoring, a bit like insider knowledge ++
I wonder did that peterborough player finish top scorer, and if hadn't would the bookmaker have just kept Fry's £1,000 and pretend it never happened?
I agree though there has to be a zero tolerance position otherwise it would be rife, and apparently many footballers top level and bottom do like to gamble, poker and the odd slot maybe
I agree with Dave, back in the day this was common practice - teams backing themselves to be promoted so they can offset parachute payments etc.
I can understand why there needs to be a blanket ban but it’s a shame. He didn’t back his team to get relegated or a player to be substituted etc. I guess the logistics of filtering out the abusable markets just isn’t worth it.