der Berliner 3,471 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 (edited) As I said dB.... Disagree all you like with the rules or indeed the punishment but I don't think you can call it a minor offence. ... I can and I did :devil: Make no mistake, I can accept your stance on this and your application of "strict liability", only that I haven't seen anyone being sacked for this. And it is a "minor offence" compared to (sic!) other people's betting charges, not least with us, Black and Simonsen. I was not exactly thinking of breach of contracts and legislations and whatnot. Edited October 15, 2016 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 I can and I did :devil: Make no mistake, I can accept your stance on this and your application of "strict liability", only that I haven't seen anyone being sacked for this. And it is a "minor offence" compared to (sic!) other people's betting charges, not least with us, Black and Simonsen. I was not exactly thinking of breach of contracts and legislations and whatnot. Lol. Not to labour the point but the moment that Barton placed his first bet made him every bit as bad as Simonsen and Black, from a legislation perspective. Makes no difference whether he bet once or one thousand times, the first bet puts him in exactly the same position as those two. Morally I agree, at least with Black, because he was betting on Rangers games in which he was involved IIRC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 If it was only one bet, you could have some sympathy for Barton. It wasn't though, it allegedly was many, he knew what he was doing and the result if he got caught. Bang to rights, he gave the club an open goal, should they decide to shoot, which looks like they are taking the shot to get rid of him on the back of this and the original suspension. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Irrelevant. The player asked for a postponement to his disciplinary hearing from the Club. Bringing up the SFA charge is completely irrelevant to what happens between Club and player. I think you need to re-read the Club statement. The meeting due to take place was between Club and player, nothing to do with SFA. And Barton asked for the Club to postpone the meeting. For you to then take the quantum leap to blame Barton's request on Warburton is highly unfair. You seem, at least to me, to be suggesting that the extension is because of the SFA hearing. The reality is that Joey Barton asked the Club to postpone his internal club disciplinary hearing.... and you have laid the blame at the managers feet. Incorrectly in my opinion. Sorry Craig but it is you that has got it wrong. He had a meeting with Rangers on Thursday because of his meeting with the SFA on Wednesday so it is totally relevant. He cancelled the meeting with Rangers because he cancelled the meeting with the SFA. He served his sentence for his trouble with Rangers and now he is being punished before he has been found guilty of anything. This stinks from Rangers side and for me there is only one man responsible. If Warburton wanted Barton in the team he would be playing it is as simple as that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 If it was only one bet, you could have some sympathy for Barton. It wasn't though, it allegedly was many, he knew what he was doing and the result if he got caught. Bang to rights, he gave the club an open goal, should they decide to shoot, which looks like they are taking the shot to get rid of him on the back of this and the original suspension. Did he know? What are the rules in England? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 (edited) Did he know? What are the rules in England? Two years ago Barton tweeted Piers Morgan saying he couldn't do as Piers asked as he (Barton) wasn't allowed to bet on any games - I think it was about a charity match - in yet another of his stupid twitter "battles". Piers retweeted that a fortnight or so ago. Edited October 15, 2016 by SteveC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacK1950 2,278 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Have heard the following scenario;- On training ground Barton throwing his weight around against younger signings who were told by Halliday not to put up with and give back as good as getting,words exchanged and Weir intervened and got bad mouthful from Barton. Witnessed by Warburton who Barton then remonstrated with and was called to office and ban handed out. Reading subsequent messages from Warburton it seems that the board are dealing with situation. IMO Barton must go as no player is greater than club and bad apples have reputation of causing others to rot. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 1,691 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Did he know? What are the rules in England? Think the rules in England are pretty much identical though it's relatively new, introduced for the start of the 2014/15 season. All professional players in English football will be banned from betting on any matches anywhere in the world from next season. The ruling, which was first revealed by Sportsmail's Charles Sale in February, was ratified at the Football Association's AGM on Wednesday and will apply to any player in the top eight tiers of the English league system, Press Association Sport understands. It replaces the current rules which only banned players from betting on competitions in which their club was involved. Tottenham winger Andros Townsend, Newcastle's Dan Gosling - who is to join Bournemouth next season - and Cameron Jerome, who played on loan at Crystal Palace from Stoke last season, are among those to have been found to have breached current betting regulations. Players will also be prohibited from passing on inside information to a third party who uses that information for betting. The FA confirmed the ban would start from August 1 and also cover betting on new managers or player transfers. It said in a statement: 'A worldwide ban on betting on football will come into force from 1 August 2014 for certain participants in English football. 'Participants covered by the ban will be prohibited from betting, either directly or indirectly, on any football match or competition that takes place anywhere in the world. 'The changes to FA rules from the start of the 2014/15 season will also effect a worldwide prohibition on betting on any other football-related matter. 'For example, the transfer of players, employment of managers or team selection. The passing of inside information to somebody that uses the information for betting remains prohibited.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2635217/Footballers-playing-England-not-allowed-bet-ANY-matches-worldwide.html 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,471 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 I think every player in the British isles know the rules and as probably every other player places a bet, it has become an unspoken rule that if you are not being caught, you won't get punished. Rule or not, if players get caught they will be spoken to by the associations and possibly fined and banned, but sacked from the club ... haven't seen that in years. Here's an article about some English cases ... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/03/30/martin-demichelis-man-city-defender-charged-for-betting-offences/ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Sorry Craig but it is you that has got it wrong. He had a meeting with Rangers on Thursday because of his meeting with the SFA on Wednesday so it is totally relevant. He cancelled the meeting with Rangers because he cancelled the meeting with the SFA. He served his sentence for his trouble with Rangers and now he is being punished before he has been found guilty of anything. This stinks from Rangers side and for me there is only one man responsible. If Warburton wanted Barton in the team he would be playing it is as simple as that. You are completely wrong and even post it yourself. Explain to me how you can possibly make the quantum leap that the CLUB are waiting to sack him when the PLAYER requested the postponement of the meeting. You are completely wrong. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.