Mail Online

TONEY ‘ADDICTED TO GAMBLING,’ BOMBSHELL DOCUMENT REVEALS

By MATT HUGHES

IVAN TONEY bet on his own club to lose 13 times, lied to the FA to cover it up and only avoided a longer ban because he is a ‘gambling addict’. The full extent of the Brentford striker’s betting on football, first revealed by Sportsmail in November, emerged yesterday when the FA published written reasons for the eight-month ban he received last week. The extraordinary document reveals that the FA pushed for a minimum 12-month ban due to Toney’s prolific breaches over a four-year period. His punishment was set at 15 months and reduced to 11 after his guilty plea, then cut again to eight months after an independent commission heard evidence from a psychiatrist that he was addicted to gambling and needs help. The England striker pleaded guilty to 232 rule breaches and admitted he had ‘repeatedly lied’ in an interview with the

FA before being charged. Toney told them ‘time after time’ he did not bet on football, before conceding he had used third parties to place bets for him and deleted evidence from his phone.

Toney’s betting spanned the seasons between February 2017 and January 2021, when he was registered at Newcastle, Peterborough and Brentford, as well as spending time on loan at Scunthorpe and Wigan.

The 27-year-old had been charged by the FA with 262 gambling breaches, but 30 were dropped.

Of the 232 bets Toney admitted to placing:

13 bets were made on his own club to lose, although he did not play in any of those games and 11 bets were against Newcastle when he was on loan elsewhere. The other two involved a Championship match between Wigan and Aston Villa when Toney was at Wigan, but not in the matchday squad;

15 bets were placed on Toney to score at a time when it was not public knowledge he would be playing, thus potentially benefitting from inside information;

16 were on his own team to win in 15 different matches, of which he played in 11;

126 bets were on matches in competitions his club were competing in at the time, with 29 involving the club he was playing for.

In their judgment, the commission make clear that Toney’s case did not involve match or spot-fixing, but did conclude there was sufficient evidence that he knew betting on football is prohibited.

‘The present case is not one of match-fixing,’ writes panel chair David Casement KC. ‘If it was, the charges would have been pursued under different provisions.

‘There is no evidence that Mr Toney did or was even in a position to influence his own team to lose when he placed bets against them winning — he was not in the squad or eligible to play at the time… (however) the reason for using third parties and their betting accounts was to conceal football betting from the FA in case there was ever an investigation.’

The FA had sought to delay Toney’s suspension until the start of next season to increase its impact on the player, although this move was rejected by the commission.

The evidence given by psychiatrist Dr Philip Hopley that Toney is suffering from a gambling addiction appears to have been crucial in reducing the length of the ban, as well as the fact that it started as soon as he was found guilty on May 17, meaning he will theoretically be able to return to action on January 17, 2024.

Toney is banned from training until September 17, however, and cannot play any friendly matches until his suspension has been lifted, so is unlikely to be fit enough for a first-team return until significantly later.

The findings also state that while Toney has stopped betting on football, he continues to bet on other sports.

‘The commission finds that a significant reduction should be made to reflect the diagnosed gambling addiction identified by Dr Hopley,’ the report states. ‘The lack of control the player has in respect of gambling is clearly a reflection of his diagnosed gambling addiction.

‘The FA invited the commission to order that the suspension begin at the commencement of next season given the player would not be playing in any event over the summer break and therefore a suspension is meaningless to that extent.

‘Alternatively, the FA contended a period of suspension could be added on to reflect the lack of football activity over the summer. The commission does not accept the premise behind that submission, namely that it is appropriate to tailor a period of suspension around the ability of a player to actually play football. The period of suspension therefore began immediately after the decision was notified.’

Brentford have confirmed Toney will not appeal and have offered the player their full support, while the PFA are also providing assistance.

‘The club will now be doing everything possible to provide support to Ivan and his family to deal with the issues raised in this case,’ a club statement read.

‘We consider this matter closed and look forward to welcoming Ivan back to training in September.’

Football

en-gb

2023-05-27T07:00:00.0000000Z

2023-05-27T07:00:00.0000000Z

https://mailonline.pressreader.com/article/282819310585198

dmg media (UK)