SFA probe Joey Barton on claims he broke footie player betting rules

[craig 5,199]

Just on the radio there that he is alledged to have bet on C****c to lose heavily against Barca last week

 

That isn't betting, that is an investment

 

I think everyone, bar the Celtic fans, would have made that bet.

 

In fact, given the performance and result, it would appear that most of the Celtic team took that bet too

[Juancornetto 1]

Mate of mine had a tenner on 6-0 @ 14/.....

 

[pete 2,499]

Scottish rules are no betting on football, period, I believe.

 

How does that betting on a period go. Pick a girl any Girl.

[JFK-1 1,674]

I know a guy who was playing for a current Scottish league 1 side though they may have been in a lower tier at the time who was betting against his own team in matches he was playing in. Currently playing Junior football. He was a shade smarter than Joey. Other people were placing his bets.

Edited September 20, 2016 by JFK-1

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Stupid rule but hey ho.

[ian1964 10,416]

Here we go.............................

[ian1964 10,416]

THE risks to Rangers of messy and embarrassing legal action by controversial suspended star Joey Barton are too great for the club not to reach an arrangement with the player, a solicitor at one of Scotland's leading employment law firms has said.

 

Michael Briggs, of Thompsons Solicitors, said any pay-off could come close to matching Barton's notice period if Rangers' directors wanted to avoid damaging tribunals or a public court hearing.

 

But Mr Briggs said that while the club would, in such circumstances, expect the player to sign a confidentiality agreement were his contract to be terminated, the former England star's personality cast doubt on the value of such a clause.

 

The comments come as it emerged Barton had been suspended by the club for a further three weeks on top of the seven-day sanction previously handed following a training-ground bust-up.

 

The Scottish Football Association is also investigating allegations he gambled on matches amid reports suggesting he placed money on the outcome of a Celtic match.

 

SFA rules prohibit players, coaches, referees and club officials in Scotland from betting on football anywhere in the world.

 

Mr Briggs explained: "Under the law of contract, either party is entitled to cancel the contract subject to any provisions requiring the terminating party either need to give notice of termination or to make a payment in lieu of that period.

 

"This will almost certainly be the case in a high profile professional footballer’s contract. If the club want to terminate Joey Barton’s contract, the only way they can avoid paying the notice is where the termination has been in response to a repudiatory breach of contract committed by the player.

 

"I do not think you can point to what has gone on in the training ground as having been sufficient to justify summary termination of the player’s contract.

 

"Whether that would have been sufficient, I don't know, however as the latest suspension certainly seems punitive rather than precautionary, it would indicate that the club has taken what it deems to be appropriate action in relation to the incident and has therefore waived its right to terminate without notice.

 

"If (the extra three weeks is punitive) then the club will need to find something else on him to justify summary termination which that makes today's betting revelations all the more curious.

 

"These new allegations may entitle Rangers to terminate the contract without notice (if) Barton hasn't abided by the terms of the SFA rules. If, in the employer's assessment, this breach was sufficient to terminate the contract without notice and they are not bound by what they've done in the past."

 

But he added: "However, if Joey Barton were to launch his own litigation, how Rangers has acted previously in similar circumstances and where contracts were not terminated will be relevant, although not fatal to either case.

 

"Another option open to Barton could be an employment tribunal. He's not had two year's service so couldn't go for unfair dismissal however he may have a remedy under the Equality Act 2010 if the club decide to terminate his contract on the basis of his breach of the SFA gambling regulations.

 

"Joey Barton is a high profile Roman Catholic. He may be able to point to the Ian Black situation where another player was found to have breached the SFA gambling regulations and did not have his contract terminated.

 

"If he could successfully establish that the reason for this less favourable treatment was his Roman Catholicism, he will have a claim for direct religious discrimination. That might not be a good or indeed winnable argument but the threat of it (and of it causing sufficient embarrassment to the club) could secure a bigger pay-off.

 

"The notice period could be substantial. Rangers got him on a free so what they saved on a transfer could have gone on an enhanced contract, perhaps even including a notice period of up to the full two years.

 

"But if I were a betting man I'd say the most likely outcome would be for some kind of agreement where Joey walks for a certain amount. There is enough risk to both parties and to the club to cause added embarrassment that you'd think the club would come to some sort of agreement that falls short of falls short of the notice period.

 

"Confidentiality agreements are pretty standard and the club are probably going to have to ask something from him. But who stands to gain more from that? Is a confidentiality agreement made for someone with Barton's personality?"

 

Rangers declined to comment.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14754264.Rangers_need_to_cut_a_deal_with_Joey_Barton_to_avoid_messy_litigation__warns_employment_law_specialist__/

Edited September 20, 2016 by ian1964

[JFK-1 1,674]

I would rather hold on to him than pay him off. Make him play in the reserves or something. If Joey were true to form inside a few months he would talk himself into a sacking or alternatively decide that 2 years out of football wasn't worth it when he could simply agree a divorce and find another club.

[Frankie 8,150]

Pathetic and irresponsible stuff from Gerry Braiden.

 

I note the religious stuff has been removed from his article.

[jhunter 0]

 

"Joey Barton is a high profile Roman Catholic. He may be able to point to the Ian Black situation where another player was found to have breached the SFA gambling regulations and did not have his contract terminated.

 

"If he could successfully establish that the reason for this less favourable treatment was his Roman Catholicism, he will have a claim for direct religious discrimination. That might not be a good or indeed winnable argument but the threat of it (and of it causing sufficient embarrassment to the club) could secure a bigger pay-off.

 

"The notice period could be substantial. Rangers got him on a free so what they saved on a transfer could have gone on an enhanced contract, perhaps even including a notice period of up to the full two years.

 

"But if I were a betting man I'd say the most likely outcome would be for some kind of agreement where Joey walks for a certain amount. There is enough risk to both parties and to the club to cause added embarrassment that you'd think the club would come to some sort of agreement that falls short of falls short of the notice period.

 

"Confidentiality agreements are pretty standard and the club are probably going to have to ask something from him. But who stands to gain more from that? Is a confidentiality agreement made for someone with Barton's personality?"

 

Rangers declined to comment.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14754264.Rangers_need_to_cut_a_deal_with_Joey_Barton_to_avoid_messy_litigation__warns_employment_law_specialist__/

 

a new low reached

 

utterly despicable "journalism"