Ian Black Given 3 Match Ban (7 Suspended) & £7.5k Fine

[deek 0]

No surrender ian black

[Marco Negri's Beard 1,423]

Sod's law says that since he's finally coming into a bit of form, he'll probably get a lengthy ban.

[Phil 1,150]

If rangers terminate his contract then as far as i'm concerned somebody at the club leaked that info so they can get him off the books

Think it came out at the time that it was Ladbrokes that reported him to the SFA mate

[KingKirk 25,656]

If the player gets banned for life, Will we be able to sign another player to replace him?

[BarrhillLoyal 32]

The right thing to do would be as follows

The SFA recognises there needs to be additional clarity about betting rules and have judged Ian Black accordingly.

In this instance we believe a fine of £1000 is appropriate BUT all players beware.....the rules will not change and the NEXT player to be brought before this panel should expect zero leniency since proper examples need to be set.

Won't happen of course buy would have if Black was still at Hearts or ICT. The SFA will try to boot us.......again.

They should also demand Ally's list and work through it, if Ally won't pass across put him on a disrepute charge. If he does give it the players and officials need to be names and shamed in the same way as Black was.

Mu personal opinion is that if Black has bet against us he should never see the insides of Ibrox again and be sacked immediately for gross misconduct.

[Buggleskelly 3,772]

If its proved that he placed bets against Rangers then I don't want him anywhere near Ibrox.

[RedWhiteBlue1872 407]

could be a blessing in disguise if he gets lengthy ban or we sack him?

Free up the wages and bring in a cheaper free agent.

[familystandloyal 131]

If its proved that he placed bets against Rangers then I don't want him anywhere near Ibrox.

Peronally, I'll stick with the old adage that 'he is innocent until proven guilty'.

imho the whole thing stinks, he signed for us just over 12 months ago so the vast majority of his alledged conduct was by the law of averages was almost certainly carried out over the previous 6 year period when he played for ICT and Hearts, odd that he was only charged after he signed for Rangers.

[Big Al 55 9,275]

As I've said before if he stands up and says he is an addict they are duty bound to help him. Banning him is in no ones interest IMO.

[Right_To_Censor 1,951]

Yeah and its a bit odd that over years nothing was said then a year into his contract at rangers he starts to find form with new players around him he gets hauled up in front of the beaks?

Something isn't right

[DAVIE8CH 296]

if it wasw Ladbrokes who grassed him to the sfa they should be booted out of ibrox.

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

could be a blessing in disguise if he gets lengthy ban or we sack him?

Free up the wages and bring in a cheaper free agent.

No. He's been on fire this season

[familystandloyal 131]

if it wasw Ladbrokes who grassed him to the sfa they should be booted out of ibrox.

This^^^

Ladbrokes did grass him, Rangers should be telling them to grass EVERY other player at EVERY other club in Scotland in the interests of sporting intergrity of kick them the fuck out of Ibrox.

What's the betting that the Ladbrokes employee who grassed him will be called Declan and will have a facebook page similar to the bheast on front of yesterdays Sun?

[thehost 11,061]

it doesn't matter who "grassed" him. If he is beting against the team he is playing for then it is simply indefensible.

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

Because he's played better than last year most seem to think he's been some outstanding player this season, he's been good but nothing special, massive difference in quality between Law and him. Same goes for Faure, he's been shaky at times, but you would think he's been exceptional going by posts on here.

He was pathetic against Forfar, was decent at best against Berwick and Brechin. Law's performances are what I would say are on fire and he's making Black's performances look better than what they've been IMO.

Black is a good player and all its took is some help in midfield

Everyone was shite against Forfar and Berwick so you can't single out one person

[falwheel 222]

Now taking bets for length of ban.

NB. Ian Black just repsonded by placing bet

[Buggleskelly 3,772]

Peronally, I'll stick with the old adage that 'he is innocent until proven guilty'.

imho the whole thing stinks, he signed for us just over 12 months ago so the vast majority of his alledged conduct was by the law of averages was almost certainly carried out over the previous 6 year period when he played for ICT and Hearts, odd that he was only charged after he signed for Rangers.

I did say 'if proven'

[AlexRFC 9]

whats the odds on him getting off with this , no surrender ian black

[MaddistonKnight 1,567]

gamblings for mugs. I wouldn't know how to place a bet.

[NixonRFC 1,337]

If he's found guilty of betting on his team to lose in a game he's actually played in then I simply dont see how he can escape a lengthy ban

[calio 688]

He will get a 12 game ban,a large fine and warned about his future conduct.

I think the same as this, possibly up to a 16 match ban & 25K fine.

They know it`s a can of worms that`s been have opened, the precedent will be set for any other players caught in the future.

It`s also an opportunity for the governing body to show that there is no institutional bias against Rangers.(No laughing at the back now)

[KingKirk 25,656]

According to SSN there Ian black intends to plead guilty to most of these charges

[scarkev 3,540]

Yes they can, if they have evidence on him betting on matches that he played in or against clubs he played for, then lawyer's couldn't do jack as it's in the official rules and he broke them!

The whole bets in other countries will be a small fine at best I would imagine, but they would be 100% correct to give him a massive ban if he's found guilty in the other two areas.

Some of you are buying into the media twist on this! Under the SFA's own rules (provided he didn't try to influence the outcome) a bet is a bet and is just as punishable whether it be on your own team or a Norwegian 3rd division game....it doesn't matter the moral side of it or what you or I seem more serious....under their own rules they have to treat all bets the same.

It appears he is accepting responsibility for it anyway but if I was him I'd be saying prove it. It may have been his account but was his mrs making the bets, how can they prove it was him if it was done online?

[NixonRFC 1,337]

I do think because of the can of worms then after the Ian Black case a new set of disciplinary rules regarding gambling will be put forward

[Moody Blue Legend 61,555]

Play the addiction card.