Ivan Toney placed 11 separate bets on Newcastle United to lose while he was on the club's books, the written reasons for his eight-month ban from all football has revealed.
And the 25-page document published to outline the investigation that led to the now Brentford striker's suspension says that he has been diagnosed as a gambling addict.
Brentford, whom he joined in 2020, have said that they accept the reasons and reiterated their full support for the leading goalscorer.
But Toney, 27, is now unable to play until the middle of January 2024 after pleaded guilty to 232 of the 262 charges brought by the FA.
Here are the main takeaways from the written reasons published on Friday morning.
Bets on his own team
The FA’s independent commission said that Toney placed 13 bets on his own team between August 2017 and March 2018 and 11 of those were against Newcastle, his parent club, while he was on loan at Wigan. But the independent commission found that he did not gamble on any games in which he was playing himself.
It stated: "There were 13 bets on Mr Toney’s own team to lose in 7 different matches between 22 August 2017 and 3 March 2018. Mr Toney did not play in any of those matches where he placed bets against his loan club as he was not in the match squad or against his parent club as he was on loan.
"Of the 13 bets 11 were against Newcastle whilst Mr Toney was on loan at another club. The other two bets related to a game between Wigan v Aston Villa whilst the player was on loan at Wigan but he was not part of the squad.
"A further 15 of the 126 bets or instructions to bet were placed by Mr Toney to score in nine different matches all of which he played in. All of those 15 bets or instructions to bet were initiated by Mr Toney at a time when it would not have been public knowledge that he was starting or playing in the fixture."
Reduced ban
The independent commission had considered banning the 27-year-old for 15 months but downgraded the length because he admitted to 232 breaches of Rule E8, around the prohibition of professionals gambling, and a psychiatric expert judged that he was an addict.
The document stated: “The commission finds that a significant reduction should be made to reflect the diagnosed gambling addiction identified by [psychiatrist] Dr [Philip] Hopley. The lack of control the player has in respect of gambling is clearly a reflection of his diagnosed gambling addiction.
“The Commission had the benefit of a report from Dr Philip Hopley dated 2 February 2023 who also attended the hearing by video conference to answer questions.
“Dr Hopley had interviewed Mr Toney on two occasions and concluded in his report that Mr Toney has a clear history of gambling addiction.
“There is no need to set out the details of the report in these reasons. It was Dr Hopley’s conclusion that Mr Toney needs professional help in respect of his addiction.”
Brentford not involved
The FA found that the breaches occurred across five seasons from 25 February 2017 to 23 January 2021. Toney joined Brentford from Peterborough United in August 2020 but none of the bets placed involved the Bees and the commission noted that none of the charges related to events where Toney could negatively impact his own team.
In a statement, Brentford said: “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. Conversations regarding this and all matters relating to the case will remain confidential in order to protect the player and his family.”
The club said that it now considered the matter closed.
Initial lies
A brief transcript is included in the document which makes it clear that Toney had known it was against the rules to gamble on football since 2017. But the written reasons also state that Toney had lied during his first interview as part of the FA investigation and initially denied using other people’s online accounts to place bets. He admitted in a subsequent hearing that he had lied during the first interview.
The commission stated: “Given the clearly false answers that were knowingly given by Mr Toney during the FA interviews, the remainder of his evidence must be approached with some caution.”
The independent commission also said it suspected Toney, who had three bank accounts assessed during the investigation, had another mobile phone that was used to place bets and he did not submit it as evidence.
