Football. The sport that is known for vast amounts of money circulating its stadiums. Football players participate in the most popular sport of all time and are also the world’s best paid athletes with Premier League footballers earning on average £3.6 million per year. Therefore, it bears the question, why do such athletes take the risk to match-fix? More importantly however, the Football Association (FA) have sanctions in place to prevent such crimes from occurring, so why are footballers not being deterred or punished accordingly?

Match-fixing has become increasingly pervasive in recent years, so much so it has a greater effect than doping ever has. However, it could be said that the sanctioning regime has yet to become acknowledged as sufficient. This can be looked at through examples of footballers in different leagues, and how it has affected them as well as deterring others from committing the same sporting crimes.

Take the form of bans for example, the most prevalent form of sanction the FA hand out. Lifetime bans are easily identifiable as a punishment. They’re career ending, and some individuals are banned from having any relation to their sport again. Michael Boateng for instance, a former non-league striker, was charged with two breaches of the FA Rules for conspiracy to commit bribery. On top of the ban, a 16-month prison sentence was also handed to Boateng for his actions. Whether this was a fair punishment to him or not, it can be classed as an effective sanction as it has prevented Boateng from having any further connection to the sport and being able to continue to commit bribery.

At the top end of the footballing pyramid however, Ivan Toney, who is currently very relevant on the back of the Euros, has only recently returned to playing Premier League football. Toney, who was charged with over 260 breaches for betting on his own team, Brentford, to win or lose in certain matches, received an 8-month ban. Whilst this time frame is nearly the length of a full season, due to the timings of when the ban was handed to Toney, he missed only 4 months of the season as the other half was during the off season. This starts to show the cracks within sanctioning under the FA, who should have the authority to determine when the ban starts to ensure the best deterrence and punishment possible. To add to this, and to show that the FA sanctioning is far from an effective deterrence, Kieran Trippier’s ban for insider information was overturned as the FA didn’t have jurisdiction in Spain when he was playing for Atletico Madrid. What is even more of an issue is that the ban did not carry over when Trippier returned to the UK to play for Newcastle. Instead, it was completely dismissed.

Information like this begins to raise questions on the legitimacy of sanctioning under the FA. Although some sanctions such as Boateng’s life-time ban may have been fair, allowing for Ivan Toney to in essence only serve half his ban seems questionable, as does allowing Kieran Trippier to barely receiving a punishment at all for his actions. It also demonstrates the divide on sanctioning top-flight individuals compared to lower-league players, and hints, there could be other factors that affect the decision of which sanction an individual will receive and how severe the sanction will be. For example, broadcasting rights, sponsorship and ticketing are major income streams for teams that compete in leagues such as the Premier League. Without any of this, teams would suffer, especially when broadcaster income accounts for half of the Premier League clubs’ incomes. However, lower league clubs knowingly do not generate as much income in comparison and therefore potentially of less importance. Therefore, it implies that banning those that are playing in front of thousands each week is more of a hinderance for the FA than those who play lower league.

As an avid fan of a National League South side, banning a player would have a large impact on the team itself and the fans, especially when each player plays their part and teams tend to have smaller squads. However, it is not just bans that have been questionable. Instead, it is also the fines that the FA can hand out. Again, Toney received a £50,000 fine on top of his ban which to most, is a severe punishment and most people would be deterred by this. However, when a player is salaried millions, this is barely a week’s wages. This bares the question, is the FA really trying to punish and deter? If they are, then why are the sanctions so low? Whilst it could be said that the sanctions handed to lower league players are a deterrence to others or more of a punishment for match-fixing, the overall efficiency of sanctions to punish and deter athletes for match fixing really is insufficient, regardless of whether individuals say they’ve learned from their mistakes.

Note: This is a summary of my masters dissertation: Football at Risk? Are the measures really sufficient in preventing match manipulation and unlawful gambling in English Football? Produced whilst studying at University of the West of England

Beth Dear

Intern, Financial Crime, Fraud and Investigative Services

FCFC Mentee