Yes, he bet against Rangers in the game against E Stirling and 2 games he bet against Hearts (one of which was Spurs). Big Derek Johnstone reckons it was okay because they were part of an accumulator
He bet against Hearts in two games he didn't play in and took Rangrrs for a draw in a game he scored in to give Rangers a 3-2 lead . Mibbe that's why the SFA thought there was no evidence of match "fitting"
A player betting on his team not to win, regardless of the stake, should have his arse booted out the club.
Free spirit do you have proof? Well his potato based vodka moonshine is fairly inexpensive I suppose.
As usual with either Rangers 1872 or The Rangers when the SFA are forced into been involved in, things become muddied and then it becomes difficult to have proper punishment laid down . Why was BLack given a light sentence of ten matches with seven written off. a) he plays with The Rangers. b) Ally McCoist said he did nothing wrong because he has lists is over hundreds of Officials ( including referees ) who do the same. c) Black has never been before the disciplinary committee for anything before in his excellent very sporting football career. d) The SFA had within its five part agreement that no player from The Rangers could be given more than 3 match suspension. e) the SFA knew that after all the fudging and sworn untruths to keep Rangers 1872 From punishment , no one would expect much punishment for poor Ian Black .
[video=youtube;EgqoHyG2FMk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=EgqoHyG2FMk[/video]
Maybe you should be directing these points at someone on the SFA board please log in to view this image
Maybe those who have been at Rangers1872 and The Rangers beck and call over the Years would have a bigger say than Peter Lawwell who has only been a couple of months on board the SFA . No matter how brilliant a job that Mr Lawwell does , it will take generations before Football is run in a fair honest manner in Scotland.