[Revived Red]

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod

His statement says that he hasn't bet on the club for over three years so his position as MD has not been compromised in my eyes.

I think I am correct in saying that the position he held at that time was Chief Executive Officer.

As for the appeal, presumably it can only be about the nature/severity of the punishment. I agree with Exile on Spencer Street - the Board and Chairman must now act. It matters not if the suspension is 21 months or 21 days. A failure to act will be seen as condoning the offences. We just cannot go on in this way.

Yes indeed, there is a wider argument about the way that football promotes gambling. But we are talking here about Accrington Stanley.