Rob heys

It is all well and good making negative comments - but Rob Heys is ASFC through and through........had he not paid 30k of his own money only 4 weeks ago then the staff and players would not have been paid.......bear that in mind as a mark of the mans commitment to the ASFC cause before getting over critical.

These bets go back TEN years when ASFC were years away from League football........his last bet on ASFC was over 3 years ago .......

Put it into context please.
 
In the Know said:
These bets go back TEN years when ASFC were years away from League football........his last bet on ASFC was over 3 years ago .......

Put it into context please.
Click to expand...
When he was in a position of power at Stanley, The betting scandal was before that, That aint negative, its putting things in context.:rolleyes:
 
When you sit at the top of the tree you are expected to set the standards for everyone who sits beneath you. In this case, Rob has made a very poor judgement call by placing 735 bets over the period of time which is a long sustained period. His statement just reads like a list of excuses instead of an explanation for why he continued to breach rules over such a long period.

If he didn't know about the rules he should looked into it, the whole point of being in a senior position is that you have the brains to not take everything at face value and delve into things and question the reasons for things happening. How can his position not be untenable after this latest episode.

If he has put money in that is good but that doesn't mean that he should automatically stay in his job. If that was the case Ilyas would be in charge of the club after all the money he has put into the club. In reality that wouldn't work in the real world. What we need now is someone independent to be recruited to run the operations of the club with proper procedures and policies in place to help run a tighter ship to help build up relations with the fans and local businesses.

To leave the skeletons in the past, we need to move forward off the pitch and get things sorted fast. Our reputation has taken a hammering in the last 4 years, we need to start moving on from this.
 
In the Know said:
It is all well and good making negative comments - but Rob Heys is ASFC through and through........had he not paid 30k of his own money only 4 weeks ago then the staff and players would not have been paid.......bear that in mind as a mark of the mans commitment to the ASFC cause before getting over critical.

These bets go back TEN years when ASFC were years away from League football........his last bet on ASFC was over 3 years ago .......

Put it into context please.
Click to expand...

The fact that you have just joined the forum is noted.

Which context would you like to put it in? The context of FA rules? The context of the previous betting scandal that shamed the club? The context of the "full enquiry" into that scandal that seemed never to take place? The context of a current or potential sponsor who is unlikely to take kindly to being linked with a club with our abysmal reputation?
 
Last edited:
Revived Red said:
The fact that you have just joined the forum is noted.

Which context would you like to put it in? The context of FA rules? The context of the previous betting scandal that shamed the club? The context of the "full enquiry" into that scandal that seemed never to take place? The context of a current or potential sponsor who is unlikely to take kindly to being linked with a club with our abysmal reputation?
Click to expand...
Seems highly suspicious to me "In The Know" that yeh have just joined to comment on this subject,:rolleyes: Don't it make yeh wonder.? oh dear gone already pmsl.
 
maccawozzagod said:
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.
Click to expand...

cashman said:
Please explain How?:confused: The betting scandal at Stanley was 4/5 yrs ago, Yet he continued in a senior position to place bets. How is that fact not compromised?:confused::confused:
Click to expand...

as MD of the club he didn't bet on us according to the statement, he was MD for approximately 12 months - what the hell has that got to do with the betting scandal.

the job that he did as MD (in my eyes) has not been compromised because as MD he didn't do it (bet on us for or against).

He broke the rules that he was aware were in place = deserved to be punished, I haven't disputed that. But I do think the punishment is way too harsh when you consider the precedents set by the FA for other crimes.

Betting against Stanley (as an official of the club) is a crime against the fans
Betting on cup competitions that Stanley have long since left is a ridiculous thing to be charged for.

£1000? now that they have taken away his right to work in pretty much the only thing he's done in years how do they expect to get that money. Offer them a £1 a week Rob
 
In the Know said:
It is all well and good making negative comments - but Rob Heys is ASFC through and through........had he not paid 30k of his own money only 4 weeks ago then the staff and players would not have been paid.......bear that in mind as a mark of the mans commitment to the ASFC cause before getting over critical.

These bets go back TEN years when ASFC were years away from League football........his last bet on ASFC was over 3 years ago .......

Put it into context please.
Click to expand...
FACTS... In the know... The above post is your first as you joined Aug 2013 and it states post no 1.... WHO ARE YOU ... Please provide proof that ROB HEYS paid the £30,000 of his own money 4 weeks ago . I suspect you have another name on here and your statement is a pack of lies . gO ON PROVE ME WRONG
 
Last edited:
Whatever the final outcome, nobody wins out of this.

Its essential the club use the incident as an opportunity for a change in direction off the pitch.
They either keep Rob and provide him some clear targets/goals and rules including some training OR they get rid quickly and advertise for an external candidate.

A lot of the off field failures may not be entirely Robs fault, if he doesn't know any better maybe people (including me) should be more balanced in analysing the missed opportunities and failures.
 
I do remember him being interviewed on some local TV channel, I think it was Channel M, and on there he stated he had remortgaged his house in order to pay some debts during the bucket shaking days, everybody makes mistakes and he will rightly pay the price.

A £2000 loss over 10 years is hardly somebody with a gambling addiction, more like somebody who likes a flutter and can take a £200 a year hit ;)
 
johnc said:
I do remember him being interviewed on some local TV channel, I think it was Channel M, and on there he stated he had remortgaged his house in order to pay some debts during the bucket shaking days, everybody makes mistakes and he will rightly pay the price.

A £2000 loss over 10 years is hardly somebody with a gambling addiction, more like somebody who likes a flutter and can take a £200 a year hit ;)
Click to expand...

Agree.
Like all punters, the bookie always wins
 
DAV007 said:
Whatever the final outcome, nobody wins out of this.

Its essential the club use the incident as an opportunity for a change in direction off the pitch.
They either keep Rob and provide him some clear targets/goals and rules including some training OR they get rid quickly and advertise for an external candidate.

A lot of the off field failures may not be entirely Robs fault, if he doesn't know any better maybe people (including me) should be more balanced in analysing the missed opportunities and failures.
Click to expand...

Mr Heys can not be involved in football or football activities for 21 months a new candidate is the only way forward by law!
 
johnc said:
I do remember him being interviewed on some local TV channel, I think it was Channel M, and on there he stated he had remortgaged his house in order to pay some debts during the bucket shaking days, everybody makes mistakes and he will rightly pay the price.

A £2000 loss over 10 years is hardly somebody with a gambling addiction, more like somebody who likes a flutter and can take a £200 a year hit ;)
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but unless I am reading Robs statement incorrectly, the 2 grand loss was related only to the 735 bets. If this was only a small percentage of his bets on other events, what on earth are his total losses if, as everyone knows, only the bookies win.
 
Was he backing or laying?

If he was acting as a bookie and laying then he may have made a few quid at times.
 
I have just taken the trouble to read this thread as I haven't really been following it, but after the story broke about Mr. Heys, I find it hard to believe that a person of his position and standing could bet on his own club losing 1 game never mind 37, having read most comments I honestly can't understand how Mr. Heys can hold any position of responcibility within the club ever again, never mind after a 21 month ban, he has broken league rules and the more important rule, don't drop your own club in the crap, a sin unforgiveable in my book
 
This whole thing needs to be put into context. In my opinion there are two types of gambling that relate to football, Corruption gambling and Fun gambling, it looks like Rob has been caught having fun.
I realise that Rob’s bets were on accumulators (same as Cav) and he probably thought were dead certs, at the time. Parallels are being drawn with the other betting scandal from 4 years ago, but in this case, players who could have had a say in the outcome of a result, bet huge amounts on a Stanley defeat whilst playing for Stanley. This is in no way comparable to Rob’s crime, but the players in question had much lighter punishments for a much more serious crime.

The issue I have with this whole matter is the harshness of the punishment, and the stupid FA rules regarding gambling. I’m referring to this quote from Rob’s website
Robheys website; said:
There is a very relevant point to be made here to all who are involved in sport and do bet from time to time. If your club has been involved at any stage of a competition you cannot place a bet on any match at any stage of the competition. For example, players, officials and employees of clubs that have already been knocked out of the 2013/14 FA Cup in the Extra Preliminary Round this weekend are in breach of the betting regulations if they place a bet on the FA Cup Final in May next year. Many of the charges that made up the case against me were bets involving this type of rule breach.
Click to expand...
I think the punishment Rob has received is unduly harsh considering the precedent shown to players who actually have a direct outcome on the result of the game. The betting rules need to be overhauled and should be rigorously enforced when gambling leads to corruption and the predetermined outcome of a result. Players betting for their team to lose should serve lifetime bans, players betting on their own team to win should go unpunished. Accumulators for typically a fiver or a tenner whether it includes your own team or not, should not matter as the outcome of the bet is still dependent on 9 other results in which your team is not involved, and these charges are unjustified and petty.

Let’s not forget the Football League has just taken an internet gambling company as a major sponsor, how will this and future gambling cases sit with the morals of the whole shoddy business.

The FA and the Football League, along with many clubs through shirt sponsorship, are happy to take money from gambling companies, yet tell all people who are working for these clubs, presumably this includes people who help out at the club (fans who do a bit of cleaning up, snowshifting, printing posters/t-shirts/flyers, or removing ground covers, etc) not to gamble on any competition which the club may or may not be involved in. yet encourage the fans who don’t do anything at the club to empty all their wages and anything else they might have into the coffers of the bookies, internet or shop.

Where does this end? Imagine having a bet on Stanley to win a game in August, then turning up in January to help out removing the frost covers, would you now be banned from removing frost protection from the pitch for the rest of the season?

If Rob had a few grand on the next Stanley manager, 3 months ago, then I would understand and be justified at the severity of the punishment.
 
It may be one opinion and view of things but this website isn't going to change the FA rules, however stupid some people regard them. The point is Stanley's Managing Director/Chief Executive either knew the rules and ignored and then publicised it, or wasn't aware of them. Either case makes his position untenable, however petty you may regard the rule.
I also find the implied argument made in Mr.Heys' web site that, because he lost money on his betting that somehow makes it less serious, incredible.
The Board need to act now and I sincerely hope they are currently working on their options for life without Mr. Heys.
 
One question, who are the people who are now running the club?! Hopefull not the 2 bob workers who are making this club as tinpot as the cowshed roof!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top