Rarely, if ever, has a Robbie Savage column polarised public opinion as sharply as his insistence that Joey Barton's 18-month ban from football is excessive' for a victimless 'crime'. <\/p>\n
In essence, Savage believes the FA's draconian sanction which effectively brings the curtain down on Barton's caereer, as he will be 36 before he is allowed to play again was using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. <\/p>\n
Here, in our weekly Sav Says trawl through his online postbag, Mirror Sport's most-read pundit answers your points of view on the big Barton debate... <\/p>\n
Video Unavailable <\/p>\n
Click to play Tap to play <\/p>\n
Play now <\/p>\n
Watch this video again <\/p>\n
Video will play in <\/p>\n
Ollie Olly Oli @OllieClaco1882: Let's be honest, Joey Barton has had this coming to him for years! Good bloody riddance. Awful footballer that thinks rules don't apply to him SAV SAYS : Well, he isn't an 'awful' footballer, for a start. He's good enough to have won an England cap and played his entire career at Premier League or Championship level. Yes, he has been involved in misdemeanours in the past, but he has paid the price for them. I just feel this punishment is out of proportion with the nature of the offences. <\/p>\n
Brendan Crisp @brendancrisp: He received a letter from the FA about his gambling, he chose to ignore it. If you ignore it then it just gets worse like toothache SAV SAYS : This is where Joey has let himself down, Brendan. If he has ignored a written warning from the FA to curb his betting habits, he can't expect to get a three-match ban, a fine and a slap on the wrist. But if you have an addictive personality or addictive genes and I know people for whom that is a dominant part of their make-up it probably takes more than a letter to stop your compulsive habit. If a heavy drinker got a letter from Alcoholics Anonymous warning him to cut down on his alcohol intake, would he be able to go down the pub, have one pint and go home again? Probably not. If Joey Barton's betting is caused by an addiction, as he admits, I feel we should be placing more emphasis on treating the addiction than taking away his livelihood. <\/p>\n
Lord Vegetable @HenrikVegetable: Does it cloud judgement if you have a contract with a betting company? SAV SAYS : No, your Lordship, my judgement is not clouded in the slightest. Whoever paid me or employed me, I would still take issue with the length of Barton's ban. In my opinion, it's too much. But since you raise the issue of my links with bookmakers William Hill, I am acutely aware of the nature of their industry, their investment in football as sponsors and their #GambleResponsibly hashtag. I am also proud to be ambassador for their charity, and my involvement in building a school classroom and providing fresh water to a remote village in Kenya. They do a fantastic amount of good with their Close To Home initiative and supporting the Bobby Moore Fund for Cancer Research. Call me a hypocrite if you like, but I have never hidden my connections with William Hill because I regard those charitable projects as privileges. <\/p>\n
Mark Nesbitt @marknesbitt_P3: Seems the FA view this addiction differently to drugs\/alcohol or is it just because it's @Joey7Barton? If he had been addicted to an illegal drug\/alcohol he would have been treated differently as per @PaulMerse #tonyadams SAV SAYS : I don't know whether the FA apply the rulebook in relation to gambling any different to cases involving alcohol or misuse of drugs, and it's not for me to set the tariff for players who find themselves involved in disciplinary cases. But in my view, addictions whether they involve drink, so-called recreational drugs or gambling need to be treated with compassion, not a big stick. And like you, Mark, I wonder if Joey Barton's reputation has gone before him in this case. <\/p>\n
Andrew Murray @aMurrayMusic: A continuously naughty child first gets lines, then detention... suspended... expelled. Same thing. SAV SAYS : I'm not sure you can treat this case as one strike, two strikes, three strikes and you're out. Yes, I accept that in many workplaces and other walks of life, you might get a verbal warning, a written warning and then you're fired if you repeatedly flout the rules. But in many cases, those employees would be a liability because their conduct is damaging their companies' output or reputation. Of course Barton is in the wrong, and we have to protect football's integrity, but he has still added value to the teams he has been playing for. That's why I still maintain his betting 'crimes' have been victimless. <\/p>\n
Andy Wilson @Andy_Wilson68: So what should the punishment be? SAV SAYS : Good question, Andy, and it goes to the heart of my column. If you look at the penalties handed out for alleged racist remarks to opponents, kung-fu kicks on spectators, doping offences or biting opponents, none has come close to the 18-month ban Barton has incurred. Betting against your own team crosses a line, and it is right that he should be suspended. But in my opinion, a six or eight-month ban would have been sufficient, with the rest of it suspended for the remainder of his career, and Joey would have to go on an education course to tackle his compulsive betting under the auspices of the PFA players' union. For me, that would serve both as a deterrent and show an element of compassion in recognition that gambling addiction is an illness. <\/p>\n
Video Unavailable <\/p>\n
Click to play Tap to play <\/p>\n
Play now <\/p>\n
Watch this video again <\/p>\n
Video will play in <\/p>\n
Gail Hawthorn @ghawthorn86: If you break rules you're sanctioned. Simple fundamental rule of life. Your examples are all heated moments on the pitch, this is pre-conceived SAV SAYS : I understand the difference, Gail, and I don't dispute your basic precept: If you break the rules, you get punished. But Barton's betting misdemeanours didn't harm anyone, whereas heat-of-the-moment incidents can do terrible damage. A single punch, for example, may not be a premeditated act of violence, but it can cause terrible harm. <\/p>\n
Andrea Gledhill @a_gledhill: Disagree, he knows the rules and think he can flout them just because he can. Don't do the crime if you can't take the consequences SAV SAYS : I get that, Andrea and I have no qualms about Joey being punished. It's just the severity of the punishment that doesn't sit right with me. <\/p>\n
AND FINALLY... <\/p>\n
BBC 5 live Sport @bbc5liveSport: The chicken was dry - When @RobbieSavage8 stood up to manager John Toshack's decision to change Wales' food SAV SAYS : Our Monday night think-tank Flintoff, Savage and the Ping Pong Guy is still No.1 in the podcast charts, which is incredibly gratifying, and this week's programme included a segment on times when you felt let down by your team-mates. I picked out the time when John Toshack took over as Wales manager from Mark Hughes and where 'Sparky' had placed a high emphasis on the importance of nutrition and gave us a wide choice of healthy options to refuel, Mr Toshack abolished the popular menu and replaced it with fried bananas and dry chicken. No sauce, no gravy, just dry chicken. I agreed with a few of the lads that we should make our feelings known to Toshack and I piped up at a meeting that dry chicken was not going to make us run faster or play better, believing some of my team-mates would back me up. But when I had finished saying my piece, they all stayed silent. Dry chicken wasn't the only factor, but I never played for Wales again. <\/p>\n
poll loading <\/p>\n
YES NO <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Read the original:<\/p>\n
'We should be treating Joey Barton rather than taking away his livelihood' - Robbie Savage responds to your tweets - Mirror.co.uk<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Rarely, if ever, has a Robbie Savage column polarised public opinion as sharply as his insistence that Joey Barton's 18-month ban from football is excessive' for a victimless 'crime'. In essence, Savage believes the FA's draconian sanction which effectively brings the curtain down on Barton's caereer, as he will be 36 before he is allowed to play again was using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. Here, in our weekly Sav Says trawl through his online postbag, Mirror Sport's most-read pundit answers your points of view on the big Barton debate.. Continue reading