I have just been reading the piece on the Echo's website regarding Everton's hall of fame. About half way through it David France gives the following comment:
"The addition of Tony Kay is the biggest upset, although it will be no surprise to those who saw him play. His poor judgement before he moved to Goodison hurt all Evertonians, but his punishment was harsh. And, unlike the football authorities, we are a forgiving lot.''
Can anyone shed some light as to what that means?
Matt Geraghty, Posted 09/01/2009 at 08:28:16
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 09/01/2009 at 14:25:10
In 1964, the Sunday People broke the story that Kay, along with fellow Sheffield Wednesday players David Layne and Peter Swan, through the instigation of Jimmy Gauld, had bet on their side to lose. The three were convicted of conspiracy to defraud, Kay on the basis of a taped conversation, one of the first times such evidence was admitted in an English court. He was fined ¬£150 and sentenced to four months imprisonment. On his release, after serving ten weeks, he was banned from football for life by the Football Association though the ban was rescinded seven years later. Kay claims subsequently to have been summoned to London to explain the use of taped evidence to the Kray twins.
2 Posted 09/01/2009 at 14:35:35
3 Posted 09/01/2009 at 14:33:20
What a waste, what a shame... When you think of what they get away with now, drug involvement, walking away from motoring offences, etc,etc,. I along with so many others cried when Tony Kay was sidelined forever by silly stupid OLD men of the FA. God Bless you, Tony wherever you are.
4 Posted 09/01/2009 at 14:53:49
Another rather sad episode, is that the Jimmy Gauld mentioned by Gerry, was infact a ex-Everton player fom the 50s.
5 Posted 09/01/2009 at 15:02:58
Couldn?t he have moved abroard though to play? I know it wasn't common then but a good number of players had.
6 Posted 09/01/2009 at 15:06:14
7 Posted 09/01/2009 at 15:06:42
I remember his one and only cap. Fazed? No chance. Picks up the ball on the edge of the box, looks up, cracks it in, top corner, without blinking. Marvellous.
Funny to think though what our midfield would have looked like had he stayed around. No Ball-Harvey-Kendall.....
8 Posted 09/01/2009 at 15:27:03
9 Posted 09/01/2009 at 15:34:26
Personally I was a bit surprised (to say the least) that he was voted a "legend". I think his demise tarnishes the title and those worthy of association with it.
10 Posted 09/01/2009 at 15:34:59
11 Posted 09/01/2009 at 17:26:48
12 Posted 09/01/2009 at 18:22:22
13 Posted 09/01/2009 at 18:31:05
14 Posted 09/01/2009 at 18:38:24
15 Posted 09/01/2009 at 20:16:46
16 Posted 09/01/2009 at 21:18:42
17 Posted 09/01/2009 at 22:14:40
18 Posted 09/01/2009 at 22:34:25
A silly mistake but no attempt to defraud only a technical conspiracy to defraud.
The talk was pre the Ipswich game, no matter how good we play we never seem to get anything there, well tell you what, if thats the case, if we all put in a couple of quid we wont go away empty handed, I’ll get the brother in law to put it on...and the rest is history.
Like a lot of things when they crash and burn, no one big cause ( ie actual attempt to lose the match, eh Brucie ), but lots of small things that contribute... Not lest Gaulds on going cupidity, he was later done for his ongoing, at the time, mis demeanors, but no good for the Sheffield 3 so what price his word, being set up with a wire by the papers for cash!!, unsafe conviction and a knee jerk out of touch establishment..
Like I said on another thread re legends, define legend.
All those who saw him could see the class.
WHAT A WASTE....that sort of legend.
19 Posted 09/01/2009 at 23:02:28
How did Billy Bullshit get all those votes with all his ?crimes? against Evertonia... Kings Dock, The Fortress Fund, 24/7, watch this space, DK.
LEGEND IS AS LEGEND DOES
20 Posted 10/01/2009 at 09:26:11
I was of the understanding that this topic was about the misdemeanours of Tony Kay and my input was solely connected with that.
You should by now have grasped the fact that denigrating Bill K when it has nothing to do with the matter under discussion is boring, repetitive and extremely tiresome.
To do so in this case does not in any way ameliorate the disgusting actions of Kay and his cronies.
As with all clubs there are many skeletons in the Goodison cupboard but most are best left for historians to deal with.
Exceptions are when a poster like Matt Geraghty seeks information that someone can shed light upon.
21 Posted 12/01/2009 at 14:06:22
However, I never took to him or felt he was a real asset to the Everton team of the time because he was often vicious in his tackling and came over as very arrogant, not really a ?team? player. I think this side of his character would have also prevented him ever being regularly chosen for the England squad of that era. For the most part, one had to be a ?nice? or at least an ?simple-honest? type to be selected them-a-days.
Although it?s true what Trevor Lynes wrote above (that Kay was a member of the 1962-63 championship-winning team), Brian Harris actually played more games at left-half than Kay that season, and Harris?s replacement by Kay midway through the 1962-63 season was a harsh even unfair decision by Catterick, since Harris was a main contributor to the team being top of the league from about September through to Xmas. (Although I don?t have statistics at hand, I believe Everton were more successful that season when Harris played rather than Kay).
Harris read the game and passed just as well and as inventively as Kay, without Kay?s arrogant manner or vicious tackling. Harris was also a better ?foil? for the more extrovert players like Jimmy Gabriel that season, and also a couple of seasons later Alan Ball. Had Kay and Ball ever played in the same team, I can imagine there would have been discord between the two, to the detriment of the team, not the success Paul Joy implies might have happened, meaning one or the other would have had to go.
Nonetheless, I think he was treated too severly, especially if you look at what sentences dope-takers in different sports now receive.