EFL player Jamie Jellis receives a five month ban from football after breaching rules by placing 2,248 bets, the FA have confirmed.
The 24-year-old, of League Two Walsall, was charged with breaching Rule E8 of The Football Association (FA) Rules for placing bets on football matches between the 30th of April 2019 and the 4th of July 2023.
The bets, made across five seasons, included 198 bets on competitions involving his clubs and 16 on his own clubs (13 against his team).
The case was heard on the 3rd of September 2025 via video conference by an independent Regulatory Commission, with Jellis admitting the charges and requested a personal hearing.
Jellis placed bets due to youth, naivety, and lack of awareness of FA betting rules, citing boredom and social influences.
He stopped betting in July 2023 upon understanding the rules and advancing his career.
Some bets were placed by a third party with access to his account.
Jellis made a net loss of £2,856.34 from the bets, with no evidence of using insider knowledge.
He expressed remorse, cooperated fully, and has no prior misconduct.
The FA highlighted the prohibition on betting by participants at Step 4 or above, noting the aggravating factor of 16 bets on his own clubs but acknowledging mitigation (e.g., Jellis’s youth, clean record, and modest bet sizes). They sought a financial penalty and a suspension of up to 6 months.
Jellis admitted the breaches, his young age, lack of rule awareness, and betting as a coping mechanism for boredom, noting there was no education on betting rules was provided at his clubs.
The bet against his club (Kings Langley) stemmed from frustration, not intent to influence outcomes. He requested a suspended sanction to protect his career.
The large number of bets (2,248) over an extended period was significant, but Jellis’s youth, remorse, cooperation, and cessation of betting were strong mitigating factors.
No evidence of gambling addiction or match-fixing intent was found.
The 16 bets on his own clubs were aggravating, but only one involved a match he played in, and most were accumulators with modest stakes.
He has been fined £1,200 and reciv 5-month suspension from all football-related activity, suspended for 12 months, effective from 3 September 2025. The suspension activates only if Jellis breaches similar FA rules within this period.
Jellis is warned about future conduct and encouraged to attend an educational program (e.g., with Sporting Chance).
Each party bears its own costs, with the FA covering Commission costs.
The Commission balanced the breach’s severity with Jellis’s mitigating factors, opting for a suspended sanction to avoid harming his career while ensuring accountability. The decision is subject to FA Appeal Regulations.
An independent Regulatory Commission has sanctioned Walsall’s Jamie Jellis for misconduct in relation to breaches of The FA’s betting rules.
Full statement: https://t.co/soFNXr7pKr pic.twitter.com/g7bFosKKrC
— FA Spokesperson (@FAspokesperson) September 12, 2025
📄 FA Update: Jamie Jellis ⤵️
— Walsall FC (@WFCOfficial) September 12, 2025
On 2 June 2025, the Player was interviewed by an investigator who is employed by The FA as a Betting Integrity Investigator.
During the interview, the player admitted to the charges, attributing the bets being placed due to him being a “young, naïve person” at the time when he “never had a full understanding of what I could and couldn’t bet on” and “didn’t think of any consequences back then”.
He stated that “being that young, it was obviously like, ‘I’ll just follow what other people do, and it’s never going to have consequences on me because these other people are doing it as well.’”.
However, he stopped betting “when I gained that knowledge and that understanding of, ‘Well, you can’t actually do this.’
And when I wanted my career to actually go somewhere…”. He stated that he found out what the betting rules were “through other people” around the time when he joined KLFC.
The Player explained that whilst most of the bets were placed by himself, some of them were made by someone else, to whom he had granted access to his betting account.
He stated that he had opened a betting account and started placing bets on football in April 2019 “through maybe boredom, or when I was at digs, and being away from home… It was maybe a comfort thing for me, at that time of my life. I obviously struggled being away from home, being that young, and it was my first experience away”. He stated that he may have also placed bets on horse racing “and stuff like that” during that time.
“I could have stopped at any point, if someone told me that it was going to jeopardise me or my future, and where I wanted to go”. He also denies placing any of the Bets using specific knowledge that he had due to his position in football. He showed remorse and stated repeatedly words to the effect that “I am ashamed of myself, the person that I was back then. It’s a completely different person to who I am now”.
On 18 July 2025, the Player was charged (“Charges”) with misconduct under E1(b) of the Rules in respect of the Bets placed on football matches between 30 April 2019 to 4 July 2023. The particulars of the Charges were as follows:
(1) 2018/19 season – it was alleged that the Player placed 119 bets (“2018/19 Bets”) on football matches between 30 April 2019 and 31 July 2019 whilst he was a participant at SFC in breach of Rule E8(1)(a)(i) –
a. 109 of the 2018/19 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition.
b. 10 of the 2018/19 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition in which the Player’s club and/or the Player was participating.
(2) 2019/20 season – it was alleged that the Player placed 302 bets (“2019/20 Bets”) on football matches between 2 August 2019 and 26 July 2020 whilst he was a participant at SFC, AUFC and HTFC in breach of Rule E8(1)(a)(i) –
a. 249 of the 2019/20 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition.
b. 53 of the 2019/20 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition in which the Player’s club and/or the Player was participating.
(3) 2020/21 season – it was alleged that the Player placed 428 bets (“2020/21 Bets”) on football matches between 1 August 2020 and 13 July 2021 whilst he was a participant at AUFC in breach of Rule E8.1 –
a. 405 of the 2020/21 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition.
b. 23 of the 2020/21 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition in which the Player’s club and/or the Player was participating.
(4) 2021/22 season – it was alleged that the Player placed 622 bets (“2021/22 Bets”) on football matches between 13 August 2021 and 31 July 2022 whilst he was a participant at AUFC, KLFC and HHFC in breach of Rule E8.1 –
a. 570 of the 2021/22 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition.
b. 52 of the 2021/22 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition in which the Player’s club and/or the Player was participating.
(5) 2022/23 season – it was alleged that the Player placed 777 bets (“2022/23 Bets”) on football matches between 1 August 2022 and 4 July 2023 whilst he was a participant at KLFC and TFC in breach of Rule E8.1 –
a. 717 of the 2022/23 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition.
b. 60 of the 2022/23 Bets were placed on the result and/or progress and/or conduct and/or any other aspect of a football match or competition in which the Player’s club and/or the Player was participating.
14. On 7 August 2025, the Player admitted to the Charges and requested an opportunity to attend a Commission for a personal hearing.
He stated that he wished to be represented by Mr. Nick Cusack of the PFA.
On 6 August 2025, a Mitigation and Defence Case Summary was submitted on behalf of the Player. On 7 August 2025, the Player also submitted a written statement.
15. The FA’s position is that under its Betting Rules, a Participant at Step 4 or above is prohibited from betting on the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of, or occurrence in, a football match or competition, or any other matter concerning or related to football anywhere in the world, including the transfer of players, employment of managers, team selection or disciplinary matters.
16. The FA did not provide written submissions on the Charges but relied on the following evidence: (i) witness statement of (FA Betting Integrity Investigator) dated 3 June 2025; and (ii) transcript of the Interview.
17. The Investigator stated that the Player was identified as having potentially breached The FA’s Betting Rules. The FA then contacted all UK-licensed betting operators and asked them to share any accounts in the Player’s name that showed breaches of The FA’s Betting Rules. This resulted in four accounts (“Accounts”) being shared with The FA by four different betting operators.
18. The Accounts showed a total of 2,248 football related bets made by the Player across 5 separate seasons, with the Player making a total net loss of £2,856.34 (staking £15,420.78 and with a return of £12,564.44), as follows –
(1) In the 2018/19 season, the Player placed 119 bets with a net profit of £272.79 (staking £641.63 and with a return of £914.42).
(2) In the 2019/20 season, the Player placed 302 bets with a net loss of £627.92 (staking £1,608.88 and with a return of £980.96).
(3) In the 2020/21 season, the Player placed 428 bets with a net loss of £680.38 (staking £2,635.03 and with a return of £1,954.65).
(4) In the 2021/22 season, the Player placed 622 bets with a net loss of £109.21 (staking £4,466.28 and with a return of £4,357.07).
(5) In the 2022/23 season, the Player placed 777 bets with a net loss of £1,711.62 (staking £6,068.96 and with a return of £4,357.34).
19. The Investigator confirmed that 198 of the Bets included games in competitions that the Player’s clubs participated in during the relevant seasons (comprising 265 FA Cup selections, 66 League Two selections, 51 Southern League Premier Division South selections, 24 Southern League Premier Division Central selections, 19 EFL Trophy selections, 17 FA Trophy selections and 10 National League South
selections) –
(1) In respect of the 198 Bets, the Player made a net loss of £280.65 (staking £1,345.69 and with a return of £1,065.04).
(2) Of the 198 Bets, 16 had been placed by the Player on his own club (with 13 being against his own club) in which he made a net loss of £81.62 (staking £106.33 and with a return of £24.71). All of the 16 Bets were accumulators and shows that the Player had bet on the following outcomes –
a. SFC to lose 9 times;
b. KLFC to lose 4 times;
c. SFC to win 1 time;
d. SFC to draw 1 time;
e. KLFC to win 1 time.
(3) In relation to the 11 Bets placed on SFC covering 10 separate matches when the Player was a scholar at the club, since he did not make any appearances for SFC, he was not involved in any of these matches.
a. On 24 August 2019, the Player placed a £6 accumulator which included Mansfield to beat SFC. The match finished 0-0 and therefore, the Bet was unsuccessful.
b. On 30 August 2019, the Player placed a £6.11 accumulator which included Macclesfield to beat SFC. The match finished 2-2 and therefore, the Bet was unsuccessful.
c. On 7 September 2019, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included Cheltenham to beat SFC. Cheltenham beat SFC 4-2 and the Bet was successful, with the Player making a profit of £19.62.
d. On 14 September 2019, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included SFC to beat Carlisle United. SFC lost 3-2 and therefore, the Bet was unsuccessful.
e. On 21 September 2019, the Player placed two £5 accumulators which both included Forest Green Rovers to beat SFC. The match finished 0-0 and therefore, both of the Player’s Bets were unsuccessful.
f. On 5 October 2019, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included Colchester United to beat SFC. Whilst SFC ended up losing the match 3-2, other selections in the Bet lost and the Bet overall was unsuccessful.
g. For the remaining 4 Bets that the Player placed on SFC, he was on loan at either AUFC or HTFC.
i. On 9 November 2019, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included Peterborough United to beat SFC. The match finished 1-1 and therefore, the Bet was unsuccessful.
ii. On 19 November 2019, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included Peterborough United to beat SFC. Whilst SFC ended up losing the match 2-0, other selections in the Bet lost and the Bet overall was unsuccessful.
iii. On 7 December 2019, the Player placed a £3 accumulator which included SFC to draw with Crawley. Whilst SFC ended up drawing this match 0-0, other selections in the Bet lost and the Bet overall was unsuccessful.
iv. On 29 December 2019, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included Plymouth Argyle to beat SFC. Whilst SFC ended up losing the match 2-1, other selections in the Bet lost and the Bet overall was unsuccessful.
(4) In relation to the 5 Bets placed on KLFC covering 4 separate matches –
a. On 23 October 2021, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included KLFC to beat Merthyr Town. The Player came on as a 46th minute substitute in this match which finished 1-1. The Bet was unsuccessful.
b. On 29 October 2022, the Player placed a £5 accumulator which included Carshalton Athletic to beat KLFC. The Player was not in the squad for this match which KLFC won 1-0 and the Bet was unsuccessful.
c. On 14 November 2022, the Player placed one £20.22 accumulator and one £10 accumulator which both included Rushall Olympic to beat KLFC. The Player was on loan at TFC when this Bet was placed. Whilst KLFC ended up losing 1-0, other selections in the Bet lost and the Bet was unsuccessful.
d. On 28 November 2022, the Player placed an £11 accumulator which included Nuneaton Borough to beat KLFC. The Player was on loan at TFC when this Bet was placed. Whilst KLFC ended up losing 2-1, other selections in the Bet lost and the Bet was unsuccessful.
20. During the Hearing, Ms. Turner took the Commission through the history of the matter in detail, in particular details of the 16 Bets that were placed by the Player on his own club which were considered to be aggravating. The FA concluded that although there was a high impact on the overall perception, this was mitigated by the fact that the Player had been a scholar at the time when the 16 Bets were placed or was on loan to another club. Of the 16 Bets that were placed by the Player on his own club, only one involved the Player playing and the Bet placed was for KLFC to win. The FA accepted that the majority of the Bets placed were accumulators and the size of the average Bet placed was fairly modest. It was accepted that there was a wealth of mitigation in this case, including the Player’s young age when he started betting, and the fact that he has a clean record. The Commission was invited to impose a financial penalty as well as a suspension of no more than 6 months.
21. The Player has admitted to the Charges and stated that most of the Bets were general football bets placed as part of low stake multi-game accumulators which was done to alleviate boredom or as part of social activity with friends. The only Bet that was placed when the Player played for KLFC was part of an accumulator for KLFC to win which was said to be “the primary aim of any Footballer”. The only Bet placed for KLFC to lose was said to be “in the context of someone at the Football Club in an attempt to prevent [the Player] from moving on. The bet was motivated by anger, and [the Player] had no prospect of playing”.
22. The mitigation put forward emphasised the Player being a young man who was unaware of the specifics of the FA Betting Rules and who used betting to cope with boredom and setbacks to his hopes of having a career as a professional football player. It was stated that he has no previous record of misconduct and has fully cooperated with the FA investigation. Any immediate suspension was said to put his first-team place in jeopardy as well as to have the predictable effect of resulting in negative and perhaps harmful consequences.
23. The Player further provided a written statement dated 7 August 2025 in which he stated that he does not believe that he has received education on the FA’s betting rules whilst playing for SFC. He stated that “mates who played local football were all putting ACCAs on as part of their Saturday routine and when I turned 18, I started doing the same”. The Player stated that at the time when the Bets were placed, “it was not in my mind that I could be getting involved in the Professional game again”. He confirmed “[t]here was nothing at any of the Clubs I played at on loan from Stevenage to indicate that I was not permitted to bet on Football” and the Bets were not placed on the basis of inside knowledge.
24. He stated that the Bet placed on KLFC to lose was made in response to the of the club appearing to resent his attempt to improve his career by pursuing an opportunity to join TFC which had annoyed him. The Player stated that he has not placed a bet on football since 4 July 2023 and confirmed that “I take full responsibility for my actions”. He showed remorse and stated that “[i]t was obviously naive” and further stated that “I can guarantee that I will not be betting on Football in the future”.
27. At the Hearing, Mr. Cusack accepted on behalf of the Player that the number of Bets placed was substantial although not prolific. It was stressed that the Player was young and inexperienced, with a lack of awareness and comprehensive understanding of The FA Betting Rules at the time that the Bets were placed. It was submitted that he had been honest, candid and transparent throughout the proceedings. The Commission was referred to a recent case in October 202 involving Gary Powell who was said to have received a £250 fine for betting activities with mitigation including his lack of awareness of The FA Betting Rules. Mr. Cusack stressed that any immediate suspension would have an adverse effect on the Player’s football career which may in turn affect his health condition. The Commission was invited to suspend any sporting sanction that may be imposed. The Player also took the opportunity to address the Commission and apologised.