Skip to content
Become a Partner

301 of 448 Turkish Club Officials Avoid Betting Sanctions

301 of 448 Turkish Club Officials Avoid Betting Sanctions
Most of the 448 Turkish football club officials investigated over betting will not face disciplinary penalties. The country's football federation announced 147 bans on October 20, while the other 301 cases ended without punishment.

Each ban lasts 45 days. Trabzonspor President Ertuğrul Doğan is among those sanctioned.

The Turkish Football Federation’s disciplinary decision contains individual rulings for all 448 officials.

301 Cases End Without a Penalty

The Professional Football Disciplinary Board (PFDK) found no grounds for penalties in 301 cases because the elements of the alleged disciplinary violations were not established. The other 147 officials received 45-day bans under Article 57(2) of the football disciplinary regulations, with Article 13 also applied.

The numbers give a different picture from the original referral list:

  • 67.2% received no disciplinary penalty;
  • 32.8% were banned for 45 days.

That is roughly two officials without a penalty for every one sanctioned.

A referral to the PFDK did not mean a disciplinary breach had already been established.


Doğan Banned, Daltaban and Aküzüm Not Punished

Doğan was one of the most prominent names on the original list. He has now received a 45-day ban, as has Erzurumspor FK President Ahmet Dal.

On September 30, Doğan said the betting account associated with him was an old one that he had previously disclosed. He denied intentionally breaking the rules.

Former Beşiktaş vice-president Hakan Daltaban received no penalty. Neither did Hüseyin Ural Aküzüm, a former Galatasaray executive who was serving on the TFF board when the investigation reached club officials.

All three appeared in 15M’s October 3 report. Of those three, only Doğan was sanctioned.


All 147 Bans Set at 45 Days

The October 20 rulings give the same punishment length to every sanctioned official, regardless of their club or position. The document does not identify the bookmakers used by those investigated or provide the amounts allegedly wagered.

Nor should the 301 decisions against imposing penalties be read as confirmation that no betting took place. The board’s finding concerns whether the alleged conduct met the requirements for a disciplinary offence.

Author of the news

Content writer

Olga is an iGaming editor and writer with hands-on experience in the industry since 2023. She covers industry news, operator updates, product launches, and key developments across the global gambling market.

Author Profile

Have you enjoyed the news?