Betting Advertising on Shirts

[Logicalman]

According to the Beeb (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41172425) there is a plan in place on the political front to make shirt advertising by betting companies illegal.

Interesting issue, keeping politics out of it, I do hate to see betting adverts on shirts, then again, I hate to see ANY advertising on shirts. Surely the clubs can find as good a revenue elsewhere than keep our players looking like walking, running, jumping and diving billboards?



The story ........


Labour says it would ban gambling firms from advertising on football shirts if it came to power.
The party's deputy leader Tom Watson said football had to "play its part in tackling Britain's hidden epidemic of gambling addiction".
Nine English Premier League clubs - and three in Scotland's top flight - have kits sponsored by betting companies.
Gambling on football was worth a record £1.4bn to bookmakers over a 12-month period, figures revealed in May.

Mr Watson, who is also Labour's shadow culture secretary, said the shirt sponsorship deals gave gambling companies "massive exposure".
"Shirt sponsorship sends out a message that football clubs don't take problem gambling among their own fans seriously enough," he said.
"It puts gambling brands in front of fans of all ages, not just at matches but on broadcasts and highlights packages on both commercial television and the BBC."

Labour said rules banning gambling adverts on under-18s teams' shirts should be extended to all sides under the Football Association's remit.
It said it would work with the FA to achieve this before considering legislation.
Gambling law is devolved in Northern Ireland but controlled by Westminster for the rest of the UK.

A government review into betting machines - also looking at the impact of gambling advertising on children and vulnerable people - is under way.
Clive Hawkswood, of the Remote Gambling Association, said the industry was waiting for the government's proposals after the publication of this review.

He said the association was "mindful" of the issues around advertising and young people but questioned what a blanket ban on shirt sponsorship would achieve.

[bill taylors apprentice]

Would be nice but we don't live in a world that would agree to it!

[Holders]

Well, tobacco advertising has been banned so this is the next prime candidate. The fact that they can afford to sponsor shows the kind of money they have to spare/which can be made.

[Snibbo]

Gambling companies are a simple means of transferring money from the poor to the rich.  You can say its people's choice whether or not to gamble,  but these companies target the susceptible and the vulnerable with a barrage of advertising.  Gambling addiction is as bad if not worse than drug addiction.  In fact gambling is a drug

[aaronmcguigan]

The news piece said 9 out of 20 teams carried gambling sponsorship. It's 11 if you include the new sleeve sponsors with WBA (12bet) and Watford (bet138)

[toshes mate]

There are an estimated two million people in the UK who are either addicted to gambling or in danger of becoming addicted and none of the companies concerned have any regard for the damage that can be caused to individuals and their families beyond the message 'Please gamble responsibly'.  Gambling ads have increased ten fold since the law was changed.  Via Match of the Day these companies get free advertising on the BBC regardless of whether logos are on shirts on not.  We should all consider how we feel about young kids being exposed to this kind of coverage because they may become tomorrow's problem gamblers..

[Lighthouse]

Why not ban fast food, holiday destinations,toy adverts, drink adverts, banks. In fact anything that is aimed at taking our money in case we are put under pressure to spend money we don't have. Lets just have Union and Labour party adverts as frankly we are all so weak we need to be led around by our noses by those who are far superior to us and know how we should behave.

Why not take down statues of people we don't agree with anymore. Let's not even allow people to debate in schools or Universities. Let's face it these people are better than us know how we should behave.

Or they could actually leave us alone and start sorting out their own deep problems.

[toshes mate]

Or we could simply exercise a bit of common sense, Lighthouse, and mitigate the problem by tightening the way these companies operate, as we have done with tobacco, alcohol and sugar water drinks, etc.   Addiction is always the responsibility of the addicted person but at least we could try to keep the numbers likely to be influenced down. 

[Holders]

Lighthouse, is there anything that should be banned or should people have full freedom of choice? In other words, where would you draw the line, if at all? Hard drugs?

[Woolly Mammoth]

Why not ban fast food, holiday destinations,toy adverts, drink adverts, banks. In fact anything that is aimed at taking our money in case we are put under pressure to spend money we don't have. Lets just have Union and Labour party adverts as frankly we are all so weak we need to be led around by our noses by those who are far superior to us and know how we should behave.

Why not take down statues of people we don't agree with anymore. Let's not even allow people to debate in schools or Universities. Let's face it these people are better than us know how we should behave.

Or they could actually leave us alone and start sorting out their own deep problems.

0001.jpeg

[Barrett487]

According to the Beeb (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41172425) there is a plan in place on the political front to make shirt advertising by betting companies illegal.

Interesting issue, keeping politics out of it, I do hate to see betting adverts on shirts, then again, I hate to see ANY advertising on shirts. Surely the clubs can find as good a revenue elsewhere than keep our players looking like walking, running, jumping and diving billboards?



The story ........


Labour says it would ban gambling firms from advertising on football shirts if it came to power.
The party's deputy leader Tom Watson said football had to "play its part in tackling Britain's hidden epidemic of gambling addiction".
Nine English Premier League clubs - and three in Scotland's top flight - have kits sponsored by betting companies.
Gambling on football was worth a record £1.4bn to bookmakers over a 12-month period, figures revealed in May.

Mr Watson, who is also Labour's shadow culture secretary, said the shirt sponsorship deals gave gambling companies "massive exposure".
"Shirt sponsorship sends out a message that football clubs don't take problem gambling among their own fans seriously enough," he said.
"It puts gambling brands in front of fans of all ages, not just at matches but on broadcasts and highlights packages on both commercial television and the BBC."

Labour said rules banning gambling adverts on under-18s teams' shirts should be extended to all sides under the Football Association's remit.
It said it would work with the FA to achieve this before considering legislation.
Gambling law is devolved in Northern Ireland but controlled by Westminster for the rest of the UK.

A government review into betting machines - also looking at the impact of gambling advertising on children and vulnerable people - is under way.
Clive Hawkswood, of the Remote Gambling Association, said the industry was waiting for the government's proposals after the publication of this review.

He said the association was "mindful" of the issues around advertising and young people but questioned what a blanket ban on shirt sponsorship would achieve.

What are the odds on this happening?

[Holders]

According to the Beeb (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41172425) there is a plan in place on the political front to make shirt advertising by betting companies illegal.

Interesting issue, keeping politics out of it, I do hate to see betting adverts on shirts, then again, I hate to see ANY advertising on shirts. Surely the clubs can find as good a revenue elsewhere than keep our players looking like walking, running, jumping and diving billboards?



The story ........


Labour says it would ban gambling firms from advertising on football shirts if it came to power.
The party's deputy leader Tom Watson said football had to "play its part in tackling Britain's hidden epidemic of gambling addiction".
Nine English Premier League clubs - and three in Scotland's top flight - have kits sponsored by betting companies.
Gambling on football was worth a record £1.4bn to bookmakers over a 12-month period, figures revealed in May.

Mr Watson, who is also Labour's shadow culture secretary, said the shirt sponsorship deals gave gambling companies "massive exposure".
"Shirt sponsorship sends out a message that football clubs don't take problem gambling among their own fans seriously enough," he said.
"It puts gambling brands in front of fans of all ages, not just at matches but on broadcasts and highlights packages on both commercial television and the BBC."

Labour said rules banning gambling adverts on under-18s teams' shirts should be extended to all sides under the Football Association's remit.
It said it would work with the FA to achieve this before considering legislation.
Gambling law is devolved in Northern Ireland but controlled by Westminster for the rest of the UK.

A government review into betting machines - also looking at the impact of gambling advertising on children and vulnerable people - is under way.
Clive Hawkswood, of the Remote Gambling Association, said the industry was waiting for the government's proposals after the publication of this review.

He said the association was "mindful" of the issues around advertising and young people but questioned what a blanket ban on shirt sponsorship would achieve.

What are the odds on this happening?

I wouldn't bet my shirt on it.

[Barrett487]

Trouble is, the less 'morally acceptable' businesses seem to have the most money and pay the best sponsorship rates.

[Barrett487]

According to the Beeb (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41172425) there is a plan in place on the political front to make shirt advertising by betting companies illegal.

Interesting issue, keeping politics out of it, I do hate to see betting adverts on shirts, then again, I hate to see ANY advertising on shirts. Surely the clubs can find as good a revenue elsewhere than keep our players looking like walking, running, jumping and diving billboards?



The story ........


Labour says it would ban gambling firms from advertising on football shirts if it came to power.
The party's deputy leader Tom Watson said football had to "play its part in tackling Britain's hidden epidemic of gambling addiction".
Nine English Premier League clubs - and three in Scotland's top flight - have kits sponsored by betting companies.
Gambling on football was worth a record £1.4bn to bookmakers over a 12-month period, figures revealed in May.

Mr Watson, who is also Labour's shadow culture secretary, said the shirt sponsorship deals gave gambling companies "massive exposure".
"Shirt sponsorship sends out a message that football clubs don't take problem gambling among their own fans seriously enough," he said.
"It puts gambling brands in front of fans of all ages, not just at matches but on broadcasts and highlights packages on both commercial television and the BBC."

Labour said rules banning gambling adverts on under-18s teams' shirts should be extended to all sides under the Football Association's remit.
It said it would work with the FA to achieve this before considering legislation.
Gambling law is devolved in Northern Ireland but controlled by Westminster for the rest of the UK.

A government review into betting machines - also looking at the impact of gambling advertising on children and vulnerable people - is under way.
Clive Hawkswood, of the Remote Gambling Association, said the industry was waiting for the government's proposals after the publication of this review.

He said the association was "mindful" of the issues around advertising and young people but questioned what a blanket ban on shirt sponsorship would achieve.

What are the odds on this happening?

I wouldn't bet my shirt on it.

Ker-ching !! 😃

[Holders]

I'm not surprised to see Tom Watson's name in the OP. Yet another cause well outside his own expertise that he can jump on to show everyone how virtuous he is.

The irony is the tobacco industry has shown that at least in the short term, the effect of an advertising ban is to make the industry impenetrable for new companies, which serves the major existing firms very well. The biggest winners would be SkyBet, William Hill et al., left free to screw punters in a much less competitive market.

In the longer term, yes maybe it does eradicate the "problem" but if that's the objective why don't we just cut to the chase and make it illegal now? Probably because it would leave a gaping whole in the economy. So no one will gamble anymore but 50,000 nurses will be sacked.

All in all I'm inclined to agree with Lighthouse.

Is there any point at which you'd draw the line or is it "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law".

[Logicalman]

What about banning ALL shirt advertising, as the main thrust of the complaint isn't so much about the advertising, as opposed to the manner of advertising and the exposure it generates when a pic of the favorite footie hero is seen in a mag or online.

[Holders]

Is there any point at which you'd draw the line or is it "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law".

I haven't expressed any feelings about the rights or wrongs of gambling. All I'm getting at is the logic and consistency of an advertising restriction. I can sympathise with those who are against gambling but I don't understand why you wouldn't just ban it outright rather than just restricting its advertising. And if you're going to ban gambling then you also need to ban tobacco, alcohol, McDonalds and so on, as Lighthouse says. Alternatively you take the view that as long as the risks are disclosed then people should be free to make their own choices. There's no logical justification for drawing the line half way in between.

I think the point is that tobacco advertising is banned, junk food advertising on TV banned before 9pm and there's a case for alcohol - but all are legal. I can see the argument for banning the promotion of gambling which can be so addictive and destructive for some, whilst not restricting their right to waste their money in that way if they really wish. There's no doubt that less people smoke now than used to be the case and more responsibility over the use of alcohol when driving so the message does slowly get through.

Me, I'm all for mugs gambling. The lottery has done a power of good and I've never wasted a penny on it. 

[hovewhite]

Politicians appearin to be concerened about peoples welfare,pul the other one ,what next controls on alchohol re introducing the beer escalator tax.
these people anti anything enjoyment so put more tax on it all,thats what the last labour goverment did.big brother believing they know best.they should keep there nose out.

[Woolly Mammoth]

Politicians appearin to be concerened about peoples welfare,pul the other one ,what next controls on alchohol re introducing the beer escalator tax.
these people anti anything enjoyment so put more tax on it all,thats what the last labour goverment did.big brother believing they know best.they should keep there nose out.

Exactly

[Lighthouse]

Or we could simply exercise a bit of common sense, Lighthouse, and mitigate the problem by tightening the way these companies operate, as we have done with tobacco, alcohol and sugar water drinks, etc.   Addiction is always the responsibility of the addicted person but at least we could try to keep the numbers likely to be influenced down.

Couldn't agree more. We could even ask the politicians to actually do some work on this. Instead of going to the easy option and banning things. Addiction is a terrible illness and I do not think enough is done. But banning shirt advertising is not going to help anybody.