Labour: Scrap betting ads on football kits

[R'Albin]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did Tampax not sponsor HMFC at one time?

So they were in the red in more ways than one.

[Tinribs]

I was a little uneasy when Hibs first announced the tie up with marathon, but as others have said they have actually been rather good with the club and fans. I would rather have them than the entity that used to be called Aberdeen asset management.

I do feel sympathy for problem gamblers, I also feel sympathy for problem drinkers but the vast majority of people seem to tick along ok. Education and regulation are probably the best ways to deal with issues.

[Godsahibby]

Personally I don't think it's the sponsors on the strips that's the issue. It's the totally over the top in your face tv advertising. Every second advert is either Ray in your face or encouraging the young team to live the Ladbrokes Life. Bet in play right now and get these odds etc etc. That's got to be regulated better.

[hibsbollah]

I like the Labour Party policy as I like their position on taxing TV deals to invest in grass roots. I don't like the proliferation of betting shops, I don't like the way the industry has leeched onto football and I think gambling addiction is massively underreported and is destroying lives. I'd like it if we looked elsewhere for sponsorship when the current agreement expires.

[lyonhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's really no such thing as responsible smoking as any amount of it is harmful in some way. Gambling, while addictive in some cases, is totally harmless to the vast majority who enjoy it in moderation. Why should they suffer?

I'm willing to bet that alcohol ruins more lives than gambling.

I'm not entirely sure how responsible gamblers would actually suffer if there was no gambling ads in football?!

It's not like it'll be a gambling blackout and I'm sure a stroll down any high Street in the UK would still involve walking past 3 or 4 bookies

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If drink and gambling are banned as sponsors, where exactly is the necessary sponsorship money going to come from?

Lets face it, these two things are inextricably linked with football/sport. It seems a nonsense to prohibit them from advertising to sports fans.

Clearly some people do have issues with gambling, but surely the vast majority do not? Same with drinking. Do we really need to be mollycoddled in this way? I don't believe we do.

Targeting football shirts is so short sighted.

Paddy Power have over 1.5 million likes on their facebook page. This is 50% more people than will watch a Man United Liverpool game on Sky Sports.

Footy Accumulators facebook page has over half a million likes, with daily links directly to various online bookies.

Millions of people follow gambling sites, Tipsters etc on Twitter where one click can have a bet right in front of you ready to be gambled.

Are Labour going to stop all this?

[Bobby's Cinema]

A lot of people mentioning the adverts being the problem. I haven't seen social media mentioned? Bookies trying to be your pal tweeting about your team. These accounts must be controlled from somewhere because if you ever try searching for any of their tweets, you will find the same standard tweet has been sent by all other major betting accounts it's an embarrassment.

Nonsense Tweets such as:
Unbeaten season ✅
Treble ✅
Champions league ✅
Brendan Rodgers

IMO there should be rules in place where these accounts are forced to be completely impartial, though I suppose that would be banning freedom of speech so not sure what you'd do. The 'banter' from places like paddy p seems to attract people, this is as big a problem as adverts on tv or strips, maybe even bigger.

[LaMotta]

Beat you by a minute

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If drink and gambling are banned as sponsors, where exactly is the necessary sponsorship money going to come from?

Lets face it, these two things are inextricably linked with football/sport. It seems a nonsense to prohibit them from advertising to sports fans.

Clearly some people do have issues with gambling, but surely the vast majority do not? Same with drinking. Do we really need to be mollycoddled in this way? I don't believe we do.

So long as they are banned for every club then it doesn't matter. Either other industries will step in or clubs will pay players less.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

Gambling, smoking and alcohol are all serious addictive problems in the UK and elsewhere. Quite often, people are addicted to more than one of those at the same time.

I've seen first hand the end results of the addictions and, believe me, it isn't pretty. People lose their jobs, houses, families. Children live in misery and often suffer serious phsycological damage because of the arguments and stress when daddy (and it usually is daddy) comes home with no wage packet or more new loans that they can possibly pay back, but not enough money to pay the telephone, Leccy or Gas bills and nothing left for food shopping.

I realise that some people have fun gambling and wouldn't call themselves addicts, just as I occasionally have a drink and I'm certainly no drunk, but I do have a problem with anything that legitimizes what is becoming yet another serious addiction, that of online gambling.

Everyone is entitled to their view but I'd rather not have players and fans of my club being walking billboards for these people.

[GreenOnions]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Targeting football shirts is so short sighted.

Paddy Power have over 1.5 million likes on their facebook page. This is 50% more people than will watch a Man United Liverpool game on Sky Sports.

Footy Accumulators facebook page has over half a million likes, with daily links directly to various online bookies.

Millions of people follow gambling sites, Tipsters etc on Twitter where one click can have a bet right in front of you ready to be gambled.

Are Labour going to stop all this?

Just like the tobacco companies' advertising was claimed to be "wholly about trying to get existing smokers to switch brands" line this is another argument of the classic variety. It is applied to many different debates but basically says that "the problem in front of us is so big there's no point in doing anything".

Well - I rarely agree with this view. In fact - when major change is required and many people are still to be persuaded then often a gradualist approach is best with change being achieved in an incremental way.

No-one in this debate is talking about stopping gambling or stopping drinking alcohol. However, we don't have to allow these things to be encouraged via advertising - particularly in sport where kids are such heavy consumers.

Is it not time that someone took a lead here rather than accepting everything as inevitable?

[Ozyhibby]

When cigarette ads were banned, smoking levels dropped. When alcohol ads were banned, people drunk less.
I'm pretty sure the same pattern will follow with gambling.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TonyStokeprano]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not a differing opinion, don't you get that.? You're utterly lost on this subject.

you sound so patronising its unreal, its clearly a difference of opinion scouse hibee has, one that i happen to agree with. as for the earlier poster sammy7nil saying you can lose your house and family through gambling but you can only drink so much, never heard so much ***** in my life, you can lose everything through drink, or any other addiction......

[High-On-Hibs]

For those who say they like Marathon bet because "they're good with the club". Well of course they're good with the club. They're selling a service to tens of thousands of people, they're hardly going to show themselves in a bad light towards potential customers.

But consider this. Within those tens of thousands of fans are also your children. They may not be able to gamble now, but when they're old enough to do so, they'll certainly be well aware of all the gambling institutions that are available to them through years upon years of endless propaganda being shoved in their faces, giving them the impression that the suits who want to empty every penny they can out of them, are somehow a bunch of great guys.

By then, the mentality will be "oh well, everybody else is doing it, so there's no need for me to stop either".

[Thegreenside]

does anyone go to have a bet when they normally wouldn't just because of marathon bet on the front of the hibs jersey?

[High-On-Hibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

does anyone go to have a bet when they normally wouldn't just because of marathon bet on the front of the hibs jersey?

The question is whether people are actually consciously aware of that connection or not. The art of advertising is to root itself into the subconcious of the viewers. The most problemed gamblers are the ones who say they don't have a problem at all, because they don't even know it.

[Steve-O]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just like the tobacco companies' advertising was claimed to be "wholly about trying to get existing smokers to switch brands" line this is another argument of the classic variety. It is applied to many different debates but basically says that "the problem in front of us is so big there's no point in doing anything".

Well - I rarely agree with this view. In fact - when major change is required and many people are still to be persuaded then often a gradualist approach is best with change being achieved in an incremental way.

No-one in this debate is talking about stopping gambling or stopping drinking alcohol. However, we don't have to allow these things to be encouraged via advertising - particularly in sport where kids are such heavy consumers.

Is it not time that someone took a lead here rather than accepting everything as inevitable?

Surely parents have to take a lead here? Explain what gambling is all about, what the pitfalls are, and that they can't do it until they are 18.

IMO kids are ridiculously protected nowadays. In reality, they're just the same as us, only younger!

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

does anyone go to have a bet when they normally wouldn't just because of marathon bet on the front of the hibs jersey?

IIRC, Marathon Bet have offered exclusive incentives to Hibs supporters in the past. It doesn't take much to hook people of a certain disposition.

They have been an excellent sponsor so far so I've nothing against them - far from it. I do think though that there is far too much betting advertising and influence in British football - it's everywhere (and living abroad I don't see as much as those in the UK). I do find it all a bit unhealthy.

[--------]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Gambling, smoking and alcohol are all serious addictive problems in the UK and elsewhere. Quite often, people are addicted to more than one of those at the same time.

I've seen first hand the end results of the addictions and, believe me, it isn't pretty. People lose their jobs, houses, families. Children live in misery and often suffer serious phsycological damage because of the arguments and stress when daddy (and it usually is daddy) comes home with no wage packet or more new loans that they can possibly pay back, but not enough money to pay the telephone, Leccy or Gas bills and nothing left for food shopping.

I realise that some people have fun gambling and wouldn't call themselves addicts, just as I occasionally have a drink and I'm certainly no drunk, but I do have a problem with anything that legitimizes what is becoming yet another serious addiction, that of online gambling.

Everyone is entitled to their view but I'd rather not have players and fans of my club being walking billboards for these people.

Yes. Plenty of it around, and all these addictions damage lives, each in its own way.

We can't watch a sports event on TV these days without R** W******* at you to "bet responsibly" on ***, or a couple of guys discussing how to maximise your winnings (they never lose) by going online with L*******s or B*****d or whoever.

Companies don't pay loadsa money for advertising that doesn't work. This is literally people spending money for nothing - most gamblers don't win (if they did, the betting companies would be out of business) - which means that most customers get nothing in return for their time and cash, and the betting companies hand large wodges to the advertisers who produce the crap we have to watch at half-time, or between overs, or between races .... As I say - at the sharp end, lots of money spent for nothing.

Like the old saying - the bookie goes home from the races in his Rolls-Royce; his customers get the bus, provided of course they still have change left for their bus fare.

Once upon a time it was the cigarette companies who were all over the TV screens. There was a ban - which has been gradually eroded over the years, thanks mainly, I believe, to motor sport (GP, NASCAR, Indycar, etc). Tobacco companies apparently now seek growth through "promotions that build brand equity through adult consumer experiences" (quote from an industry press-release, btw), though the "adult consumer experience" of a greatly increased likelihood of coughing my lungs up day by day in the form of black phelgm, chemo, radiation therapy and surgery, heart disease and death doesn't appeal to me personally.

Nor does losing my car, my house, my friends and my reputation 'betting responsibly on free-six-foive' with Fat Ray. Anyone else, feel free. But responsible government would seek to drastically limit people's exposure to the sort of high-pressure advertising we have just now on every communications medium.

[High-On-Hibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Surely parents have to take a lead here? Explain what gambling is all about, what the pitfalls are, and that they can't do it until they are 18.

IMO kids are ridiculously protected nowadays. In reality, they're just the same as us, only younger!

Kids don't learn from what they're told to do. They learn from what their parents actually do themselves. No use telling the kids that gambling is bad, just before you're about to pop down to the bookies to pop a few accumulators on. It just makes them want to gamble as soon as possible, because the grown ups are doing it. Just like smoking and alcohol, they see bad habits of grown ups as something "cool" and something they want to try out themselves.

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Kids don't learn from what they're told to do. They learn from what their parents actually do themselves. No use telling the kids that gambling is bad, just before you're about to pop down to the bookies to pop a few accumulators on. It just makes them want to gamble as soon as possible, because the grown ups are doing it. Just like smoking and alcohol, they see bad habits of grown ups as something "cool" and something they want to try out themselves.

Some people may start gambling after seeing others in their family do it, but it mostly comes from doing what your mates do.

Up until my late 20s I'd almost never gambled (normally a couple of quid on whatever jockey was wearing the closest to a Hibs top in the Grand National). Then one night I went to the casino for the first time with a new crowd - friends of friends who became good mates. I went in with £30 on me and left an hour later with £150 - that's all it takes.

I became a regular and, apart from a couple of times when I was blootered, I didn't really take any sore ones - in fact I generally left my bank card at home and only took what I could afford (and expect) to lose.

I've only been in a casino (to gamble) once since I've been here (13 years), but arriving at the blackjack table I saw that everyone else was playing hundreds per hand. I wasn't in the same league and didn't feel at ease, so I didn't even bother.

[emerald green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So they were in the red in more ways than one.

[High-On-Hibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Some people may start gambling after seeing others in their family do it, but it mostly comes from doing what your mates do.

Up until my late 20s I'd almost never gambled (normally a couple of quid on whatever jockey was wearing the closest to a Hibs top in the Grand National). Then one night I went to the casino for the first time with a new crowd - friends of friends who became good mates. I went in with £30 on me and left an hour later with £150 - that's all it takes.

I became a regular and, apart from a couple of times when I was blootered, I didn't really take any sore ones - in fact I generally left my bank card at home and only took what I could afford (and expect) to lose.

I've only been in a casino (to gamble) once since I've been here (13 years), but arriving at the blackjack table I saw that everyone else was playing hundreds per hand. I wasn't in the same league and didn't feel at ease, so I didn't even bother.

How do you suppose your mates started? The buck has to end somewhere.

Also, you grew up at a time when gambling advertisements were frowned upon and hugely regulated. Not like now, with ads telling people to put a bet on in between every sporting event.

People might not want to believe that ads have such a huge impact on the behaviour of society as a whole. But if it didn't, the companies wouldn't be spending hundreds of millions every year pushing it into peoples minds.

If things keep heading the way they are, gambling will eventually have a monopoly over everything. Almost every advert on the TV will be a gambling promotion, because they'll be able to offer the most money for the advertisement time slots. That's the damage that zero regulation will do.

[Ozyhibby]

if the ads don't work, why would anyone care if they got banned?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KWJ]

As someone who battles the gambling demons it's mad how rife it is in this country.

I've lived in Canada where to put on a bet person you need to do it at the post office and it was such a hassle it wasn't worth it. There were issues with using online bookies too, I could use my laptop but not my phone. Can't recall but perhaps I had to use a VPN.

The lack of advertising of it meant that I'd only put a bet on when it was my idea to which was pretty seldom really. There's so much added entertainment away from the game itself in North America that there's little need to have a flutter to make it more interesting.

In Australia I think online betting is growing but there's still limited options and to put a bet on in person requires visiting a TAB and getting pretty **** odds that differ depending on what state you are in. The one thing they do that would be a huge change here is that bookies are inside pubs. Didn't bet much in Australia but when I did it was at these things when others were too. NZ has some of these too but it's not as rife. Pokies are the gambling killer for them but it's kinda like smoking in that you have to go into a dark and dingey room to play them and generally feel bad about life!

USA has the issue of pharmaceutical advertising and I disagree with their outright banning of gambling in most states.

But I come home and think it's sickening the repetitive cycles of gambling commercials sandwiched by pay day loan adverts aimed at those on low incomes or the unemployed. How this has been allowed to grow so much in the past 10-15 years without somebody finally saying STOP is beyond me.

I no longer have live TV but these advertisements are still rammed down your throat as you go about your day be it on bus stops, billboards, taxis or any other means.

That said I don't have a problem with betting companies sponsoring football as somebody has to and they are clearly the highest bidders and it makes sense that it targets their demographic. Marathon Bet in particular have been a great sponsor. There is a dangerously increasing gambling problem in society though which is why the bookies are making such money and saturating the advertising market with more and more online bookies sprouting up every year. This is happening on the back of 1/3 children being born into poverty in this country. The two shouldn't be allowed to happen hand in hand and while I'm no Labour fan and their motives could be called into question if it starts the debate of Gambling advertising in this country then bring it on.

Okay that was a bitty ramble, apologies.

[Renfrew_Hibby]

What I find sad is football fans not bothing with a match on the telly or even going if they don't have a bet on it.
"I need an interest" they say and "if I don't have a bet on then what's the point in watching it?"
The point is, I thought you were a football fan!

[Thegreenside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

IIRC, Marathon Bet have offered exclusive incentives to Hibs supporters in the past. It doesn't take much to hook people of a certain disposition.

They have been an excellent sponsor so far so I've nothing against them - far from it. I do think though that there is far too much betting advertising and influence in British football - it's everywhere (and living abroad I don't see as much as those in the UK). I do find it all a bit unhealthy.

They 100% have. My point is the majority of people who take these offers up are more than likely to be having a bet anyway.

Should we stop Eden mill having their branding on the top also? Pretty sure they gave an offer to hibs fans at the start of the sponsorship

[Renfrew_Hibby]

The French were very successful in banning alcohol ads from all pro sport.

The problem is football in this country is now totally dependent upon gambling firms money, only TV contracts are more important and even then these two industries have become intertwinde hence we have the SkyBet Championship!

The fear for me is football, and many pro sports, are now open to serious match fixing, especially from the far east as there is tens of millions wagered on a daily basis.
As for gambling in society, we have to reign in online firms, even the fun and cheerie bingo sites as house wife's and grannies are even becoming addicted.

High street bookies are fine as they are heavily regulated and staff have a duty of care which most adhear to, just like pubs. You're local bookies can be a valuable part of a local community just as a well run pub can be.

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just like the tobacco companies' advertising was claimed to be "wholly about trying to get existing smokers to switch brands" line this is another argument of the classic variety. It is applied to many different debates but basically says that "the problem in front of us is so big there's no point in doing anything".

Well - I rarely agree with this view. In fact - when major change is required and many people are still to be persuaded then often a gradualist approach is best with change being achieved in an incremental way.

No-one in this debate is talking about stopping gambling or stopping drinking alcohol. However, we don't have to allow these things to be encouraged via advertising - particularly in sport where kids are such heavy consumers.

Is it not time that someone took a lead here rather than accepting everything as inevitable?

Ok, so why punish Football clubs first? Why not stop Facebook and Twitter from making money from gambling adverts?

Why not look at Horse Racing?

My point was not that nothing should be done...

[GreenOnions]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Surely parents have to take a lead here? Explain what gambling is all about, what the pitfalls are, and that they can't do it until they are 18.

IMO kids are ridiculously protected nowadays. In reality, they're just the same as us, only younger!

You're right of course. All I would ask is that, if all parents did that, would we be able to scrap all restrictions on availability and promotion of products that can cause addiction/harm? Class A drugs, pornography, drinking, smoking, gambling etc?

If not - then are we not accepting that, whilst enabling the maximum level of personal freedom, some limits have to be placed on that freedom to do certain things and (where banning is inappropriate) to promote the use of certain things?

Some of those judgements could be ethically motivated whilst others might be evidence-based.

Is it not a role of society / organisations to play a part in this or is it all down solely to the individual?