Betting/Gaming ads during football matches

eagle eye

This just came up in a thread and I am very concerned about it myself. I don't like the idea that these advertisements are on during games. I think there should be a watershed for ads like these which at the earliest should be 8.00pm imo.

Lately there has been an ad for a betting/gaming firm which has Jurgen Klopp in it and I'm really concerned by this because younger people who are easily influenced are more likely to be taken in by an ad with a well known figure from the Premier league in it.

I'm just wondering what other peoples thoughts are on this. I'm thinking about kids here which is the major concern as far as I'm concerned.

Fr Tod Umptious

Totally agree with you.

Seven year old is big into Liverpool and sure enough there is Klopp doing an ad for a gambling company.

Obviously I have my own responsibility about teaching him about gambling which I will do, but ads all over the place do not help.

I find BT sport to be very bad for it, every as between overs in the Big Bash cricket is for gambling.

Harry Palmr

I used to respect Ray Winston.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Totally agree with you.

Seven year old is big into Liverpool and sure enough there is Klopp doing an ad for a gambling company.

Obviously I have my own responsibility about teaching him about gambling which I will do, but ads all over the place do not help.

I find BT sport to be very bad for it, every as between overseas in the Big Bash cricket is for gambling.

End of discussion.

Don't see the issue with it.If people want to spend their money gambling then fair enough, companies are entitled to advertise their products if they want and there should be no restrictions to it.

If you stop at gambling how about stopping ads for coca cola,mars bars,loan companies,alcohol all of which can have negative affects on people

thebaz

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm thinking about kids here which is the major concern as far as I'm concerned.

it also affects adults in all walks of life - gambling can become a horrible addiction - which has affected many sports people in particular - nothing wrong with an odd flutter - but I'm sure most of us know someone whose life has become unbearable thanks to gambling - I'm all against too much nanny state preaching in our over Politically correct world , but agree gambling advertisement seams wrong

keane2097

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

End of discussion.

Don't see the issue with it.If people want to spend their money gambling then fair enough, companies are entitled to advertise their products if they want and there should be no restrictions to it.

If you stop at gambling how about stopping ads for coca cola,mars bars,loan companies,alcohol all of which can have negative affects on people

How do you feel about cigarette advertising being banned?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you just wondering.

Jayop

Advertising works and gambling is a cancer. Should be banned.

sword1

With gambling so much easier now due to online the true extent of the problem is not being seen yet,only place it is obvious is the bookies pockets .It should be banned or at least a watershed time .

howiya

I enjoy a flutter but would also be of the opinion there are two many ads for it. Its got to the stage where they're nearly having the opposite effect that they're designed to. A lot of people don't watch the ads

Ads annoy me so the more you advertise the less you're gonna get from me. "€3 can help a child in Africa". If you didn't spend the money on making an ad or an expensive CEO I might be more inclined to give you my €3. Fcuk off

Jayop

sword1 wrote: »

With gambling so much easier now due to online the true extent of the problem is not being seen yet,only place it is obvious is the bookies pockets .It should be banned or at least a watershed time .

Go to pretty much any pub in the country with football on on a Saturday and every young lad has bets on now. They can't enjoy the game without money on it and the advertising is effecting that. When I was young betting was an issue but nothing like it is now.

Dirty Dingus McGee

keane2097 wrote: »

How do you feel about cigarette advertising being banned?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you just wondering.

If they were to bring it back I wouldn't mind.

I watched the embassy world snooker championship and embassy world darts championship when I was younger and I've never smoked nor even considered it.

Advertising obviously works but people (and childrens parents) really have to take personal responsibility. Where do you draw the line over what is and is not acceptable to be advertised.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Jayop wrote: »

Advertising works and gambling is a cancer. Should be banned.

For people stupid enough to not know when enough is enough.

Agent Coulson

Does this include the Fantasy Football leagues that are being heavily advertised now as well that are just as bad.

howiya

To the people saying advertising works, to what extent does it work?

Do ye buy everything you see in an ad?

MD1990

Jayop wrote: »

Advertising works and gambling is a cancer. Should be banned.

How many bets have you lost recently?:p

keane2097

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

If they were to bring it back I wouldn't mind.

I watched the embassy world snooker championship and embassy world darts championship when I was younger and I've never smoked nor even considered it.

Advertising obviously works but people (and childrens parents) really have to take personal responsibility. Where do you draw the line over what is and is not acceptable to be advertised.

It just occurs to me that ads for Mayfair Menthols during Spongebob would give me a pretty queasy feeling so I find it hard to imagine that there isn't a moral issue here.

The fact that acknowledging that would lead to difficult 'where do we draw the line ' questions doesn't seem like a good reason to to allow everything all the time.

We don't allow porn on TV on Saturday mornings because we make an assessment as a society that it might be harmful to children watching it, it's hard to argue in that context that a similar discussion around booze, gambling etc doesn't make sense.

Fwiw I say this as someone who regularly bets amounts on sports I imagine most here would blanch at.

Richard Hillman

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

If they were to bring it back I wouldn't mind.

I watched the embassy world snooker championship and embassy world darts championship when I was younger and I've never smoked nor even considered it.

Advertising obviously works but people (and childrens parents) really have to take personal responsibility. Where do you draw the line over what is and is not acceptable to be advertised.

It wasn't until they got rid of Embassy until I knew what Embassy even was. Same with the Martell Grand National. I just thought it was the name :pac:

Agent Coulson

howiya wrote: »

To the people saying advertising works, to what extent does it work?

Do ye buy everything you see in an ad?

Eh you don't think advertising works?

So companies waste multi billions a year on it for no reason?


Every single thing we buy for whatever purpose we buy it is down to some form of advertising.

Hotblack Desiato

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

I watched the embassy world snooker championship and embassy world darts championship when I was younger and I've never smoked nor even considered it.

They weren't a well known brand here, if available at all, I'm sure many adults watching in Ireland didn't even know they were a cigarette brand

Maybe Klopp was an inspired choice, he'd scare small children away

howiya

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Eh you don't think advertising works?

So companies waste multi billions a year on it for no reason?


Every single we buy for whatever purpose we buy it is down to some form of advertising.

But we also make choices not to buy the other products that are also heavily advertised. Go figure??

Agent Coulson

howiya wrote: »

But we also make choices not to buy the other products that are also heavily advertised. Go figure??

But we still buy so yes it works.

elefant

howiya wrote: »

But we also make choices not to buy the other products that are also heavily advertised. Go figure??

What are you trying to make a point about here?

thebaz

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

For people stupid enough to not know when enough is enough.

lovely turn of word - count yourself lucky that gambling has not affected you or anyone close to you - addiction is not about stupidity

sword1

Its not about the people posting here,it is about teens getting into a habit that tends to increase, i like a bet myself and feel i gamble well within my means but see others with no control and these tend to have been early starters in gambling

Jayop

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

For people stupid enough to not know when enough is enough.

Yep and sadly that's loads of people.

howiya

elefant wrote: »

What are you trying to make a point about here?

Well on one had somebody is saying advertising works and I've asked to what extent.

Poster replied saying companies spend billions on it so it must work...

As an example of the point I'm trying to make Coca Cola and Pepsi compete with each other in the billions they spend on advertising to maintain their percentage of market share but I wouldn't buy Pepsi because I don't like the taste. For what it's worth I would rarely buy a can of coke either.

So because Ray Winston tells us that Diego Costa is 2/1 next goalscorer at half time doesn't necessarily mean I or other rational thinking people will put a bet on.

How many ads have you seen today? How many products have you bought as a result?

elefant

howiya wrote: »

Well on one had somebody is saying advertising works and I've asked to what extent.

Poster replied saying companies spend billions on it so it must work...

As an example of the point I'm trying to make Coca Cola and Pepsi compete with each other in the billions they spend on advertising to maintain their percentage of market share but I wouldn't buy Pepsi because I don't like the taste. For what it's worth I would rarely buy a can of coke either.

So because Ray Winston tells us that Diego Costa is 2/1 next goalscorer at half time doesn't necessarily mean I or other rational thinking people will put a bet on.

How many ads have you seen today? How many products have you bought as a result?

This is such a ridiculous line of thinking it doesn't warrant engaging with tbh.

howiya

Another example of advertising not working, the ads on this website appear to be driven by your internet history. All of the ads that I've seen while posting on this thread are of products/companies who I've decided not to buy products from/use their services. Bit of a waste of money if you ask me

Fr Tod Umptious

sword1 wrote: »

Its not about the people posting here,it is about teens getting into a habit that tends to increase, i like a bet myself and feel i gamble well within my means but see others with no control and these tend to have been early starters in gambling

And the question is in a few years time will these issues be bigger.

The lads down the pub with a bet on every game will soon grow up and have bigger responsibilities like family, mortgage, career etc.
Will gambling effect the way he deals with those responsibilities ?

Only time will tell, the demographic that has grown up with online bookies are coming of age.

Dirty Dingus McGee

thebaz wrote: »

lovely turn of word - count yourself lucky that gambling has not affected you or anyone close to you - addiction is not about stupidity

Gambling addiction is though.Nobody has ever forced anybody to gamble on anything.

Technically I have been affected by as I've been affected by the property gambling that existed in this country during the Celtic tiger era as my parents stupidly remortgaged our house to buy an investment property which of course tanked and have now left me with having to pay all this money back for the rest of my life.They were complete idiots to gamble with there life savings and anyone who gambles excessively in any way is a complete idiot.Simple as that.

Gambling anything more than small amounts is complete idiocy unless you are really really good at it which almost nobody is.

Fr Tod Umptious

howiya wrote: »

Another example of advertising not working, the ads on this website appear to be driven by your internet history. All of the ads that I've seen while posting on this thread are of products/companies who I've decided not to buy products from/use their services. Bit of a waste of money if you ask me

A come on, advertising works, end of, not in every situation for you and me, but in some situations for some people, and in enough situations for enough people for companies to justify their investment in it.

Hotblack Desiato

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Gambling anything more than small amounts is complete idiocy unless you are really really good at it which almost nobody is.

The irony is that with online gambling if you do somehow start making profits you're liable to have your account restricted or closed.

Mobile gambling is pernicious. It's one thing for a recovering alcoholic to have to resolve not to go into a pub or off licence. A gambling addict can't get away from it.

MD1990

Online Bookmakers are a disgrace. Ads everywhere & I have noticed now many Football Social Media accounts with over 50k followers are promoting them too & they don't even work for these companies.

You will also get limited easily enough too. If you make a profit of over 1,000 you will be limited & only allowed to place about 2 Euro on any bet.

Harry Palmr

What annoys me most is the bet365 pop up ads when looking for porn......:p

howiya

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

A come on, advertising works, end of, not in every situation for you and me, but in some situations for some people, and in enough situations for enough people for companies to justify their investment in it.

It works to an extent. I never said it didn't. In your first post on this thread you said it was your responsibility to teach your son about gambling and your 100% right. No amount of ads will change that. Years ago when there were little or no gambling ads it would still have been your responsibility.

A lot of people will blame the advertising on their son taking up gambling rather take the responsibility like you are doing.

It is interesting though that while people have criticised the ads nobody has criticised the EPL teams who mostly all have sponsorship/partnership arrangements with the various bookmakers.

Should we ban Stoke City matches from the TV? Yes is the answer because they're awful but not because they're sponsored by Bet365.

niallo27

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

For people stupid enough to not know when enough is enough.

You could say the same for alcohol, cigarettes, fast food most things really. To say these people are stupid is wrong.

keane2097

Watching Kindergarten Cop on ITV here and the sentence 'what did it feel like to hit that son of a bitch' was cut, but presumably an ad with Ray Winston offering odds on Arnie to hit some son of a bitch in the second half of the film would be ok so long as he tells the kids to gaaaaambol responsibly at the end.

Fr Tod Umptious

howiya wrote: »

It works to an extent. I never said it didn't. In your first post on this thread you said it was your responsibility to teach your son about gambling and your 100% right. No amount of ads will change that. Years ago when there were little or no gambling ads it would still have been your responsibility.

A lot of people will blame the advertising on their son taking up gambling rather take the responsibility like you are doing.

It is interesting though that while people have criticised the ads nobody has criticised the EPL teams who mostly all have sponsorship/partnership arrangements with the various bookmakers.

Should we ban Stoke City matches from the TV? Yes is the answer because they're awful but not because they're sponsored by Bet365.

Stoke would have to get a new sponsor or the logos etc would not be allowed in televised games, just as is now the case with drinks advertising and sports in France.

Unearthly

Good topic. There's definitely way too much advertising during games. And with apps allowing you bet instantly it can be disastrous.

More regulation is required

howiya

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Stoke would have to get a new sponsor or the logos etc would not be allowed in televised games, just as is now the case with drinks advertising and sports in France.

So you're ok with clubs taking money from these companies but just don't want to see it?

You could save companies billions on advertising if you let them know it doesn't work.

Hurry up before someone else gets there first.

Fr Tod Umptious

howiya wrote: »

So you're ok with clubs taking money from these companies but just don't want to see it?

Visibility and brand recognition is a huge part of advertising.

If a company cannot display their brand then they will not invest in that form of advertising.

Thus if Stoke's sponsors cannot have their brand visible then they will not stay as sponsors for long.

I agree with OP in general. I hadn't thought about the effect on kids in that context, more the effects on them from having a highly-addicted parent.

A good friend of my OH's, I saw her and the kids lose everything but the roof over their heads, just about kept that, because of the husband/father's gambling addiction. You picture a gambling addict, and you might think of someone running out of the post-office with their dole and straight into the bookies, not nearly always the case. This guy had a well paying job, bought the big house at the height of the boom, big car, looked the part, never smelled of his own piss etc. but in the end lost well into six figures on gambling, never mind his family.

I am someone who partakes in the occasional bet, have won some, lost more probably, but don't get that addictive sweep of emotions from gambling. I do however understand addictive tendencies. As someone who is off the smokes a few months, I know that it is all within me to stay on top of the addiction, but not having a multitude of cigarette ads broadcast around and during a program I'm watching does help.

In all classes of society this addiction is a problem. Advertising is not the cause, just something that tries to sell this addiction. Somehow though, never mind being restricted or banned, the advertising basically gets free roam and is end-on-end during sporting events. Of course, I get that the TV stations aren't going to command big money from non sports-related products to advertise during football games, there's target marketing and all of that, but there are also lives being ruined daily through this very real addiction.

There's personal responsibility of course, but unfortunately in real life it is not as simple as that. Otherwise there would be far less negative addiction statistics. I don't blame advertising outright at all for the problems gambling causes. I just think the spate of advertising isn't helping the problem, never mind the outright glamourisation of the whole thing.

Of course a betting company isn't going to pay to not promote their product to the maximum, but the likes of that Ray Winstone ad for Bet365 is so far up its own hole..."I travel a million miles in a single afternoon, I see all the cards, all the goaws..."

With all due respect Ray, loved you in The Departed and I won't be escalating this to a physical confrontation, but ya do in me fúck! It's all mystical and shiny on the surface, but think about it for a moment and it's quite possible that Ray even spent some of his earnings from that ad on some bets. He sees nothing, and in fairness to him he is just an actor taking a paycheque. It's the people who sign that cheque, more importantly they see nothing because they don't want to. Chuck a 'Bet responsibly' in the small print, as required by law, and it'll be grand.

eagle eye

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Visibility and brand recognition is a huge part of advertising.

If a company cannot display their brand then they will not invest in that form of advertising.

Thus if Stoke's sponsors cannot have their brand visible then they will not stay as sponsors for long.

I think you are picking the wrong team there. That would be the case for most teams but Stoke are actually owned by company that advertise with them.

howiya

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Visibility and brand recognition is a huge part of advertising.

If a company cannot display their brand then they will not invest in that form of advertising.

Thus if Stoke's sponsors cannot have their brand visible then they will not stay as sponsors for long.

That's not what I asked. Are you ok with betting companies funding your child's dream of Liverpool winning trophies etc?

Bet365 own Stoke so they're probably not going anywhere

eagle eye

howiya wrote: »

Are you ok with betting companies funding your child's dream of Liverpool winning trophies etc?

I'm not tbh, I'd prefer if it was some company that sells runners or jerseys or anything that isn't a risk to them in later life.

Somebody was talking about parents being responsible and that is very true. Should I prevent my kids from watching Premier league games and GAA games on Sky or even RTE? It's heading that way for me because I don't want my kids exposed to gambling advertisement.

I can tell them how it's a waste of their time and all that but at the end of the day if they are seeing it on tv then at some stage they are going to go and have a bet and if they have that addictive trait in them they are in trouble. If they never get to see it on tv there is a much bigger chance they don't ever try it.

Dirty Dingus McGee

niallo27 wrote: »

You could say the same for alcohol, cigarettes, fast food most things really. To say these people are stupid is wrong.

All of those things are personal choices.People have to protect themselves from themselves.

Should we ban advertising of everything, I mean people can get addicted to shopping as well.

Dirty Dingus McGee

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm not tbh, I'd prefer if it was some company that sells runners or jerseys or anything that isn't a risk to them in later life.

Somebody was talking about parents being responsible and that is very true. Should I prevent my kids from watching Premier league games and GAA games on Sky or even RTE? It's heading that way for me because I don't want my kids exposed to gambling advertisement.

I can tell them how it's a waste of their time and all that but at the end of the day if they are seeing it on tv then at some stage they are going to go and have a bet and if they have that addictive trait in them they are in trouble. If they never get to see it on tv there is a much bigger chance they don't ever try it.

Betting shops are widely visible with big bright signs on the street in every town in ireland. There is no way of stopping children from seeing ad's for them.better off to warn them of the dangers and hope they have enough cop on not to hooked in by it.

kippy

eagle eye wrote: »

This just came up in a thread and I am very concerned about it myself. I don't like the idea that these advertisements are on during games. I think there should be a watershed for ads like these which at the earliest should be 8.00pm imo.

Lately there has been an ad for a betting/gaming firm which has Jurgen Klopp in it and I'm really concerned by this because younger people who are easily influenced are more likely to be taken in by an ad with a well known figure from the Premier league in it.

I'm just wondering what other peoples thoughts are on this. I'm thinking about kids here which is the major concern as far as I'm concerned.

Totally agree. Gambling is a scourge for many and these ads do nothing but normalise it in the eyes of younger people. While there is a form or personal and parental responsibility expected I dont believe sport should be associated so closely with gambling.

Dirty Dingus McGee

kippy wrote: »

Totally agree. Gambling is a scourge for many and these ads do nothing but normalise it in the eyes of younger people. While there is a form or personal and parental responsibility expected I dont believe sport should be associated so closely with gambling.

Where do you draw the line at what should and should not be allowed in sports sponsorship.

Should alcohol be banned?

Should fizzy drinks be banned?

Should chocolate be banned?

Should fast food restaurants be banned?

Should car/airline companies that pollute our environment be banned?

eagle eye

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Where do you draw the line at what should and should not be allowed in sports sponsorship.

Should alcohol be banned? Yes

Should fizzy drinks be banned? No

Should chocolate be banned? No

Should fast food restaurants be banned? No, unless they serve alcohol

Should car/airline companies that pollute our environment be banned? No

My answers are about advertisements for kids. I don't care what you advertise after hours but not during the hours that kids might be watching tv.

I don't believe that adverts for gambling or alcohol or for anything porn related or phonecalls to hotlines for private chats should be allowed before 10.00pm on the night of a football match if your tv station is showing said match and 8.00pm on all other nights.