GAA have banned all sponsorship from betting companies

NinetyTwoTeam

King of Kings wrote: »

This point relates to more than just gambling in general.
What galls me about much in Ireland (and Uk tbh) is we throw road blocks at the freedom of everybody to curtail the actions of the few.
What really pisses me off if that people will happily curtail their choices on the premise that they are saving society when it's bullsh1t cos the few that have problems with vice (drink , drugs , gambling, porn ..whatever) would will probably move mountains to circumvent those rules anyway.

The only people impinged by rules to curtail vices are the people who don't abuse those vices.

some may laugh but this ruling is pure virtue signalling from the GAA - look how great we are.
meaningless pontification.

You're way off base. No one is banning gambling for a start. It's better to have it legalized IMO for many reasons I won't bother to list.

But we don't need the advertising being pushed onto young men, persuading them into doing it. It normalizes it, glamorizes it, and like most advertising it is totally dishonest and doesn't show what the reality of it is for most people - losing.

Gambling can be fun, and people win sometimes, but it's a very powerful addiction that shouldn't be encouraged with advertising, it's powerful enough on its own, and young men who tend to have more testosterone than sense are the perfect targets for bookies. You can gamble legally while still a teenager, and too dumb to know any better. If you're overly confident, a bit lazy, think you're invincible, haven't really learned the value of money yet, etc it's the perfect combination for the bookies.

King of Kings

King of Kings wrote: »

This point relates to more than just gambling in general.
What galls me about much in Ireland (and Uk tbh) is we throw road blocks at the freedom of everybody to curtail the actions of the few.
What really pisses me off if that people will happily curtail their choices on the premise that they are saving society when it's bullsh1t cos the few that have problems with vice (drink , drugs , gambling, porn ..whatever) would will probably move mountains to circumvent those rules anyway.

The only people impinged by rules to curtail vices are the people who don't abuse those vices.

some may laugh but this ruling is pure virtue signalling from the GAA - look how great we are.
meaningless pontification.

You're completely missing the point.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Fr Tod Umptious

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Explain how he/she is "pretty much bang on actually"

kippy

weldoninhio wrote: »

You think someone with an addiction, be it gambling in this case, or drinking, drugs, sex has no personal responsibility towards their actions?? Jesus wept.

You don't understand addiction by the looks of it.

weldoninhio

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I wasn't trying to suggest that the gambling problems or match fixing incidents among players were caused by the gambling industry's involvement with the sport. But in the context of those problems, there's something incongruous about naming the major tournaments after gambling companies. My biggest issue isn't even with their presence in the sport - it's the prominence they're given and the fact that even on the advertisement-free BBC, you have presenters calling competitions 'the Betway UK Championship' and the 'Dafabet Masters', etc.

Calling competitions by their names?? The humanity. Have they no shame?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Fr Tod Umptious

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Snooker has become very popular in Asia so that's a good fit with the betting companies.

I'm just going to stereotype and say that gambling in popular in Asia and make no apologies for it by the way.

King of Kings

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But how is a ban on betting advertising a road block at freedom ?

No one is banning betting, what is being banned is the visibility of betting companies.

Is the fact that there is no porn on RTE 1 at 3 in the afternoon a road block to my freedom to watch porn ?

it's about control - however I felt I addressed the whole point
It's about curtailing our vices or access to them.

This is a mis-guided attempt to make betting less popular because the nanny state deems there is an issue.
The GAA is part of the state for this argument as it's a hugely powerful group with tentacles in every town in ireland.


Other posters have celebrated the fact that it will mean a younger generation will not have the grá of gambling like older ones...

It's a clear case of - ban the things I don't enjoy.
I find that notion has got worse since social media exploded.....everybody want regulation for everything ,every second thing banned and every transgressor hung.


Your porn analogy is well made but flawed as we never had a "porn video of the week" slot on live at 3....I'd have loved it Thelma and Derek discussing and rating videos such as "Ride my hole 6" featuring Damo from Finglas and Jane from Ballydehob
...but on the porn front we aren't losing access to our beloved porn.


However the UK government is trying to bring in at attempt to make people register to view porn online...it may fail but still an attempt to curtail peoples freedoms.

Why? We are always told that it is to protect society but who in society needs protection...the people with problems - not the general populous.


I'm not repeating my argument above - but i'm sure you get the point.

diomed

https://www.gillbooks.ie/biography/biography/tony-10

New book out.
The An Post worker who lost €1.75 million gambling.

Rjd2

weldoninhio wrote: »

We could never do that. Personal responsibility is frowned upon in Ireland.

To be honest personal responsibility is something fewer people believe in these days. Its easier to demand things that are banned and to blame others whether it is the government or society for there own short comings.

Heck you have it in the world,,,right wingers blaming foreigners for everything and left wingers blaming the big bad government for everything.

feargale

diomed wrote: »

A backward step by a backward organisation.

There's no end to begrudgery.

NinetyTwoTeam

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

I actually think if we are going to have legalized gambling, it should be run by the government, and all proceeds go towards the health service. They are making obscene amounts of money in Ireland, it's the one thing that not only survived but thrived during the recession, as people became more desperate for money and also suddenly became unemployed and unoccupied during the day, many turned to gambling.

Excellent idea. When I lived in Sweden every single off licence in the country selling alcohol of 3.5% or above was owned by the Swedish state. A quick Google and they still are, and have been since 1955:


Systembolaget

Now, if only the Irish could break their minds free from always aping whatever systems the Brits and Yanks have...

nice_guy80

Deleted User wrote: »

Excellent idea. When I lived in Sweden every single off licence in the country selling alcohol of 3.5% or above was owned by the Swedish state. A quick Google and they still are, and have been since 1955:


Systembolaget

Now, if only the Irish could break their minds free from always aping whatever systems the Brits and Yanks have...

yeah. used to love the queues on a Saturday for booze!

Johngoose

Well done G.A.A. too many betting ads on t.v. for games that children are watching, making kids think that betting is cool.

diomed

feargale wrote: »

There's no end to begrudgery.

The Shinners have found another thread to hijack.

diomed

A report on gambling released February 2018.
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/survey-data/Gambling-participation-in-2017-behaviour-awareness-and-attitudes.pdf

This link is to a PDF file.

xckjoo

King of Kings wrote: »

it's about control - however I felt I addressed the whole point
It's about curtailing our vices or access to them.

This is a mis-guided attempt to make betting less popular because the nanny state deems there is an issue.
The GAA is part of the state for this argument as it's a hugely powerful group with tentacles in every town in ireland.


Other posters have celebrated the fact that it will mean a younger generation will not have the grá of gambling like older ones...

It's a clear case of - ban the things I don't enjoy.
I find that notion has got worse since social media exploded.....everybody want regulation for everything ,every second thing banned and every transgressor hung.


Your porn analogy is well made but flawed as we never had a "porn video of the week" slot on live at 3....I'd have loved it Thelma and Derek discussing and rating videos such as "Ride my hole 6" featuring Damo from Finglas and Jane from Ballydehob
...but on the porn front we aren't losing access to our beloved porn.


However the UK government is trying to bring in at attempt to make people register to view porn online...it may fail but still an attempt to curtail peoples freedoms.

Why? We are always told that it is to protect society but who in society needs protection...the people with problems - not the general populous.


I'm not repeating my argument above - but i'm sure you get the point.

Nobody banned gambling or brought in restrictions on gambling. Nobody is suggesting you register with the government before you can gamble. It's about advertising. Advertising is about convincing people to buy a product. You still have the same access to the product, just not the advertising.

Drugs seem to get by fine without advertising....

seanin4711

how are they going to pay the managers?

ToddyDoody

I thought the gaa was a non profit organisation?

kippy

ToddyDoody wrote: »

I thought the gaa was a non profit organisation?

A not for profit organisation has to balance the books......

ToddyDoody

kippy wrote: »

A not for profit organisation has to balance the books......

As long as that's all they're doing

feargale

Patww79 wrote: »

Seriously, that'll be the next crusade. You can count on it.

No. The next crusade, (assuming government as usual will run scared and the people themselves will have to initiate it) will be against the additives that processors are putting in food, and poisoning us in the process, all to make us want more.
Fair play to the GAA and its people power for tackling an issue that our legislators don't have the guts to address.

buried

lol Some nice digs up in here the last few posts about the GAA and how they spend their money. The local club up the road from me recently put in a floodlit 2k walking/running track around their grounds, open to all of the public, It's open and actually cleared of the snow that fell today. I suppose something had to pay for that, ami right? I suppose ladbrokes, paddypower, betwank and all them other hoors put some of their money profits into that sort of public amenity all the time too, right? Walking tracks to the ATM machine? Rain shelters for the people smoking fags like panic chimneys outside the betting shops?

feargale

diomed wrote: »

The Shinners have found another thread to hijack.

So to you anyone who takes you to task for an ill-informed, kneejerk, Ross O'Carroll Kelly-like swipe at the GAA is a Shinner. How revealing.

I take it you have never, as I have, professionally encountered an idiot who won about €10,000, and then sat in a bar for a week or two putting a bet on every race on tv and buying drinks for everybody in the house, while his long suffering, half-starved wife had to make do with the €50 he gave her out of his winnings. And then the money ran out. Some can turn their backs on the problem with that tired old shibboleth about "the nanny state." The "nanny state" doesn't get much of a mention when state agencies, thanks to the taxpayer, have to come in and pick up the pieces, whether as a result of gambling or drug or alcohol addiction.
We are told here that neither advertising nor sponsorship increase consumption. Are you seriously suggesting that advertising has any other motive? What other motive?

The GAA is backward, you say.
Dictionary definitions of "Backward" = unable or unwilling to advance; undeveloped or unsophisticated. Would you recognise any of those adjectives as applied to your lazy, unsubstantiated impugning of the GAA?

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion, however wacky, but you have crossed a line in implying that I am a Shinner. I challenge you to cite one post of mine in which I have expressed a hint of support for Sinn Fein or the IRA. And when you find that you cannot do so you will no doubt be man enough to withdraw the slur.

diomed

diomed wrote: »

A report on gambling released February 2018.
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/survey-data/Gambling-participation-in-2017-behaviour-awareness-and-attitudes.pdf

This link is to a PDF file.

It's pretty grim reading

feargale

feargale wrote: »

So to you anyone who takes you to task for an ill-informed, kneejerk, Ross O'Carroll Kelly-like swipe at the GAA is a Shinner. How revealing.

I take it you have never, as I have, professionally encountered an idiot who won about €10,000, and then sat in a bar for a week or two putting a bet on every race on tv and buying drinks for everybody in the house, while his long suffering, half-starved wife had to make do with the €50 he gave her out of his winnings. And then the money ran out. Some can turn their backs on the problem with that tired old shibboleth about "the nanny state." The "nanny state" doesn't get much of a mention when state agencies, thanks to the taxpayer, have to come in and pick up the pieces, whether as a result of gambling or drug or alcohol addiction.
We are told here that neither advertising nor sponsorship increase consumption. Are you seriously suggesting that advertising has any other motive? What other motive?

The GAA is backward, you say.
Dictionary definitions of "Backward" = unable or unwilling to advance; undeveloped or unsophisticated. Would you recognise any of those adjectives as applied to your lazy, unsubstantiated impugning of the GAA?

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion, however wacky, but you have crossed a line in implying that I am a Shinner. I challenge you to cite one post of mine in which I have expressed a hint of support for Sinn Fein or the IRA. And when you find that you cannot do so you will no doubt be man enough to withdraw the slur.

The half starved wife is equally to blame for her situation. Is she incapable of supporting herself?

Fr Tod Umptious

Deleted User wrote: »

The half starved wife is equally to blame for her situation. Is she incapable of supporting herself?

If it was only that simple.

It comes in any different forms and every case is different I'm sure, just as I'm sure the poster was just using an example.